Дело об организации народных чтений в городе Брянске. 1894-1899 гг.

Unlike other books on civil society in Russia which argue that Russia’s civil society is relatively weak, and that democratisation in Russia went into reverse following Vladimir Putin’s coming to power, this book contends that civil society in Russia is developing in a distinctive way. It shows that government and elite-led drives to encourage civil society have indeed been limited, and that the impact of external promotion of civil society has also not been very successful. It demonstrates, however, that independent domestic grassroots movements are beginning to flourish, despite difficulties and adverse circumstances, and that this development fits well into the changing nature of contemporary Russian society.

The subject of this article is the impact of Orthodox Church upon the development of civil society in Russia. The goal is to reveal the role of the Orthodox Church within the structure of Russian civil society, analyze the evolution of civil society in Russia, shed light on interaction between the government and civil society, and demonstrate what unites the Orthodox Church and civil society in Russia. The article leans on the “Fundamentals of Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church”, data of the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, public chamber of St. Petersburg, “Center for the Development of Nonprofit Organizations”, etc. The scientific novelty lies in disclosure of the role of Orthodox Church within the structure of Russian civil society; analysis of the evolution of civil society in Russia; clarification of the peculiarities of interaction between the government and civil society, as well as what unites the Orthodox Church and civil society in Russia. The conclusion is drawn that the role of Orthodox Church as the civil institution in political relations is defined by the following factors: 1) as the guardian of the highest religious values, the Church is the “sense of conscience” of the civil society; Church is the civil institution for defending the public interest; 3) Church is the interlink between the private and common interests, as well as ensures social integration; 4) Church is the guardian of not only personal faith, but collective identity as well. The religious majority tends to view their faith as a social “ethics”, while the religious minorities rather view it as ethnic affiliation.

Purpose. The main purpose of writing the work were to study the changes that occurred in the activities of the modern civil society after the start of the Special Military Operation (SVO), characterize the activities and determine the role of patriotic public opinion leaders (telegram channels, military correspondents) in the ongoing transformation processes. Method. This study used the analytical method (studying the essence and effectiveness of the interaction between Internet platforms and the structure of civil society), the historical method (studying the history of the formation of Russian civil society), and the deductive method (recognizing telegram channels as informing, stimulating and agitating, as well as their mediating role between society and power). Conclusions. During the research, the main processes occurring in the institutions of civil society and the directions of information and activities of popular patriotic Internet platforms were identified. When conducting an analysis and analogy of social processes stimulated by SVO, and the characteristics of educational, propaganda and organizational publications in telegram channels, similar features of these social phenomena were identified, as a result of which a conclusion was made about the relationship between civil society and the activities of leading patriotic telegram channels and LOMs as general and private accordingly, in recognizing the latter as an institution of civil society. The author has suggested that the process of formation of civil society in Russia received unprecedented stimulation with the beginning of the SVO, while it is largely directed by the activities of opinion leaders and patriotic telegram channels, which in turn are both the result and the stimulus (locomotive) for the development of Russian civil society. Practical use. As a result of the study, theoretical information regarding the institutions of civil society was expanded, a new and promising direction in the development and management of the activities of civil society in Russia was proven, which can be used in its further study. Social consequences. A study of the effectiveness of the activities of telegram channels/LOMs not only in terms of informing the population, but also in implementing the functions of stimulating and organizing public life and their recognition as part of civil society states the significance of this social phenomenon, which, in turn, stimulates the attention of society to this type of activity and prolongs its comprehensive development. Originality. The presented work is intended for the scientific community, students of humanities faculties, and the public interested in the problems of the development of civil society in general and Russian society in particular.

This article analyzes the information activity of the main institutions of civil society in modern Russia. It is shown that the institutions of civil society in Russia have significant information potential.

In recent years a flurry of works analysing liberalism and civil society in pre-revolutionary Russia have been published in English. Perhaps this trend can be attributed to a search on the part of ...

The state of civil society in post-socialist Russia and other former socialist countries is of great interest to social scientists, policy makers, and development-oriented practitioners. Numerous theoretical assumptions and methodological approaches have been used by researchers to describe, analyze, and assess the state of civil society in Russia, for example. One of the key issues addressed has been the influences on citizens’ civic and social activities and the historical conditions and cultural environments that have generated – and continue to generate – these activities. This critique focuses on the concept of “communist legacies” which has been applied at the individual level to explain people’s preferences, attitudes, and forms of behavior in Russia and other post-socialist countries. The concept is influential, in large part, because it has been supported by empirical research, especially the highly influential empirical research of Marc Howard. This paper takes a critical look at this research, including its theoretical frame and the methodology associated with the frame.

