Annotated bibliography

We present an annotated index of literature (monographs, articles, collections of publications, materials of conferences and round tables) devoted to the problems of democracy and civil society in Russia, which attracted our attention during the work on the "Democracy under Siege" project. The list is systematized alphabetically by authors (titles) .

• Asmanov S. Putin and his successors: The experience of democratic construction // Emergency reserve. 2004. No. 4 (36). S.19-25.

S. Asmanov considers the the tradition of the transfer of power in terms of the democratic nature of this procedure. On the one hand, the "advice" of a political leader may take place, since Democracy is first and foremost a procedure. On the other hand, democracy is in many respects an effectively operating illusion of the subjectivity of voters. The choice is always, to a greater or lesser extent, a foregone conclusion, not only in Russia, but also in other countries, such as the USA or Japan. Unfortunately, unlike them, the Russian government partly destroys this illusion of the subjectivity of the voter, thus casting doubt on the existence of democracy in the country.

In addition, in the current situation, the president's choice of his successor is his PERSONAL choice, and not the result of the system's work. BN Yeltsin tried to create the appearance of a system (a succession of prime ministers). VV Putin is getting rid of the "redundancies" of the Yeltsin era, but this means that the population can in no way influence the choice of the head of state. If the "Putin" version of the transfer of power is consolidated, then an epidemic of succession will begin at all levels.

Can V. Putin remain in the presidency for a third term? Very unlikely, says the author. And here the main difficulty for the current president is the question: what next?

• Belokurova E., Yargomskaya N. The price of one illusion: Is it possible to make civil society effective with the help of one federal reform? // Emergency ration. 2004. No. 6(38). pp.62-67.

On November 18, 2004, V. Putin said in a TV interview that in the Russian regions the mechanisms of governance fail, the political system is ineffective, there is no civil society in Russia, and ordinary citizens cannot influence the political situation.

The authors dispute this statement of the president, arguing that over the past decade in the subjects of the Russian Federation, although with varying degrees of success, models of interaction between civil society institutions and authorities have begun to take shape. They arose as a response to existing regional needs, taking into account the capabilities of both non-profit organizations and authorities. Therefore, the reforms planned by the center may have a negative impact on the successes achieved.

• Blyakher L.E. Power Games in a Crisis Society: Transformation of the Russian Institutional Structure // Political Studies (Polis). 2003. No. 1. pp.63-73.

The problem of the formation and functioning of democratic institutions in the post-communist world is one of the most difficult for modern political science. Exploring the specifics of Russian political design, political scientists note its inconsistency. On the one hand, the country has the necessary minimum of democratic institutions. On the other hand, there are constant intrusions of power into the private sphere, a violation of the principle of separation of powers and, most importantly, the absence of an effective mechanism for maintaining legitimately accepted norms.

It is clear why this is happening: the system of democratic institutions, which emerged in other conditions, is undergoing qualitative changes on foreign political soil. Consequently, in Russia the system of political institutions is in the process of formation.

The difficulty lies in the fact that in Russia the authorities previously distanced themselves from society and were the only political entity. The remaining elements of society were only objects of its influence. In the same way, in the 1990s some democratic institutions were created in Russia, but the democratic procedure for vesting power came into deep conflict with the age-old political tradition. What this leads to in Russian political practice, and the author tries to show.

LE Blyakher does not agree with those who talk about "defective" Russian democracy. Over the last time in Russia there has been a complex process of adaptation of institutions alien to this type of political space. Having borrowed these institutions as an external, sacred system, the Russian government adapts them to the realities of the national political culture. This process is far from complete, but the contours of the institutional structure of Russian democratic power are already visible.

• Brudny I.M. Identity Politics and Russia's Post-Communist Choice // Political Studies (Polis). 2002. No. 1. pp.87-104.

After the unsuccessful performance of the putschists in August 1991, hope arose in Russian society for the establishment of a stable democratic regime and the transition to a functioning market economy, following the example of Central Europe. A decade later, the country's political system is still far from a Western-style liberal democracy. In modern scientific literature, the Russian post-communist system is defined as "electoral autocracy", "proto-democracy", "illiberal" or "delegative" democracy, or as a "hybrid regime" combining elements of democracy, authoritarianism and oligarchy.

Researchers explain Russia's difficulties in different ways. However, in all discussions, the very important, in the author's opinion, for understanding the circumstances of the Russian transformations, the problem of establishing the concept of national identity during the transition from communism to democracy is not considered. Changes in the existing concept are a consequence of the impact of four factors: 1) the institutional legacy of Soviet federalism; 2) the political essence of the Russian national movement; 3) the specific ideas of Russian liberals, their uncritical admiration for Western democracy and the market, as well as their belief in the primacy of economic reforms; and 4) the acceptance by the Russian ruling elite of the mid-90s. political identity of the imperial type.

In his article, the author tried to show that the combination of these four factors was the reason for the establishment of an illiberal concept of national identity in Russia.

• Verkhovsky A.M., Mikhailovskaya E.V., Pribylovsky V.V. Putin's Russia. Passionate look. - M.: ROO "Panorama", 2003. 212 p.

