Authoritarianism In Russia Research Articles

From “Living Constitutionalism” to “Zombie Apocalypse”. Valery Zorkin, the Constitutional Court and Russian Authoritarianism

Abstract The 2020 constitutional amendments marked a turning point for Russian constitutionalism. The Constitution finally lost its limiting function and the Constitutional Court lost significant power. The long-serving Chairman of the Russian Constitutional Court, Valery Zorkin, however, remained in power and continues to guarantee authoritarian legality and approval for Putin through favorable rulings, his theory of state and law, and support for the constitutional amendments in 2020. Over the years, Zorkin has adapted to the increasing authoritarianism of the Putin regime. This is all the more remarkable given that Zorkin was a strong defender of legalism and opposed Boris Yeltsin’s power grab in 1993. The figure of Zorkin can help us explain the development of Russian constitutionalism during the last 30 years and the poses questions for comparative constitutional law.

The specificity of the so-called digital sovereignity in Russia on the example of the Russian segment of the Internet the RuNet.

Due to the activity of the Russian Federation in the digital information space, it seems necessary to examine the role (identity) of Russia in the sphere of international information security and the process of shaping Russian national interests in this field. One of the steps leading to the achievement of the above research objective is an attempt to analyse the specificity of the Russian segment of the Internet the RuNet, which functions according to internal regulations and is becoming more and more independent of the global network. The main hypothesis of the article is the assumption that the nature of the Russian segment of the Internet the RuNet, deeply embedded in the Russian culture, is an excellent space for implementing the so-called digital sovereignty, which is on a par with digital authoritarianism in Russia. During the considerations, reference was made to Russia's geopolitical and cultural issues concerning the conceptualisation of Russian national interests in the changed international information space. The article briefly presents the Russian legislation related to the process of implementing the so-called digital sovereignty.

RUSSIA AND COVID-19: RUSSIAN ADAPTIVE AUTHORITARIANISM DURING THE PANDEMIC

This paper explores Russia’s response to Covid-19, with a focus on its implications for political freedoms and human rights across the country. It investigates the relationship between the pandemic and reinforcing authoritarianism in Russia. This paper is an in-depth case analysis that uses policy analysis and process tracing to examine Russia’s response to Covid-19 and its effects on Russian domestic politics. The study concludes that the Russian authorities have considerably abused Covid-19-related restrictive measures, not least through curtailing the freedom of assembly and expression. In doing so the Russian authorities have conveniently shielded themselves from mass protests amid constitutional amendments and upcoming legislative elections. Nevertheless, while the authoritarian practices that the Kremlin resorted to during the pandemic are not much different from those of other authoritarian regimes, they proved insufficient in curbing anti-regime dissent. This study inquires into the political repercussions of crisis management in authoritarian regimes and concludes that their authoritarian reactions lead to further crackdowns on civil liberties and political freedoms.

Perverse Development from Short-lived Liberalization to Authoritarianism in Russia: Law as a Tool for the Authorities’ Interests

Perverse Development from Short-lived Liberalization to Authoritarianism in Russia: Law as a Tool for the Authorities’ Interests

Popular Culture and Authoritarianism in Russia: A Study of Common Sense Through the Prism of Women’s Fiction

The high level of support enjoyed by the authoritarian regime in Russia has been interpreted as evidence of the reactionary character of Russian mass consciousness. We question this view by adopting a neo-Gramscian perspective on popular culture and common sense. We view common sense as protean, combining incongruous beliefs and ideological elements. Our study of Russian women’s fiction finds that contrary to the canons of the genre, Russian authors often display their ideological preferences openly. These can be either pro-government or oppositional, which, given the wide appeal of this literature, suggests that Russian mass common sense is politically diverse.

