Army-Support Civic Activism in Wartime Russia: A Case from Buryatia

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.

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...

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 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.

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.

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 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.

Reviewed by: The Orthodox Church and Civil Society in Russia, and: Russian Society and the Orthodox Church: Religion in Russia after Communism, and: Russkaia pravoslavnaia tserkov': Sovremennoe sostoianie i aktual'nye problemy [The Russian Orthodox Church: Contemporary Condition and Current Problems] Irina Papkova Wallace L. Daniel , The Orthodox Church and Civil Society in Russia. 251 pp. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2006. ISBN 1585445231. $29.95. Zoe Knox , Russian Society and the Orthodox Church: Religion in Russia after Communism. 257 pp. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2005. ISBN 0415320534. $170.00. Nikolai Aleksandrovich Mitrokhin , Russkaia pravoslavnaia tserkov': Sovremennoe sostoianie i aktual'nye problemy [The Russian Orthodox Church: Contemporary Condition and Current Problems]. 648 pp. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2004. ISBN 5867933245. Post-Soviet Russia has been characterized by a visible resurgence of the country's arguably most important cultural institution, the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). After seven decades of alternating persecution and soft repression by the atheistic Soviet state, the Church has experienced a remarkable renaissance, both in terms of recovered physical infrastructure and in social status.1 Visitors to today's Russian Federation will observe the ongoing renovation and reconstruction of church buildings, the proliferation of kiosks selling religious materials on many city streets, the ubiquitous Orthodox clerics offering commentary to the mainstream television stations, and other daily manifestations of Orthodoxy's pervasive public presence. President V. V. Putin is, according to reliable accounts, a practicing Orthodox Christian, as are an increasing number of officials in the government apparatus.2 Accordingly, scholars have begun to explore both the extent [End Page 481] and the implications of this phenomenon. Broadly, analysts have looked at the following issues: the degree to which Russian society can really be called Orthodox; the relationship between the Church and the political regime, specifically Orthodoxy's role in democratization; the position of the Russian Orthodox Church within civil society; and the contribution of Orthodoxy to the creation and maintenance of a cohesive post-Soviet Russian identity.3 The deepening of the research agenda can be easily traced: if at first scholarship on post-Soviet Russian Orthodoxy found expression exclusively in academic articles or conference anthologies, since 2004 several serious monographs on the subject have been published both in Russia and in the West, three of which are reviewed here. The disciplinary background of scholars currently working on today's Russian Orthodoxy is quite varied; it includes sociologists, anthropologists, political scientists, and, less frequently, historians. The methodological difficulty historians experience in tackling a modern-day subject hardly needs to be stated; at the same time, two of the three authors reviewed here—Nikolai Aleksandrovich Mitrokhin and Wallace L. Daniel—are historians by training, suggesting the timeliness of an assessment of the ways that history is employed in the scholarly analysis of the contemporary Russian Orthodox Church. This review, then, focuses not just on how the three monographs treat the subject of their inquiry but also on aspects of these works that should be of particular interest to Kritika's audience. Specifically, the review stresses the pitfalls inherent in the (unavoidable, to be sure) interpretation of a contemporary phenomenon through a particular reading of history; it also brings attention to the need for a critical reassessment of the way in which scholars (historians or otherwise) in general treat fundamental assumptions regarding the historical pattern of church–state relations in Russia. All three books are welcome contributions to our understanding of the post-Soviet Russian Orthodox Church. In terms of institutional analysis, Nikolai Mitrokhin's 650-page volume is the most impressive. Based on eight years of research in over 40 dioceses, the book devotes attention to almost [End Page 482] every imaginable aspect of the ROC's activities. Mitrokhin begins by dissecting the membership of the Church, critically assessing the actual number of active Orthodox believers in Russia and their socioeconomic backgrounds and analyzing the inner workings of parish communities (35–75). He then looks at the organizational administration of the Moscow Patriarchate, its economic activities, and the internal divisions among various Orthodox factions vying for control over the Church's spiritual and political agenda (76–234). The second part of the book analyzes such related issues as the...

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.

The subject of this article is the process of interaction between state power and civil society in the USSR. The purpose of the work is to identify the features of the interaction between state power and civil society in the USSR, by analyzing the evolution of civil society in Russia and clarifying the features of the process of interaction between state power and civil society, to show what united state power and civil society in the USSR. The work is based on the research of domestic and foreign authors, the data of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, the Public Chamber of St. Petersburg, the Center for the Development of Non-Profit Organizations, etc. The following methods were used during the study: historical and philosophical analysis, comparative analysis, interdisciplinary approach. The scientific novelty lies in the fact that the features of the interaction between state power and civil society in the USSR are revealed, the evolution of civil society in Russia is analyzed, and the features of the process of interaction between state power and civil society are specified. It is shown what united the state power and civil society in the USSR. The main conclusion of the study is that in the USSR, especially at the stage of the “nationwide state” (60-80s), a model of limited public (non-state) self-government developed, which included a number of important elements of civil society. However, the ideological, administrative and economic barriers that stood in the way of the development of a free civil initiative led to an increase in public apathy, on the one hand, and sharp public discontent, on the other. An actively dissatisfied part of society took advantage of the systemic crisis of the Soviet system in the late 1980s for its elimination. A new period of national history has begun.

Introduction S.White PART 1: CIVIL SOCIETY IN RUSSIA Civil Society and the Reconstitution of Russian Political Space I.Liikanen What Kind of Civil Society in Russia? D.Schmidt Russian and Estonian Civil Society Discourses Compared R.Alapuro PART 2: MEDIA AND SOCIETY Journalistic Source Practices in Russian Business Dailies K.Koikkalainen Journalists in the Russian Regions S.Pasti& J.Pietilainen Debate in Russia over Ratifying the Kyoto Protocol M-H.Mandrillon Political Capitalism and the Russian Media M.Soldner PART 3: ECONOMY, CULTURE AND SOCIETY Russia's Asymmetric Capitalism in Comparative Perspective D.Lane Killers and Gangsters: The Heroes of Russian Blockbusters of the Putin Era B.Beumers Drug Abuse and HIV/AIDS in Russia J.M.Kramer

Russian Abstract: Исследуются проблемы определения (дефиниции) гражданского общества в России. Рассматривается динамика изменения взглядов на гражданское общество в России. Анализируются проблемы понимания гражданского общества в России. Особое внимание уделяется вопросам функционирования гражданского общества в Росси. English Abstract: Problems of definition of civil society in Russia are researched. Dynamics of change of views of civil society in Russia is considered. Problems of understanding of civil society in Russia are analyzed. Special attention is paid to issues of functioning of civil society in Russia.