A collection of articles reflecting different views on current trends in social and political development. The collection is part of a project aimed at tracking social phenomena that pose a threat to democracy in Russia. The participants of the collection came across such different objects as the Church, the political rhetoric of the federal government, the cult of President Putin, and regional elections.

The authors of the articles touch upon, in particular, the following problems: the Russian President's lack of a consistent program of action, the growth of Islamophobia in Russian society, the ROC's attempts to obtain a special status in the state, controlled elections and controlled media.

• Power, business and civil society . Discussion materials. M.: OGI, 2003. - 280 p.

The book presents the materials of the discussions held by the Liberal Mission Foundation in 2000-2002. Each of them is devoted to a specific problem: deregulation, administrative reform, Russia's entry into the high-tech market, the adoption of new bills and their effective implementation. On the whole, the book is about liberal reforms affecting all segments of Russian society - political and administrative power, business, as well as the general population. For economists, sociologists, political scientists and a wide range of readers interested in the economic and social development of Russia.

• Down the vertical : Putin's first four-year plan through the eyes of liberals / [Ed.-ed.: A.R. Kurilkin, A.V. Trapkova]. - M.: Kolibri, 2005. 368 p.

A collection of articles by prominent Russian publicists and political scientists written and published during Vladimir Putin's first presidential term (2000-2003), is an attempt to present as widely as possible under one cover a wide range of liberal opinions about the erosion of civil society institutions and democratic freedoms in Russia. The topics of the collection are presented in its sections: :Managed Democracy;: Deformation of Public Sentiments;, :Managed Democracy; vs public policy", :Managed democracy; vs freedom of speech", :Managed democracy; vs business;, :Managed Democracy;: Project Perspectives.

• Volodin A.G. Civil Society and Modernization in Russia. Origins and modern problems // Political studies (Polis). 2000. No. 3. pp.104-116.

A.G.Volodin considers the development of Russia during the 19th-20th centuries, from the moment the country entered the industrial stage of development. The author constantly emphasizes that, unlike the West, the trajectory of the development of civil society in Russia has its own characteristics, if only because Russia in many aspects of its life differed from the territorially compact, structurally and functionally developed societies of the West. Civil society there grew out of existing relations and institutions, socially expanded, and then, subordinating the "environment" to the laws of its development, modernized the historically established formation. In Russia, similar processes were corrected in various parts of the empire by the susceptibility / insensitivity of local civilizational substrates to innovations and a rationalistic way of thinking.

A.G. Volodin speaks about the uniqueness of social processes in Russia and shows what is the reason for this.

The author concludes his article by defining the main problems in the political life of modern Russia, the lack of progress in solving which will increase tension in society.

• Golosov G.V., Liechtenstein A.V. "Parties of Power" and Russian Institutional Design: A Theoretical Analysis // Political Studies (Polis). 2001. No. 1. pp.6-14.

The authors set themselves the task of identifying the role of "parties of power" in the Russian political system on the basis of an analysis of the institutional design specified by the 1993 Constitution. The "party of power" was considered by the authors as a strategy due to the need to adapt the elites, who have no experience of participating in elections, to the new institutional conditions.

The main result of the work was a theoretical model explaining the reasons for the formation of "parties of power" at the all-Russian level.

• Golosov G.V. Political institutions and democracy in Russia // Emergency reserve. 2001/2002. No. 5. pp.30-34.

According to the author's definition, democracy is the rules of the game, more or less voluntarily accepted by the majority of participants in the political process. In Russia, these rules are set by the 1993 Constitution, according to which the Russian Federation is a presidential-parliamentary system. Such a system already existed, for example, in Germany in 1918-1933. without much success and ended its existence with the coming to power of A. Hitler. In Russia, the "Weimar scenario" has not yet materialized, and this scenario seems like an "empty horror story," but for how long?

• Civil Society and the State . Thematic issue of the magazine "Pro et Contra" (2006. No. 10).

How long will the state be able to maintain control over political and public space? Are there forces in Russian society - not controlled by the Kremlin and not financed from abroad - that over time will be able to win the trust of citizens and form the basis of a new civil society? - these and other issues are considered in the thematic issue of the journal, which presents the following articles:

Schmidt Diana. What kind of civil society exists in Russia?

Green Sam. State and public sovereignty

Petrov Nikolai. Public chamber: for the authorities or for society?

Polischuk Leonid. Businessmen and philanthropists

• Democracy in Russia and Europe: a Philosophical Dimension: Proceedings of the International Conference "Philosophical Problems of a Democratic Society" / Ed. V.N. Bryushinkin. - Kaliningrad, Publishing House of KSU, 2003. - 232p.

The transition of Russia and other countries of the "Eastern bloc" to democracy finally destroyed the illusion that democracy is such a state of society, reaching which it automatically enters the path of prosperous development. Democracy has turned out to be a tool for solving the problems of society, which, if used skillfully, leads to the resolution of problems and conflicts that exist in society; if not very skillfully, then to aggravate existing problems and conflicts. The destruction of illusions leads directly to questions about the meaning, purpose and limits of applicability of democracy.

The international conference "Philosophical Problems of a Democratic Society", held on October 4-6, 2001 in the city of Svetlogorsk, Kaliningrad Region, was devoted to consideration of such questions. At the conference there was a tense dialogue between Russian and German philosophers and political scientists. In this collection of articles written at the end of the conference, you can find the approaches and positions presented at it.