Conceptualization of post-Soviet regime changes: Some intermediate results

The aim of the article is to analyze the attempts to conceptualize post-Soviet regime changes that have been undertaken over the past thirty years. For convenience, all concepts are grouped around three main approaches. The first one examines regime transformations in the former USSR from the point of view of a possible transition to democracy (transition paradigm); the second approach emphasizes the continuity between the post-Soviet political regimes and previous ones, overlooking fundamental differences between them; the third approach assumes that the post-Soviet transition did take place, however, it was “autocracyto-autocracy transition” (from one-party communist dictatorship to hybrid regimes or consolidated personalistic autocracies). The author considers regime change as transformation of some basic formal and informal rules of the game that determine the functioning of a given political system (from the way of making key decisions and allocating resources to the main channels for recruiting to the elite). As a result, the author proves that the third approach is the most relevant for understanding post-Soviet politics. Inter alia, its advantage is that it allows us to fit post-Soviet studies into the wider field of comparative political science: the analysis of post-Soviet politics, on the one hand, can significantly enrich our ideas about “how dictatorships work” at large, on the other hand, empirical knowledge about autocracies outside post-Soviet Eurasia and theories built on this basis will help us to understand the nature of authoritarianism in Russia’s “near abroad”.

What Does Putin Promise Russians? Russia's Authoritarian Social Policy

In his 20 years in power, Vladimir Putin has employed a savvy use of social policy to bolster his popularity, but it is a set of policies not well designed to address Russia's chronic under-provision of healthcare, education, and other social services—particularly in rural areas. The COVID-19 global pandemic will only exacerbate Russia's social policy challenges and could pose a threat to Putin's political survival.

Концепция Карла Маркса в сознании и практике российского общества XX века

<p>Статья посвящена 200-летнему юбилею Карла Маркса — выдающегося мыслителя человечества и реконструкции применения его идеи мировой революции в России — отдельно взятой стране.</p><p>Подчеркивается несоответствие Октябрьской революции 1917 г. концепции К. Маркса: захват власти не пролетариатом, а группой большевиков, превративших революцию в гражданскую братоубийственную войну, уничтожение вчерашних соратников — открытие эпохи авторитаризма в России.</p><p>Акцентируются противоречия власти и народа на разных этапах не имеющего научной программы построения и стихийно складывающегося общества, результатом чего явилось превращение марксизма в догму, и одновременно в идеологию и политику, отвлекавшую народ от авторитарного управления трудом и самой жизнью.</p><p>Обращается внимание на то, что общественное сознание соотносится не с бытием — как в марксизме, а с определяющей его властью, превратившись в социальную психологию (понятие используется авторами в его нетрадиционном значении в историческом контексте) доверия и страха перед ней.</p><p>Период относительной стабильности общества, достижения в управлении трудом и ростки самоуправления сменяются застоем, «оттепелью» и «бархатной революцией», совокупность которых, при деградации власти не позволила избежать кризиса конца века.</p>

An Indispensable Party of Power? United Russia and Putin’s Return to the Presidency, 2011–14

United Russia (ur), which has served as one of the pillars of Russian authoritarianism, experienced a radical decline in its support around the time of Putin’s return to Presidency. In this study, I examine the regime’s responses to the declining support for ur by focusing on the nuanced relationship between the regime and ur. Especially important in this context is that ur can be characterized as a “party of power” that is embedded in the political system; this allows the regime to be opportunistic toward the party, but there is also a limitation in the extent that the regime can distance itself from the party. I demonstrate that the regime took various measures, including the creation of the All-Russia People’s Front (onf) to escape the ire of voters; however, the range of responses adopted did not lead to the replacement of ur.

The Roots of Authoritarianism in Russia

The Roots of Authoritarianism in Russia

State-society relations and the sources of support for the Putin regime: bridging political culture and social contract theory

ABSTRACTThis article evaluates two theoretical approaches to the popularity and resilience of authoritarianism in Russia, namely political culture and social contract theory. These approaches are two of the most important theories of Russian politics and also reflect the general divide in comparative and post-communist politics between political-cultural and rationalist explanations. We demonstrate that these approaches are bound up with different notions of legitimacy. This article suggests that neither framework offers a complete explanation of the Russian case. We develop an alternative framework that bridges these two approaches. Our analysis suggests that the social contract in Russia needs to be analysed as dynamic and conditional. Moreover, the use of different legitimation strategies by Russian authorities suggests that leaders can reshape the social contract and gain support in a strategic fashion by choosing appeals related to political culture.