Throughout the 1990s, new possibilities of participation have triggered the emergence and development of a civil society or third sector in post-Soviet Russia. At the turn of the millennium, assessments were made not only as this marked the end of the first decade of development, but also the onset of a new era of government with Vladimir Putin assuming the presidency in 2000. By then, many scholars responded with rather optimistic prospects to the frequently asked question whether Russia would be ‘on its way towards civil society’ (see for instance the contributions in Gorzka and Schulze 2000; Schrader et al. 2000; vanden Heuvel 2000). Yet some remained more cautious regarding this new political era, envisaging that all the crucial societal achievements of the last few years might be put to test (Schulze 2000, p. 151). Recently, increasing international awareness of Russia’s deviance from the path of democratization and the government’s imposition of restrictive regulations on civil society have spurred renewed attention to the issue. Current assessments are overly pessimistic, while recent attempts at drawing a balance have been confusing at best. Many have argued that Russian civil society remains weak, internally fragmented, underdeveloped, co-opted, repressed, or even non-existent. Other accounts have taken the rather different view that civil society does exist in Russia, and is building on longstanding traditions. Others have emphasized novel incentives and forms of mobilization. Consensus has emerged, at least, that it is problematic to compare Russian civil society with Western standards.1

This book is a study of the impact of liberal academic ideas on the concept of civil society in Russia in the years following the revolution of 1905. The changes that resulted from the revolution were in the direction of greater autonomy for the individual and a lessening of arbitrary rule. The book shows how, in its efforts to further the cause of civil society, the academic community combined liberal notions of the individual and the citizen with their own professional claim to cultural leadership. Throughout an era when Russia hovered on the brink of a new revolution, academics embarked on various new enterprises — such as people's universities and private or semi-public institutions of higher education — aimed at reaching out to a wider section of the population and offering opportunities for peaceful and progressive reform.

This article examines the development of civil society in Russia. We argue that cultural and societal norms, which developed during the Soviet period, have continued to shape civil society arrangements in the post-Soviet period. We examine how parallel to recent changes in Russia’s economic, political and legal environment, shifts in Russia’s contemporary civil society arrangements have occurred. We argue that, similar to a Russian-style democracy and market economy, Russian-style civil society arrangements are clearly emerging. These changes are explained by the cultural–historic legacies of both the Soviet Union and the subsequent peculiarities of Russia’s economic, social and political transformations since the collapse of the Soviet Union. In this Russian variant of civil society, its agents have developed and continue to maintain strong and dependent relationships on the state.

This book is a study of the impact of liberal academic ideas on the concept of civil society in Russia in the years following the revolution of 1905. The changes that resulted from the revolution were in the direction of greater autonomy for the individual and a lessening of arbitrary rule. The book shows how, in its efforts to further the cause of civil society, the academic community combined liberal notions of the individual and the citizen with their own professional claim to cultural leadership. Throughout an era when Russia hovered on the brink of a new revolution, academics embarked on various new enterprises — such as people's universities and private or semi-public institutions of higher education — aimed at reaching out to a wider section of the population and offering opportunities for peaceful and progressive reform.

A few apocalyptic predictions of a post‐communist ‘maelstrom’ notwithstanding,1 the break‐up of the USSR was initially greeted by optimistic assessments of the prospects for democracy in the ‘new R...

Многообразие подходов к пониманию гражданского общества (Variety of Approaches to Understanding of Civil Society)