In particular, the issue of the universal applicability of democracy in various socio-cultural contexts was discussed at the conference. Naturally, this discussion centered around the issue of democracy in Russia. The participants in the discussion pointed to the problems and difficulties associated with the establishment of democracy in Russia and raised the question of the compatibility of the concept of democracy developed in the West with the foundations of Russian life.

There are substantive differences between the approaches proposed in the articles of the collection. For example, in the article by E.N. that reproduce them, which leads to a more optimistic answer to the question of the compatibility of these traditions. A number of works deal with the epistemological and even logical foundations of democracy; explores the new that globalization and the spread of "mass society" bring to the interpretation of democracy. Other aspects are also touched upon: the influence of philosophical views in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. on the formation of socio-political concepts; the emergence in Russia of a professional political science community and its influence on democratic processes, etc.

• Diary of the Altai School of Political Studies . No. 10. Russia after the elections: prospects for economic and political development. Materials of the scientific-practical conference. / Ed. prof. Yu.G.Chernyshova. Barnaul: Publishing House of Altai University, 2000. - 224 p.

The conference was held on July 15-16, 2000 in Barnaul. The main topic of the discussion was the trends in Russia's economic and political development after the elections held in late 1999 - early 2000. In addition to the transcripts of the conference, at which famous scientists and public figures spoke, the book contains articles and abstracts of its participants, as well as reference materials on the results of the elections held in the Altai Territory.

• Drobizheva L.M. Conquests of democracy and ethno-national problems of Russia (What democratization can and cannot give) // Social sciences and modernity. 2005. No. 2. pp.16-28.

The author, pointing to the popularity in modern society of a hypercritical assessment of Russian reforms, notes the positive aspects of the democratization of socio-political life in the post-Soviet space in the sphere of its ethno-political reorganization. At the same time, L.M. Drobizheva notes that democratization by itself cannot solve all problems and draws the reader's attention to these problems.

However, the democratic structure of the state contributes to finding adequate solutions to emerging challenges. In this regard, the problem of optimizing the policy of regulating interethnic interaction, which in modern Russian conditions cannot be solved outside the context of relations between the federal center and the subjects of the federation, is of particular importance.

• Kapustin B.G. Ideology and politics in post-communist Russia. M.: Editorial URSS, 2000. - 136 p.

The collection includes articles covering the period of Russian history from 1990 to 1996. However, the author's task is not to reflect the events that took place, but to comprehend them from the distance set by two key themes for the entire collection. The first is the specificity of Russian political history in the context of the world and especially in conjunction with the history of the West. The second theme is the search for an ideological and political profile of democratic and social liberalism, which could become an alternative to both national communism and elitist liberalism "without a human face", which turned out to be the credo of Russian quasi-reformers.

The articles are written in the genre of philosophical and political journalism. An attentive reader easily detects the evolution of the author's views and even their inherent contradictions.

• Karpova V. Will the Middle Class Save Democracy in Russia? // Emergency Reserve. 2002. No. 1 (21). pp.32-39.

It is traditionally believed that the middle class is a politically active social group that acts as a guarantor of private property and the political stability of the state. In the Russian case, however, representatives of the middle class are not politically active, and their instrumental interest in politics is declining every year (i.e., they are rarely members of parties and socio-political organizations, and just as rarely participate in political actions). The civil position of the middle class in Russia is realized mainly through participation in elections. Why is it so? And what, in this case, should Russia expect in the future?

• Konovalova L.N., Yakimets V.N. Civil Society in Reformed Russia: Problems, Mechanisms of Interaction, International Aspects. M.: GUU, 2002. - 89 p.

The book attempts to study the current state of civil society in Russia, its role and functions, features of the structure and relationship of its institutions with state power. At the same time, the authors also touch upon the theoretical aspects of this issue - the problem of defining the concept of "civil society" and the phases of its transformation.

One of the main issues explored in the book is to study the influence of the non-profit (non-governmental) sector on changing the functions of public administration. The real experience of interaction between non-profit organizations existing in Russia (according to the authors, and constituting civil society) with government institutions and other experience of social partnership is being studied.

In the final part, the authors put forward a number of assumptions to improve the efficiency of public administration in Russia and point to possible areas for the participation of civil organizations in shaping the social policy of the state.

• Korgunyuk Yu.G. The political elite of modern Russia from the point of view of social representation // Political studies (Polis). 2001. No. 1. pp.30-48; No. 2. pp.24-39.

According to the author, representatives of four main classes are the most active in Russia: 1) lumpen and lumpenoids, 2) bureaucracy (officialdom), 3) bourgeoisie (entrepreneurs) and 4) intelligentsia. Each of these classes is characterized by a certain type of worldview, which they are able to impose on the rest of society, especially in a democracy that provides members of society with the opportunity to choose between different types of worldview.

Yu.G.Korgunyuk makes a historical digression, considering the changes in the Russian political elite, starting from pre-revolutionary Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. According to how the country's political elite was formed, the author distinguishes three stages in its development (before 1917, the years of Soviet power and the post-Soviet period since 1990), of which he pays the most attention to the last one. He considers in sufficient detail the behavior in the political arena and the trajectory of development of each of the classes he singled out and points to the political forces that expressed and express their interests.

