Russian Elite Research Articles

Formation of Elite in Russia: Conflict and Consensus

Writing of the article is determined the following reasons. Firstly, the increasing role of elites in the modern global world needs strategic decisions in acute shortage of time. Secondly, the growing role of administrative and political elites concentrated in the executive authorities in the period when the role of parliamentarism and political parties weakens regardless of political regimes. Thirdly, the actual growth of the presidency role in Russia, when a semi-presidential form of government is actually transformed into a super-presidential, which led to the reformation in elite-formation. The authors are aimed to reveal the causes that led to creation of a elite-formation-model typical of Russia. The authors come to the conclusion that Russia belongs to the category of states where mobilization model of development dominates. It was established due to natural and geographical features of the country and the necessity to preserve the territorial integrity of the state as well as to ensure its safety. The Soviet administrative-bureaucratic system formed in conditions of external threats and lack of resources for development, led to the creation of specific system elite-formation, called nomenclature. External stability of the Soviet nomenclature system of elite-formation turned out to be misleading in reality as it couldn’t resist to internal and external challenges of the late 80-ies of XX century. The process of elite-formation in Russia has an asymmetrical wave-like nature, which is reflected in successive phases of conflict and consensus. During this phase of the conflict phase often becomes latent in nature, getting a form of consensus. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s7p71

«Крымский консенсус» российской элиты: причины и последствия

The article is devoted to the process of formation of the Russian intra-elite consensus about the reintegration of the Crimea and Sevastopol. In particular, the text examines the range of relations between domestic establishment and foreign partners in the context of the «Ukrainian question». The article also analyzes the causes of the «polite policy» in the 2014-2015. It is stated that the United States and the European Union for its straightforward and confrontational actions actually forced the Russian elite to take a tough stance on Crimea. This article discusses an alternative point of view on the reintegration of the Crimea, in particular, of the liberal society that opposed Vladimir Putin. However, the author concludes that for the whole elites managed to come to the consensus about the Crimea that allowed the president of the Russian Federation to continue acting in the Ukrainian direction. At the same time, the spread of conflict in the Donbass caused some unrest in the domestic «ruling class», which led to the conclusion of the Minsk Agreement and freezing of the «Russian world» project.

Russia's Soft Power Discourse: Identity, Status and the Attraction of Power

The article adopts an interpretive approach to explore Russian soft power as a discourse that has emerged in response to Joseph Nye's hegemonic narrative of soft power. Russian elites are drawn to soft power for status and influence in the international system. Their discourse is influenced by Russia's dual great power identity shaped by a ‘love–hate’ relationship with the West. When Russia fails to meet the hegemonic criteria for soft power and recognition, it resorts to a countervailing discourse that claims soft power and great power status in opposition to the West and its hegemonic discourse.

The Discourse of the Russian Elite in the ERA of “Liquid” Modernity as a Problem of Ethnic, Social and Cultural Security

The purpose of this article is an analytical study of modern Russian-speaking elite discursive identity, which is a reflection of the problems of modern social and cultural security of the country. The discursive practices of elite identity in Russian discourse of the era of "liquid” modernity are observed. Addresses Current changes in behavioral discourse of elitist personality, basic discoursebased concepts, that records changes in social reality in the chronotope, are analyzed. The tense situation in Russia exacerbates socio-cultural opposition of "friend or foe" at the level of discursive practices. Modern, multicultural elitist language personality skillfully uses several ethno-linguistic and socio-cultural codes, successfully adapting to globalization and migration processes of modernity (Karabulatova, 2013, p. 794). Language game, which is clearly represented in the discourse of the elite of the Russian personality, allows the characteristic representatives to use the funds as elevated and reduced vocabulary. In the process of language use new behavioral patterns of society and culture are forming. In it N. Farkle and R. Wodak see the power of discourse (Fairclough, 1996, p. 237-240). It is obviously that the problem of discourse does not belong only to linguistics, but this very preparadigmaticity attracts the interest of researchers. The eclecticism of human society dictates various forms of communication between participants depending on social and cultural norms. In accordance with the linguistic philosophy of structuralism the language is not just a channel of information about ordinary phenomena, and the mechanism of generating and structuring the social world. This also applies to the formation of social identity and social relations, i.e. changes in discourse are a way to change the world. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s4p147