The purpose of this work is to identify the role and significance of M. M. Speransky as the founder of a theoretically sound, holistic and systemic liberal doctrine in Russia. The article uses such methods of scientific research as the historical method, the retrospective method, and the hermeneutical method. The question of the founding fathers of Russian liberalism, which ideologically has a serious impact on all spheres of modern public life, continues to be quite controversial in the historical and political science literature. From the research position of the author of the article, it is M. M. Speransky stands at the origins of Russian liberalism. During the were identified the most important theoretical parameters of the richest philosophical, political, legal heritage of Speransky, on which were based all the ideologues of Russian liberalism, till our days: the adoption of Western political experience, a focus on the formation of civil society in Russia, the need for government guarantees the rights and freedoms of the individual, etc. these parameters are presented as individual subsections, at the end conclusions and generalizations. The article also provides information about the personality of M. M. Speransky, the most important stages of his biography and political and legal activities. According to Speransky, the effectiveness of ways, methods and forms of Russian transformations increases with the skillful borrowing of Western experience, gradual "grafting" of useful elements of the legal system and political culture of the advanced countries of Western Europe. He saw his political mission as the reorganization of Russian absolutism and potential despotism into a form of constitutional monarchy based on the separation of powers and subordination to a single ("root") law. The "root law" should provide for the interests and aspirations of all the main elements of society, and the rights and freedoms of all Russian citizens will be firmly respected. This will also ensure a response from the bottom up, an increase in social activity of the population, the development of social and individual self-activity, and the emancipation of entrepreneurial talents. M. M. Speransky justified the relationship between the development of liberal trends and the need to form a full-fledged civil society in Russia. The importance of M. M. Speransky gave social mobility for the successful development of society, defended the facilitated opportunities for intersectional movements of Russian subjects.

The purpose of this work is to identify the role and significance of M.M. Speransky as the founder of a theoretically sound, holistic and systemic liberal doctrine in Russia. The article uses such methods of scientific research as the historical method, the retrospective method, and the hermeneutical method. The question of the founding fathers of Russian liberalism, which ideologically has a serious impact on all spheres of modern public life, continues to be quite controversial in the historical and political science literature. From the research position of the author of the article, it is M.M. Speransky stands at the origins of Russian liberalism. During the were identified the most important theoretical parameters of the richest philosophical, political, legal heritage of Speransky, on which were based all the ideologues of Russian liberalism, till our days: the adoption of Western political experience, a focus on the formation of civil society in Russia, the need for government guarantees the rights and freedoms of the individual, etc. these parameters are presented as individual subsections, at the end conclusions and generalizations. The article also provides information about the personality of M.M. Speransky, the most important stages of his biography and political and legal activities. According to Speransky, the effectiveness of ways, methods and forms of Russian transformations increases with the skillful borrowing of Western experience, gradual "grafting" of useful elements of the legal system and political culture of the advanced countries of Western Europe. He saw his political mission as the reorganization of Russian absolutism and potential despotism into a form of constitutional monarchy based on the separation of powers and subordination to a single ("root") law. The "root law" should provide for the interests and aspirations of all the main elements of society, and the rights and freedoms of all Russian citizens will be firmly respected. This will also ensure a response from the bottom up, an increase in social activity of the population, the development of social and individual self-activity, and the emancipation of entrepreneurial talents. M.M. Speransky justified the relationship between the development of liberal trends and the need to form a full-fledged civil society in Russia. The importance of M.M. Speransky gave social mobility for the successful development of society, defended the facilitated opportunities for intersectional movements of Russian subjects.

The article considers the history of people’s universities in the Urals at the beginning of the twentieth century, the conditions for their emergence and activity are showed. People’s universities as a form of public educational and cultural work are of significant scientific interest in many respects, contributing to the deepening of scientific ideas about the development of higher education at the turn of the 20th century and in the context of subsequent revolutionary changes in Russian society, as well as in the context of studying the role of civil initiatives and the phenomenon of public activism in the country. The approach to studying the history of peoples universities in the context of expanding the scope of civic activities in Russia as one of the forms of social activism, considering them as non-profit organizations operating on the principles of self-organization, self-government and self-financing is promising in theoretical and methodological terms. The aim of the article is to identify the regional features of these institutions in the Russian province. The source base is fairly representative and includes several types of sources: regulations, periodicals, office documentation and sources of personal origin. The author concludes that people’s universities in the Urals at the beginning of the twentieth century, aimed at popularizing higher education subjects, became an accessible form of enhancing people’s culture (including professional culture), promoting self-education of the general population. These institutions in the Ural region appeared later than in other regions of Russia, operating successfully only in some large cities. The author has identified regional features determined by the importance of public and private initiative in the creation of people’s universities in the Urals, for example, the role of cultural and educational associations, as well as cooperative and regional social movements. As for the peculiarities of studying at public universities, the Ural universities also had an independent choice of subjects to attend, priority of lectures and the provision of notes, the absence of entrance exams and certifications in the learning process. People’s universities in the mining Urals were largely designed for workers and the urban lower classes. The thesis that people’s universities consolidated cultural forces in the Ural city, engaging people in broad cultural and educational activities is substantiated. These public institutions operating in the conditions of socio-political transformations in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century could not fully realize their potential, many of them quickly ceased their activities for political reasons.