• Krasin Yu.A. Russia's Political Self-Determination: Problems of Choice.// Political Studies (Polis). 2003. No. 1. pp.124-133.

At present, Russian society is painfully difficult to self-determine itself in relation to the new realities both in the world and in its own development. To do this, it must answer a number of questions. At the political level, the choice between democracy and authoritarianism is decisive. All Russian political life takes place in the energy field of this antinomy, shifting first to one pole, then to the other.

As a result, the political system of today's Russia, on the one hand, seems to be democratic, because. it has the key features of a democratic system: general elections, separation of powers, parliament, multi-party system, etc. On the other hand, these attributes of democracy are largely decorative.

The sharpness of the contradiction between authoritarian and democratic tendencies is partly explained by the historical and sociocultural characteristics of Russia. The tradition of autocracy permeates the entire national history, which is connected with the city of weak development of civil society and low level of mass political culture.

By introducing the Western model of democracy, Russian liberals undermined the foundations of the country's socio-political life that had been developing for centuries. Since the sharp breakdown of state institutions was not accompanied by the growth of new democratic institutions, people who suddenly became impoverished and lost their bearings began to pin their hopes not on the development of democracy, but on a "strong hand."

The Constitution of the Russian Federation legitimized the hegemony of the executive bodies, but "pure" authoritarianism did not work out, because, firstly, the population does not want to part with publicity, political freedom and economic independence, and secondly, the ruling elite is heterogeneous. The current situation is in many ways reminiscent of what M. Weber called "plebiscitary democracy." How can such a society develop further? The author considers several options.

• Who and where is striving to lead Russia ? Ed. T.I. Zaslavskaya. - M.: MVSHSEN, 2001. - 384 p.

The monographic collection presents the most interesting and important materials of the eighth international symposium "Where is Russia heading?..", held in 2001. This annual forum was devoted to an interdisciplinary discussion of the fundamental problems of the transformation of Russian society. The subject of discussion is the composition, social characteristics, methods of action and mechanisms of interaction of social subjects (actors) that have a decisive influence on the course of social transformations in Russia. Scientists of different profiles and significantly different views discuss the social nature, the structure of the purpose and values ​​of these actors, the nature and ways of their interaction with each other. Questions are considered about what means and in what direction they seek to direct or unconsciously push Russia. In particular, are those who believe that the transformation of our society depends only on the will of a narrow circle of the elite, while the rest of the citizens are deprived of the opportunity to exert any influence on it, are they right?

The first section of the book is devoted to personal characteristics, conditions, content and results of the activities of Russian reformers from Witte to Gorbachev. The second one presents the views of scientists on the macro-actors of the transformation process, i.e. on the socio-political forces that determine the fundamental paths of Russia's development. The third section examines the activities of meso-actors who play a major role in the practical transformation of the institutional system of our society. In the articles presented in the fourth section, an attempt is made to find out how new social practices are institutionalized, how ordinary citizens feel in the modern legal space of Russia, whether they are, albeit micro, but actors, or only objects of reforms. Among the authors are prominent historians, sociologists, political scientists, economists, psychologists, jurists.

• Levinson A. People's Democracy // Emergency reserve. 2003. No. 1 (27). S.84-88.

According to the author himself, he is making an attempt, based on the results of VTsIOM polls, to tell how the citizens of the Russian Federation relate to democracy. A superficial look at these results suggests that the situation with democracy in Russia is very bad, but if you look closely, it turns out that there are real supporters of the democratic system in Russia. But, according to the author, the fate of democratic principles in Russia in the foreseeable future will depend not on political parties, but on the level of respect for democratic values ​​that has been entrenched in society.

• Liberalism: A View from the Literature. - M.: New publishing house, 2005. - 232 p.

Why is liberal ideology becoming less and less popular in Russia and, in particular, losing its traditionally strong position in fiction? These questions became the core of a series of discussions held by the Liberal Mission Foundation and bringing together well-known Russian critics, publishers and sociologists: Natalia Ivanova, Andrei Nemzer, Igor Zakharov, Boris Dubin, Sergei Chuprinin, Alexander Ivanov, Dmitry Bak, Lev Gudkov, Lev Rubinstein and others

• Lukin A.V. Democratization or clanization? Evolution of Western Researchers' Views on Changes in Russia // Political Studies (Polis). 2000. No. 3. pp.61-79.

From the mid 1980s to the mid 1990s. Western scholars were dominated by the opinion that, despite the resistance of the forces of the past, the "reformers" are gradually leading the country along the path of modernization and democratization. Now the political fashion has changed, and the situation in Russia is being actively criticized in the West. But with an abundance of criticism, there is little analysis. The author, however, invites the reader's attention to the opinions of those Western researchers who, from his point of view, express "original views on Russian reality."

• Madatov A.S. Democracy: Essence and Methodological Problems of Research: Textbook. M.: Publishing House "Unicum Center", 2000. - 108 p.

The paper deals with topical methodological problems of democracy, such as the correlation of formational and civilizational approaches in the analysis of the democratic process, the correlation of class and universal in democracy, foreign concepts and models of democracy, etc. In conclusion, the program of the special course "History and Theory of Democracy" with literature on the relevant sections is proposed.