Kleespies, Ingrid. A Nation Astray: Nomadism and National Identity in Russian Literature (review)

SEER, 93, 2, APRIL 2015 342 illuminates Bogatyrev’s theory through concrete examples. Bogatyrev’s lifelong interest in theatre — both avant-garde and folk theatre — was closely tied to his pioneering work in cultural semiotics. Both Veronika Ambros and Eva Šlaisová focus on Bogatyrev’s collaboration with the Czech avant-garde theatre director E. F. Burian. Šlaisová’s essay is particularly informative, and makes the insightful suggestion that Bogatyrev’s work on the transformation of ethnographic facts as they pass from one milieu to another can be understood as a type of intertextuality. The seven essays by Bogatyrev which conclude the book were selected to complement the conference papers, and include his best-known theoretical work from this period. All have been previously published, and most can be found in English translation, as well as in German, Russian and other Slavic languages. Pëtr Bogatyrëv et les débuts du Cercle de Prague contains new and important analyses of Bogatyrev’s ethnographic theory and his sources of inspiration. This book will be of use for specialists in Russian folkloristics interested in Bogatyrev, scholars of Prague School structuralism and semiotics, as well as for those looking for an introduction to Bogatyrev’s ethnographic theory. Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures Jessica E. Merrill Stanford University Kleespies, Ingrid. A Nation Astray: Nomadism and National Identity in Russian Literature. Northern Illinois University Press, DeKalb, IL, 2012. x + 242 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $48.00. Itinerancy, Ingrid Kleespies argues in this stimulating monograph, emerged as a central element of the national identity formulated by the Russian literary and intellectual elite over the period from around 1790 to 1880. Fedor Dostoevskii drew attention to it in the momentous speech of 1880 in which he celebrated Russian distinctiveness as he thought it found expression in Pushkin: here the archetypal representative of the nation was depicted as a questing wanderer defined by homelessness, displacement and lack of fixity or purpose. Kleespies develops her thesis through a close reading of several works written during the literary golden age, beginning with the Letters of a Russian Traveller that arose out of Nikolai Karamzin’s journeying in the German lands, Switzerland, France and England in 1789–90 and ending with Dostoevskii’s Winter Notes on Summer Impressions, published in 1863. Petr Chaadaev’s first ‘Philosophical Letter’ (published in 1836) is a key work for her, inasmuch as it famously articulated the notion that Russians were figuratively nomadic. Even REVIEWS 343 before Chaadaev, though, the heroes of two of Aleksandr Pushkin’s southern poems, ‘The Prisoner of the Caucasus’ and ‘The Gypsies’, ‘driven from Russian society to the outer edges of the empire’, embodied the ‘crisis of rootless or peripatetic entrapment’, as in their search for freedom they crossed borders into ‘uncivilized’ space where they became yet more alone. In his autobiographical travelogue, A Journey to Arzrum (1836), Pushkin himself enacted the dilemma of the wanderer ‘at the border between home and away’ (p. 178). Somewhat to the reader’s surprise, Ivan Goncharov’s novel, Oblomov, and his travelogue, The Frigate Pallas, published in the years 1858–59, also yield rich material for exploration of the theme of Russian nomadism. Goncharov’s sedentary hero, for example, is portrayed by Kleespies as a wayfarer caught between the capital city and the rural heartland where the feudal estate is imagined as an idyllic organic community. Finally, Kleespies treats Aleksandr Herzen’s autobiographical magnum opus, My Past and Thoughts, written over the period 1852–67, as a vehicle used by this political exile not only to demonstrate to posterity his own role as an historical actor but also to enable Russians to think of themselves as a ‘nomadic antithesis’ to the peoples rooted in the dying civilization of the West and as, in that sense, revolutionary (p. 179). Nomadism, then, was a powerful topos in the literature and thought of a nation whose writers sensed that it was excluded from European civilization or confined to its margins. The figure of the nomadic wanderer ‘became a convenient symbol for Russian self-definition because it reflected anxiety on the part of an educated Russian elite over Russia’s perceived alienation from Europe and its seeming...