• Malinova O.Yu. Party ideologies in Russia: attribute or entourage? // Political studies (Polis). 2001. No. 5. pp.97-106.

The author shows the specifics of the existence of parties in Russia, drawing attention to a number of weaknesses in their organization and activities. In particular, O.Yu.Malinova states the presence of a number of factors that contribute to the formalization and even curtailment of the ideological functions of Russian parties. For example, party ideologies are vague and cannot serve as a factor in the political orientation of citizens, therefore they depreciate and begin to be perceived as a verbal entourage that is obligatory for politicians, but useless for society. Difficulties in the ideological self-identification of parties, according to the author, are largely related to the instability and multidimensionality of the political space.

• Local self-government : yesterday, today, tomorrow. - Stavropol: CJSC "Press", 2004. - 220 p.

The collection includes scientific articles on the problems of state and local authorities in the past of Russia and at the present stage of development of our state, prepared on the basis of speeches by the participants of the conference at the Stavropol State University on April 12, 2004. Many authors noted that local self-government is the most important factor in the development civil society. In their articles, they reveal the features of the formation and activities of state bodies and local self-government, the specifics of the relationship between various power structures.

• Movsesyan A.G. Liberalism and Economics. M.: Logos, 2003. - 247 p.

What is liberalism? What are the advantages and disadvantages of Russian liberals and what is their activity leading to? The monograph gives an exposition of the foundations of liberal doctrine, the history of its development, and philosophical background.

The paper tells about the liberal view of economics and finance, state and law, globalization and international relations. At the same time, it is repeatedly emphasized that these problems are very complex and deep, and often people who call themselves liberals defend polar positions in these areas.

The author identifies four varieties of liberal political movements.

In a general review, A.G. Movsesyan also touches upon the problem of liberalism in Russia, showing, in particular, its significant political engagement.

• Society in the background. M.: O.G.I., 2001.

The book consists of two dozen articles published on the Internet on the Polit.Ru website during 1999-2000. The articles are connected by a common theme - the problem of building a civil society in Russia, but they are devoted not to society as such, but to its relations with the authorities; more precisely, the relationship of power with society and its public initiatives, such as the introduction of new state symbols or military reform in its social plane.

• Oleinik A. Lesson in Spanish: how to turn off the road to virtual democracy // Emergency reserve. 2004. No. 2 (34). pp.64-69.

The author draws a comparison between real democracy in Spain and an increasingly virtual democracy in Russia, which boils down to the periodic holding of formal elections that are not able to limit the use of power for selfish, narrow group or personal purposes.

A. Oleinik draws attention to the colossal possibilities of the media in manipulating public consciousness (examples of the coming to power of M. Evdokimov, I. Kobzon, A. Razin and other pop figures). In other countries, the influence of the media is limited by the rule of law and the tradition of civic participation, but in Russia there are no such restraining elements, so even the explosions in the Moscow metro did not mobilize the population for protests and did not affect the election results, in contrast to Spain, where a series of terrorist attacks albeit temporarily, but she saved society from the "husk" of virtual democracy, and it reminded the authorities of their real interests.

In Russia, there is nothing under the "husk" and democratic construction must be started from scratch.

• Oreshkin D.B. Geography of electoral culture and the integrity of Russia // Political Studies (Polis). 2001. No. 1. pp.73-93.

The electoral system of the Russian Federation is perhaps the most complete and exhaustively described in the language of statistics, an example of a liberal reform introduced from above, which, moreover, was carried through to the end.

An analysis of Russia's electoral geography can, in the author's opinion, bring us closer to understanding the differences in adaptive abilities and susceptibility of different territories of our country to political reforms.

• Open forum. Russia after the presidential elections: authoritarianism or democracy? 16.03.04.: [Materials of the round table meetings]. Issue 19. M., 2003.

This collection presents a transcript of the round table meetings, in which A.G. Bilanov, M.G. Delyagin, G.O. Pavlovsky, A.A. Piontkovsky, M.Yu. Urnov, E.G. other. The participants of the discussion spoke on such issues as the correlation of authoritarian and democratic principles in the political system of Russia (current state and prospects), the tendency of the Russian political elite to authoritarianism, the authoritarian syndrome in the Russian mass consciousness and the possibility of overcoming it, and also tried to predict the consequences of the authoritarian development option Russia.

In addition to the transcript, the collection contains materials of some of its participants related to the issues discussed, for example, M.Yu.Urnov presented the results of a study of the syndrome of radical authoritarianism in the Russian mass consciousness.

• Pantin I.K. Democratic project in the modern world // Political studies (Polis). 2002. No. 1. pp.176-186.

The problem of democracy in Russia is still relevant, just from the period when the reformers directly linked all the benefits of the new political system with the destruction of the command-administrative system and the advent of the market, we moved on to realizing the real difficulties of establishing democracy in Russia, and democracy began to turn from a goal into a means forward movement.

The article, as the author himself says, is in a sense a reaction to the collective monograph "Political Institutions at the Turn of the Millennium", published in Dubna in 2001. I.K. Pantin, recognizing the inefficiency of democratic institutions in modern Russia, nevertheless refuses to talk about "the collapse of democracy", because, in his opinion, democracy is a very changeable phenomenon, taking various concrete forms at different phases of its development and depending on the historical structure of a particular society. In view of the foregoing, one should be very careful in highlighting the general features of a democratic structure.

• Pantin I.K. Democracy in Russia: Contradictions and Problems // Political Studies (Polis). 2003. No. 1. pp.134-148.

In Russia, the attitude of the population towards democracy at this stage has acquired a clearly negative connotation. This is due to the fact that democracy in our country was supposed to solve a number of problems, but it failed to do so. The reasons for this are discussed in this article.

• Let's talk about civil society . M.: Institute of the Public Opinion Foundation, 2001. - 136 p.

The collection presents materials based on polls conducted by the Public Opinion Foundation in August-October 2001. The focus is on the problem of the formation of civil society in Russia and the motives for the participation of Russians in public organizations.

• Problems of Democracy and Democratization / Ed. O.G. Kharitonova. - M.: Aspect Press, 2002. - 79s.

The collection consists of three scientific articles and is devoted to the analysis of the theories of political transformations and the concepts of democracy. Theoretical models and applied aspects of transitology, the conditions and factors of democratization, the main patterns and phases of democratization are considered, trends in the further development of the theory of democracy are identified, general patterns and Russian experience are compared.

The last of the presented articles (N.V. Rabotyazhev "Parties of Democratic Socialism in the Processes of Post-Authoritarian Transformation: Portugal, Spain, Russia") examines, in particular, the activities of the SDPR, which arose in 1990, and identifies the reasons for the collapse of social democratic ideas in Russia.

• Political institutions at the turn of the millennium / Ed. Ed. K.G. Kholodkovsky. Dubna: LLC "Phoenix +", 2001. - 480 p.

A collective work that explores the changes that political institutions are undergoing in the West and in Russia (as well as in Latin America and Japan) in connection with global processes - globalization, the transition to a post-industrial society, as well as the ongoing confrontation between modernization and traditionalism.

More than a dozen specialists participate in the collection, each with his own theme and his own vision of modern democracy and modern democratization processes. Their articles are divided into three sections: the first is devoted to general theoretical issues, the second - to country and regional specifics, and the third - to the problems of political institutionalization in Russia. The unity of the diversity of democratic processes and the problems of democracy in connection with the enormous expansion of the "democratic area" became the connecting problem-thematic lines in the book.

• Pshizova S.N. Democracy and the Political Market in a Comparative Perspective // ​​Political Studies (Polis). 2000. No. 2. S.30-44; No. 3. pp.6-17.

The marketing approach to politics is becoming more and more popular in science: in the political market there are sellers of political goods and buyers. Both are looking for benefits. What is the specificity of the domestic political market in comparison with Western countries? But when making a comparison, it is necessary to take into account, firstly, the various historical circumstances of the emergence of representative democracy institutions in Western countries and in Russia, and secondly, to imagine the current state and features of the development of democratic institutions where they have long existed.

• Rogov K. Between democracy and freedom. Ideological paradoxes of the Russian democratic revolution // Emergency reserve. 2003. No. 5(31). pp.20-29.

The author considers the period 1991-1993. and analyzes the reasons for the "split of the democrats", which took shape in the coexistence of two political structures - "Yabloko" and the Union of Right Forces, because. considers this important for understanding the fate of the Russian democratic revolution.

Much attention is paid to the reforms of the government of Y. Gaidar - to the concepts on which they were based and from what positions they were criticized. K. Rogov comes to the conclusion about the different understanding of the concept of "democratic" by the participants in the events under consideration, which inevitably led to differences in the assessment of the results of the reforms.

The author sees another reason for the "split" in the fact that they invested different meanings in their common demand for democratic freedoms. Some saw it as a struggle for political freedom, which would be the key to economic success, as drastic changes in the political system would make economic transformation a matter of course. Others considered economic freedom to be a priority, remaining indifferent to civil and humanitarian forms of political freedoms.

• Russian Civil Society and Modernity // Social Sciences and Modernity. 2002. No. 6. pp. 33-51. You can view the publication here (PDF file)

The publication presents a selection of reflections of public figures, scientists, politicians, businessmen on the current state of Russian civil society and its relationship with business and government, expressed during the round tables of the Liberal Mission Foundation. Questions discussed at the "round tables": has a civil society been formed in Russia; government and civil society; business and civil society.

• Russian Democracy : Development, Current Trends and Contradictions / ed. A.V. Ivanchenko. Moscow: New publishing house, 2005, 368 pages.

Prepared by a team of well-known experts led by the head of the Independent Institute for Elections Alexander Ivanchenko, the book examines the democratic principles of the organization and activities of public authorities in a theoretical plane and on modern Russian material. The analysis presented in the book of the constitutional structure of today's Russia, its electoral system and local self-government makes it possible to clarify current trends and contradictions in the development of the Russian state, problems and prospects for the development of institutions of Russian democracy.

• Russia: 21st century. Where are you? M., RGGU, 2002. - 416 p.

In 2001, under the auspices of the RSUH, historiosophical readings were held, in which representatives of the academic community, the media, and politicians of a liberal democratic orientation (B. Nemtsov, G. Yavlinsky) took part. The materials of these readings are offered to the general public in this book.