SOCIOLOGICAL PORTRAIT OF THE SENIOR OF THE UNIVERSITY (ELITE) GYMNASIUM IN TYUMEN REGION

The aim of the study is to show and analyze the situation and aspects of work with gifted children and teenagers that are aimed at preservation of a gene pool of the country; and revealed to be the most important condition of formation of the future highly professional elite in Russia. The most efficient forms of establishing such activities are emphasized; the basic psychological and pedagogical methods of this activity are shown. The most important qualities of schoolaged children that are notable for not ordinary mental abilities are noted in the present study. Methods and techniques. The article presents the results of the empirical sociological survey of senior schoolchildren and the results of the sample survey of senior students undertaken in five regions of the Ural Federal District. The software package for statistical analysis (SPSS) was used for data evaluation. Scientific novelty . Federal and regional infrastructure oriented to work with gifted children is considered in the study; the ways of efficiency assessment are investigated. The concept «elite school (high-class)» is refined. The sociological portrait of the senior pupil trained in specially created establishment of the elite general education is presented. Results . The authors pay special attention to the analysis of the focused work with gifted children and teenagers in the Tyumen region. A special focus is laid on the Academic Gymnasium of Tyumen State University that was included in the list of top 25 secondary schools of Russia. Spiritually-moral values and social-professional choices of senior students both of an elite gymnasium and ordinary secondary schools are revealed and compared in the course of sociological research. It is found out that gymnasium schoolchildren are remarkable for their social optimistic approach to their life, they are more pragmatic in the issues of their future professional preferences, and moreover, they are active in their choices and career guidance. But there are also some negative issues that have to be adjusted within educational work. It is important to achieve as more as possible adequate, realistic student’ self-estimation of their potential and possibilities; to take steps for number decrease «potential migrants» among the most talented part of youth. Practical significance . The research results can be used while deepening the scope of knowledge on the sociological graduates’ portrait of elite or high-class educational institutions. These results can also lay the basis for undertaking some steps that would make the native city and the region more attractive for talented youth. The research methodology can be used by scholars in the field of sociology, psychology and pedagogics for pre-arranged and strategic researches implementation.

Crimea

The author examines the role of Crimea in the Russian state, beginning with a justification of the legality of the region's annexation as both a reflection of the historical connection between Crimea and Russia and the result of the illegitimacy of the post-coup government in Ukraine. He then turns to the potential role of the integration of Crimea as a national project that could revive Russia while allowing its leaders to root out traitors and other undesirables from among the Russian elites.

Ivan IV’s Reconciliation with the “Devil in a Skirt”

A re-examination of Ivan IV’s donations to support his aunt Evfrosin’ia Staritskaia’s household (obikhod) and convent after he forced her to take religious vows in 1563 sheds new light on both the Russian elite diet and commemoration practices in the second half of the 16th century.

French and Russian in Imperial Russia. Vol. 1: Language Use among the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Century Russian Elite ed. by Derek Offord etal. (review)

French and Russian in Imperial Russia. Vol. 1: Language Use among the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Century Russian Elite ed. by Derek Offord etal. (review)

Российский генералитет 1730–1741 гг.: численность, национальный и социальный состав, тенденции развития