Most of the book is devoted to the peculiarities of the Russian democratic transition and the problems of the consolidation of democracy in the Russian Federation. Among the debatable problems was the question of the quality of the transformations that have taken place over the past decade in Russia. What we really faced in the 90s, with democratization or clanization and the formation of "nomenklatura capitalism". And what is the role of V. Putin in all this?

Questions about the prospects for liberal and legal statehood in Russia, about the reasons for the passivity of the population, and others are also considered.

The authors noted the incompleteness of the process of institutionalization of the Russian party system and the persistent attempts initiated by the presidential administration to introduce significant changes in the order of its functioning; serious concern was expressed about attempts to exercise state control over the mainstream media.

• Putin's Russia. Case history / Sat. articles - A.Kh. Amirov, A.M. Kareeva, Yu.B. Smolyakova and others - M .: ROO "Center "Panorama", 204. 236 p.

A collection of articles from the "Managed Democracy" series, published by the Panorama Information and Research Center, addresses a number of problems related to the erosion of democratic institutions during the presidency of V. Putin in 2002-2004. The authors of the articles cover the following subjects: federal and regional elections (2002-2004), the Yukos case, and the so-called. "spy processes".

• Putin's Russia. Ruins and sprouts of the opposition / Comp. E.Mikhailovskaya. M.: Panorama, 2005. 380 p.

The collection contains transcripts of round tables and discussions held by the IIC "Panorama" in 2004-2005. within the framework of the Managed Democracy project. A cross-cutting topic of discussion was the future of the democratic opposition in Russia. The specific reasons for the discussions were current political events: the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine, the abolition of gubernatorial elections, "the Khodorkovsky case, street protests, etc. Among the participants in the discussions were representatives of political parties, youth protest leaders, historians, sociologists, etc.

• Russia of Regions: Transformation of Political Regimes / Ed. Ed. V. Gelman, S. Ryzhenkov, M. Bri. - M.: Publishing house "Ves Mir", 2000. - 376 p.

This publication presents the results of a comparative study of the transformation of regional political regimes in modern Russia, carried out within the framework of the Russia of Regions project with the support of the Volkswagen Foundation, from August 1997 to August 1999.

The idea of ​​the project was connected with the development of the research cycle of understanding Russian politics: from a monographic analysis of individual regional cases and the creation of their empirical typologies to generalizations. The search for the causes of certain results and consequences of transitions inevitably raises the question of rethinking the democratization paradigm itself. In the opinion of the project participants, who dominated in the early 1990s. ideas about the coming triumph of democracy as a goal of the political development of society, as well as judgments that soon replaced them, denying the transition to democracy due to local or global reasons, are extremes. The authors of the collection set themselves the task of impartial and value-neutral analysis of transitions, considering the transformation of the political regime as a process with an open ending.

The first question that arises before a researcher trying to comprehend the political development in the regions of Russia is related to identifying the reasons for the similarity or difference of these processes - both between the federal and regional levels of politics, and between different regions, which leads to the formulation of the problem of comparative research. Its solution requires the formulation of a model for the analysis of political transformation in Russia, which would not only answer a specific question about the causes and consequences of the effects of diversification of the political development of Russian regions, but would also be suitable for analyzing a wide range of phenomena of modern Russian politics.

The objectives of the study determined the structure of the work. Its first chapter presents a theoretical model for analyzing the transformation of political regimes, which includes a description of concepts and sets the context within which the transformation process in Russia is analyzed, incl. and in a comparative regional perspective. The second chapter is devoted to the analysis of the influence of the political economy of the Russian regions and regional management systems on the process of transformation of regional political regimes. This is followed by a series of chapters devoted to political regimes in the six regions studied (Saratov, Nizhny Novgorod, Volgograd, Ryazan, Ulyanovsk, Tver regions). A comparative analysis of regional political dynamics formed the basis of the ninth chapter.

• Smolin O.N. Kink: was something else given? Problems of revolution, democracy and educational policy in the socio-political process of the 90s. - M.: OOO "IPTK" Logos "VOS", 2001. - 392 p.

This book is compiled from materials partially published by the author in the Omsk regional press and in central small-circulation publications.

O.N. Smolin considers his book a reflection of the mood of an entire social group, which he characterizes as part of the Russian intelligentsia, which has retained leftist and democratic orientations. This group initially supported the reforms of M.S. Gorbachev, but quickly became convinced of his inability to do anything but good impulses, and turned out to be in fierce opposition to B.N. Yeltsin and his "team" soon after they came to power.

The book opens with a special section in which O.N. Smolin shows what distinguishes his work from most contemporary publications on political issues. He singles out the two most common conceptual interpretations of what happened and is happening in Russia. One explanation is that everything happened as it was supposed to happen, it was predetermined in advance, and it could not be otherwise. Another explanation reduces the main cause of historical drama to subjective factors.

The author sees his task in showing how the laws of historical situations (in this case, the laws of revolution) predetermined the course of events, how the objective logic of revolutionary development subordinated political leaders to itself.