Referring to a vast number of archival and published sources, the author analyzes the social structure and development tendencies of the Russian General Officers between 1730 and 1741. The growth in the numbers of generals under Anna Ioannovna had ceased in the period in question. As opposed to the five previous years, the numbers of generals between 1730 and 1741 were directly conditioned by whether the army was involved in military activities. After the confirmation of the new staff in 1731, the number of generals decreased reaching 104–108 persons, while during the Russo-Turkish and Swedish wars, it increased to 113–129 persons. The structure of the general officers’ staff between 1730 and 1741 reflected the overall changes in the armed forces of the time. The number of generals in the field army was decreasing, while it remained unchanged in the military units financed by sources other than chevage (artillery, engineer corps, land militia, defence forces). According to the general data, between 1730 and 1738, 60 to 63 percent of the generals were Russian nationals, and 37 to 40 percent non-Russian nationals. Consequently, after Anna Ioannovna was enthroned, there were no significant changes in the general officers’ national structure. It was only at the very end of the period that due to a mass resignation of Russian generals, the numbers of foreign general officers grew: in 1739 they accounted for 42 percent, and between 1740 and 1741 – for 45–46 percent. In the field army, the growth of the number of non-Russian nationals continued with 35 percent in 1725, 42–45 percent in 1726–1730, and as many as 51–70 percent in 1739–1741. Foreign general officers prevailed, as previously, in the artillery and engineer corps with Russian generals employed in the military administration. The land militia forces were commanded by non-Russian generals. According to the general data between 1730 and 1741, equally to the preceding five years, the majority of foreign generals were from Germany (43 to 45 percent). Having started under Peter I, the incorporation of the Baltic nobility into Russian elite continued, while the numbers of Baltic Germans among the generals considerably increased (from 10 to 28 percent). Non-Russian generals taking service between 1730 and 1741, as a rule, had military experience and were assigned to the field army and land militia. The renewal of the command of the artillery, engineer and defence forces, as well as the military administration was mainly carried out by means of promoting the officers that were already serving in the Russian military forces. The development of the social structure of the Russian part of general officers remained unaltered. The amount of the traditional elite decreased from 40–43 percent in 1730–1731 to 34–35 percent in 1740–1741. After three decades since the start of the military reforms of Peter the Great, representatives of the Moscow nobility were promoted to generals in chief and accounted to the majority of such positions. It was only the senior rank of field marshals that was made up of the nobility. Overall, the development of the general officials’ corps between 1730 and 1741 followed the general pattern of the development of Russian military forces initiated under Peter the Great, and the changes of the beginning of Anna Ioannovna’s reign were the result of the internal policy that was formulated by the reformer-tsar’s associates between 1725 and 1727.

Leadership and Elite Projection of Regional Political Processes in Russia (Following the Panel Sociological Studies)

The submitted research is devoted to estimation requirements to a leadership component of political management in modern Russia generated as realized by experts and in popular consciousness. This paper presents and analyzes experts and public opinion poll findings in several regions of Russia. Following the results of survey the leadership and elite configuration, in the Russia of our modern age represented by a triad “President – Heads of territorial entities of the Russian Federation – municipal authorities”, is described. Analysis of desirable and available leadership style of representatives of the Russian establishment of different levels, criteria of selection of political leaders have been performed; stability of the modern Russian elite, its key positive and negative features in the eyes of expert community and in popular consciousness have been evaluated. Timeliness of this research is arising from changes in foreign policy status of Russia, extension of its political and economic clout, increase of its significance in the international stage. These positive trends not least result from leadership skills of the leader of the State and his team officials both at national and at regional levels. And the contest for the support or discrediting of the country’s leadership starting under these circumstances requires a thorough valuation of actual position of the leader and his environment in the context of the resource of their authority. Based on the research data, authors of the research note a linkage between rates of leadership and elite skills of Leader of the State and efficiency of political management.

Russia's perceptions and misperceptions of the EU Eastern Partnership

This article is devoted to the problem of the reaction to the Eastern Partnership by Russia's both the political establishment and the expert community. The question of reactions to the Eastern Partnership in the target countries has been extensively posed in academic literature. However, the question of Russia's reaction to the Eastern Partnership, one of the most important actors of the region, has been rarely raised by the academic community. A wide array of factors impacted Russian elites' perception of the Eastern Partnership – from problematic issues in the EU-Russia relations to the post-Soviet states' political and economic transformation. Studying the dynamics and peculiarities of Russia's perspective on the Eastern Partnership makes it possible to draw meaningful conclusions on the nature of Russia's phobias that fuel its domestic and foreign policy.

Nobility and Schooling in Russia, 1700s-1760s: Westernization of an Elite as a Social Process

In this paper we use the records of the Heraldry and the Noble Land Cadet Corps to explore the career and educational choices made by Russian nobles in the 1730s and 1740s. We make use of the fact that after the 1736-7 reform of noble service, young members of the elite were allowed to express their preferences regarding enrollment in specific schools or branches of service, and the government promised to respect these choices. Our goal is to investigate how much choice had nobles in reality, what choices they made, and how these choices can be explained. Our analysis demonstrates that post-Petrine nobles had very clear preferences, and that there are deep cleavages within the elite in terms of the attitude of its members towards schooling. While wealthier nobles tended to opt for state schools, especially the Noble Cadet Corps, the poorest nobility overwhelmingly ignored the educational requirement and service registration rules imposed by the state, and did not apply for state schools, preferring instead to enlist directly into regiments as privates. Despite numerous attempts, the government failed to force the poorest nobility to follow the 1736-7 rules for entering schools and the state service, and was forced to regularly issue blank pardons to these offenders. Finally, the paper considers the role of social connections in shaping choices of education and service made by the nobility. The paper presents the Westernization of the Russian elite as a dynamic social process driven by the choices made by the nobles themselves.