The second and third sections of the book are devoted, respectively, to the conceptual and historical-chronological study of recent Russian history. The fourth section includes publications that analyze the manifestations of democratic and authoritarian tendencies in the Russian socio-political process. Some of the materials are devoted to the use of plebiscitary democracy as the main mechanism for the escalation of authoritarianism and the curtailment of representative democracy in the process of forming a super-presidential system. It is these processes, as well as the collapse of projects for the creation of new political movements of the left and social orientation in Russia, that Smolin characterizes as the three tragedies of Russian democracy. But the latter topic is beyond the scope of this book.

The fifth section covers questions of educational policy, mainly from the point of view of the struggle in it between reformist and revolutionary-destructive tendencies.

The sixth and seventh, final, sections of the book are devoted to the problems of political forecasting. In particular, analyzing the policy of the new Russian President V.V. Putin, the author comes to the conclusion that this is the essence of the policy of Bonapartism: some symbolic gestures (the music of the anthem, the refusal to remove the body of V.I. Lenin from the Mausoleum) to calm the left and, in general, the elder generations during the resuscitation of the radical liberal economic course in the spirit of B. Yeltsin - E. Gaidar. Thus, we have a right-liberal political regime with a national-state coloring. With the continuation of the course taken, O.N. Smolin predicts a decrease in the rate of economic growth and an increase in social inequality.

• Turkin S. Russian Liberal Movement: An Anthology of the Split // Emergency Reserve. 2004. No. 5(37). pp.54-61.

The author argues that the "liberal split" along the Yabloko/SPS line is caused not only by the confrontation of individuals, but, more importantly, by the different attitudes of liberals towards the Russian authorities as such and, above all, towards the modern Russian authorities.

S. Turkin examines the "lines of split" in detail and concludes that the split cannot be overcome by a simple political unification of all the liberal forces he described. The liberals will have to make some sort of alliances, but their choice of partner is not obvious.

• Fedosov P.A. Bicameral Parliaments: European and Domestic Experience // Political Studies (Polis). 2001. No. 1. pp.168-179; No. 2. pp.163-177.

Over the past decade, the country's parliament has gone through four reforms (1990, 1993, 1995, 2002). In itself, the search for an optimal model for forming a parliament is not unusual in world practice, however, the frequency of reforms and the speed of their implementation in domestic practice raise certain concerns, so the author suggests turning to European experience.

Based on the priority topics of Russian discussions, P.A. Fedosov focuses on the historical roots of bicameralism (the phenomenon of bicameralism) and the formation of the second chambers. The first part of the article (No. 1) is devoted to an overview of the European experience, the second (No. 2) - Russian practice, starting with the convening of the first Zemsky Sobor by Ivan the Terrible. According to the author, the history of Russia largely predetermined the main characteristics of the parliament, laid down in the Constitution of 1993, incl. limited powers and a bicameral structure. At the same time, the Basic Law reflected both the balance of opposing forces in the period preceding its adoption, and the general desire of the authors of this document to approach the world practice of parliamentary construction.

• Furman D., Morozov A., Pribylovsky V., Petrov N., Korgunyuk Yu., Blum A. about the political system of Russia after Putin's reforms // Emergency reserve. 2004. No. 6(38). S.26-42.

This article is the answers of the above authors to four questions formulated by the editors of the journal, namely: 1) How can the current political system of Russia be characterized? With what former or current countries does it make sense to compare Russia in terms of the political system? 2) What is the essence of the political changes that have taken place since the end of 2003 (elections of the Duma and the President, the abolition of elective governors)? Some talk about a coup d'état, the actual abolition of the Constitution and the end of the second republic, others consider what is happening as a systematic evolution of the existing political regime. What is the real significance of these processes? 3) What are the most likely ways for the further evolution of the Russian political system? Whose actions (political parties, civil associations, special services, etc.) can influence its development? 4) What has changed for you personally as a result of political processes? Do you see an opportunity for yourself to somehow influence the development of events? Is it possible today to talk about the responsibility of citizens for the political changes taking place in the country, and what can a person who wants to positively influence the political process do?

• Khoroshev A.N. Democracy and problems of democratization of Russian society: Elective course. - Novosibirsk: NGAEiU, 2000. - 82p.

The course of lectures is devoted to the issues of the genesis of democracy and its current state in our country; the similarities and differences between liberalism and democracy are shown, the world concepts of civil society are highlighted; the prerequisites for the formation of a new society in Russia are revealed.

• Schmidt D. Civil society in Russia - problematic, mythical or just different? //Emergency ration. 2005. No. 1 (39). pp.125-133.

The author makes a review of scientific research (published mainly abroad) and publications of civil activists themselves about civil society and the peculiarities of its development in Russia since 2000. As a result, D. Schmidt comes to the conclusion that activists constantly problematize the situation, Western scientists mythologize it , while their Russian counterparts are "busy with other things."

• Yasin E. Will democracy take root in Russia. - M.: New publishing house, 2005, 384 pages.

The book is devoted to the history and prospects for the development of democracy in Russia. Considering democracy within the framework of political and economic theory and analyzing Russian historical practice, the author demonstrates the political and economic advantages of a democratic form of government and convincingly refutes the widespread thesis and its inconsistency with the tasks and properties of modern Russian society.

A public lecture by E. Yasin, in which the main theses of the book were discussed, was published on the Polit.Ru portal .