The Umbrella Revolution

The last Sochi Economic Forum emphasized that the Russian business failed to have a full realization of the fact that the world has changed. It became more Asian. The number of those who attended the block revolved around economic sanctions against Russia, manifold exceeded the audient of the Asian block, and lectures met this fact with raised eyebrows. After all, development of Russian business, in general, had an emigration nature: originally any business person went to the USA or in Europe as a tourist, looked about, launched a company and, simultaneously, got a residence permit, set up any simple operations, made new connections, relocated children for permanent residence and education, and, eventually, mean to live peaceful and secure old age at the place of “registration” of the company. As regards Asia, the situation is much trickier. The Russian business and political elite are not ready to relocate for permanent residence in China, Malaysia, Singapore or Korea. Nor yet they are ready to send their children to get education there, and, certainly, not regard Asia as a place for spending peaceful and secure old age.

The Lines of Interaction Between Civil Society and the State in Forming the Regional Political Elite of the Russian Federation

The present report is devoted to advanced topics in formation of regional political elite of Russia. The author makes a cause for involvement representatives of civil society to activities aimed at development the system of requirements (competences) to senior executives of subjects of the Russian Federation as well as technologies of its formation. The author described the key qualification standards for representatives of regional elite who make a part of executive candidate pool, and among these standards knowledge of regional specifics and resources, skill of their potential assessment and use for social and economic development of the region are at the top. The position of independent expert communities in formation standards for representatives of regional elite is determined. The case for taking steps for development qualification of regional elite with the assistance of experts skilled in economy, law, information technology, ecology and etc. are made.

Influence of Relationship Between Federal and Regional Elite on Safety of the State

Sometimes the term “elite” loaned from foreign socio-humanistic disciplines is not easy corresponding with modern Russian realities. And more special it concerns political elite. The possession of a whole number of personal and moral qualities was a sign of belonging to elite of its representative in pre-revolutionary Russia, but elite has been depersonalized in the Soviet political model and could be described in nomenclature terms. Actually, the elite production technology has been put in motion, identification the elite was defined by a post occupied and could be lost at any time by its owner owing to these or those reasons. Thus the interests of elite were identified with the interests of the state. In the 90’s another model has come to replace the Soviet model of formation of elite on a nomenclature basis, where the political elite is recruited as a team representing the interests of the specific functionary. Such approach has resulted in a further depreciation of elite to a group carrying out functions of supernumeraries to certain charismatic leaders. Under these conditions the elite appears to be even less stable and distinctly shaped. At the moment the system of preparation of elite is in a deep crisis and that is focused not on real formation but on production of some substitute which is not possessing real attributes of elitism. In the presented theses an attempt is undertaken, ascending from the particular to the general, to estimate inductively the real condition of the Russian elite. A problem of the actual state of a political elite recruitment system in Russia is poses, its real situation is described, and the issue of need of radical improvement of quality of elite through modernization of public administration system and revision of the elite recruitment concept is brought up.

Implementation of an Ideological Paradigm: Early Duginian Eurasianism and Russia's Post-Crimean Discourse

Alexander Dugin, the well-known public philosopher, entered Russia's intellectual and political life in the 1990s, with strongly anti-American and often anti-Western statements. Dugin's philosophy, especially in its early version, was of great use for foreign analysts with its emphasis on the irreconcilable conflict between the Eurasian civilization – with Russia in its centre – and the Atlanticist civilization led by the United States. While the image of Atlanticism and Americanism as despiritualizing forces ready for global predominance emerged in Dugin's work early on, it was later supplemented by another image, stressing Atlanticism as a desire to play God, to change the nature and the man himself. Consequently, Atlanticism and Americanism cannot live in peace until the Eurasian civilization is destroyed completely. While geopolitical Duginism of the 1990s had few direct translations into actual Russian foreign policy, it had an indirect relationship to Putin's posture in Crimea and Ukraine, and on the economically centred Eurasian Union. The importance of Duginism in the minds of segments of the American and British leadership is due, rather, not so much to the danger of an aggressive Russia, but to the waning of Washington's influence in Europe. Duginism is less a manifestation of Kremlin policy, than an ideological construction mostly belonging in the past. Instead, pragmatic nationalists are the most influential people in the present-day Russian elite.

About the Use of Foreign Experience in Reformatting the Political and Administrative Elite of Russia

This article is about the employment of the foreign experience in reformatting the political and administrative elite of Russia. Also article examines the role of the national elite in the output state of the socio-economic crisis, examines the experience of the United States and the Republic of Korea, the possibility of using on Russian soil in accordance with our national conditions and traditions.

Problems of Modernization of Modern Russian Elite

The article analyzes approaches to forming and modernizing Russian administrative and political elites, the authors make suggestions of improving the given process.

Power and the 18th-Century Nobility

Ol'ga Glagoleva and Ingrid Shirle [Schierle], eds., Dvorianstvo, vlast' i obshchestvo v provintsial 'noi Rossii XVIII veka (Nobility, Power, and Society in 18th-Century Provincial Russia). 656 pp., indices. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2012. ISBN-13 978-5867939748. N. N. Petrukhintsev and Lorents [Lorenz] Erren, eds., Praviashchie elity i dvorianstvo Rossii vo vremia i posle petrovskikh reform (1682-1750) (Ruling Elites and the Nobility in Russia during and after the Reforms of Peter the Great [1682-1750]). 455 pp., indices. Moscow: Rosspen, 2013. ISBN-13 978-5824317176. Although from the perspective of readers (and reviewers) single-author books always are easier to assimilate, evaluate, and critique, in post-Soviet Russia the production of monographic essay collections has become a mainstay of historical scholarship. These volumes can be difficult to digest--filled as they are with thematically broad and empirically narrow essays that often seem too brief or too long--but in this era of Russian intellectual ferment, they serve an important purpose. Essay collections make possible rapid dissemination of the voluminous research that is going on in Russia today, and they introduce to Russian and foreign publics the labors of scholars working in cities and towns across the Russian Federation. Time-consuming as it can be to work through hundreds of pages of disparate microstudies, there is simply no better way to become acquainted with the breadth of research and the explosion of information currently becoming available. Although such collections cry out for review by scholars who specialize in the specific areas covered, rather than by someone such as this reviewer who is broadly familiar with the period and issues at hand, there simply are not enough reviewers outside Russia to do justice to the massive amount of research being produced. Turning to the books under review, it also appears that the end of communist-era disdain for the governing classes of imperial Russia has led to a revival of interest in the history of elites, who now can be viewed through a more objective, nonideological lens formed out of the historian's natural empathy for his or her chosen subject. The collections discussed below represent stunning examples of the possibilities at hand, and both belong to a growing list of monographs sponsored by the German Historical Institute (DHI) in Moscow, which has set as its mission sustained support for Russian scholarship and for collaboration between Russian and foreign scholars. Praviashchie elity i dvorianstvo Rossii vo vremia i posle petrovskikh reform (1682-1750), edited by N. N. Petrukhintsev and Lorenz Erren, consists of 18 articles by 18 authors, including one of the editors. The articles are grouped into four sections devoted to (1) the nobility and the exercise of power (four contributions), (2) individual personalities within the elite (six contributions), (3) questions of collective soslovie consciousness (four contributions, among them my favorites), and (4) the relationship between local elites and the state (four contributions). All the articles address the broad subject of how the Russian elite should be defined--how its organization, power, and patterns of development should be understood, with special attention to the impact of the Petrine reforms. (1) Unfortunately, although the individual articles provide much fuel for thought and much information on sources, there is no general concluding essay that explains what it all means or how the different themes that have been covered interrelate. The individual essays are left to stand on their own legs, which they do quite well, but it is hard to know what the general scholar-reader should take away from the deluge of encyclopedic information. The articles in the first section, dealing with the structure of the nobility and its relationship to the monarchy and/or state power, cover a variety of traditional issues that need to be addressed in any discussion of the nobility as a ruling elite. …