Defying Putin: Leaders of the Opposition Movement Against Russian Authoritarianism

Since being named acting president of Russia in 1999, Vladimir Putin has gone from a little-known ex-KGB agent to one of the most powerful men in the world. Handpicked by his ailing predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, Putin came to power following a decade of economic turmoil and political instability. His decisiveness, especially in regard to civic uprisings in Chechnya, garnered early support among the Russian people. In fact, Putin’s approval ratings remained high even as his actions became increasingly authoritarian. Given Russia’s position of power and its recent invasion of Crimea, there is reasonable concern among the international community over Putin’s ongoing obstructions to democracy both within and outside the country’s borders. Over the past few years, however, opposition groups have emerged with hopes of limiting Putin’s power. While widespread reform has yet to occur, movements to mobilize the Russian public are beginning to take place.

Why Putinism Arose

This essay argues that the sources of the current revival of Russian authoritarianism lie in the country’s economic and political history. Among the major factors behind President Putin’s rise and consolidation of power, it cites an ideological overemphasis on the state that fosters hostility toward human rights and liberties; deeply rooted attitudes that cast the regime’s opponents as dissidents, not an opposition; the commodity economy that allows the rulers to treat the majority of citizens not as stakeholders, but rather as freeriders; and the imperial obsession that makes many willing to accept any kind of politics that secures Russia’s territorial expansion. Taken together, these factors mean that the advent of Putinism in Russia was not a coincidence, and that the West should be prepared to deal with an authoritarian and unpredictable Russia for decades to come.

Governance networks and vertical power in Russia – Environmental impact assessments and collaboration between state and non-state actors

ABSTRACTThis article examines how governance networks and “vertical”, that is, hierarchical or coercive, modes of governance are related to each other under the circumstances of increasing authoritarianism in Russia. The empirical data from nine in-depth case studies focusing on negotiations between administrations, non-governmental organisations, companies, and experts during environmental impact assessments were collected in the Russian regions of Krasnodar and Irkutsk. The data confirm that regional and federal authorities resort to control and coercion, but also promote cooperation in order to solve policy problems and compensate for the poor performance of formal institutions.

Nationalism and authoritarianism in Russia: Introduction to the special issue

This article discusses different aspects of the political evolution of Russian President and former Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and the impact of his evolution upon the type of regime that has evolved from soft authoritarianism to a ‘militocracy’ and ‘consolidated authoritarian regime.’ The article discusses eight contributions to this special issue by placing them within the broader context of how the West misread two areas pertaining to Russia. The first is how the West by wrongly believing that Russia, being a member of G8, the NATO-Russia Council and other Western structures, continued to be interested in becoming a Western political and economic system. The second is the tradition, stretching back to Sovietology, of ignoring and downplaying the issue of how the nationalities question and different nationalisms interact with democratic revolutions, transitions and, specifically, with Russian politics.The introductory article next discusses the eight contributions within the context of: Russian messianism, the Russkii Mir (Russian World), how and when nationalists and fascists became mainstream in Russian politics, Putin's great power nationalism, Ukrainophobia and Russian chauvinism, historical myths and re-Stalinization of Putin's political system. The final section compares Russia's invasions of Georgia and Ukraine in 2008 and 2014 respectively and the growing xenophobia in Russian foreign policy.

ACTUAL SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PROCESSES IN RUSSIA AND CHALLENGES TO THE REGIONAL YOUTH POLICY

The author believes that Russian authoritarianism is a socially and politically non-uniform phenomenon, with a manifestation of national-regional features and characteristics. Russian authoritarianism has demonstrated certain vitality. At a certain historical stage, it has solved some problems of socio-political development relatively successfully. However, further domination of authoritarianism in the political system, according to the author, will inevitably lead to strained relations between the narrow class rent-consumers and socially active people, young people. In some regions this can cause large-scale social upheavals. The author believes that in modern conditions networks of horizontal type being at the same time the foundation of the civil society can be considered as a better alternative to clientele.

The Impact of Russia's Authoritarian Turn on Russian Society

The articles in the current issue of Russian Politics and Law discuss the authoritarian turn in Russian politics that has followed the return of Vladimir Putin to the presidency in 2012 and acceler...

О реверсивных процессах в развитии постсоветской России

The author makes an attempt to justify his hypothesis that Russia since the early 2000s demonstrates a quite typical for many countries undulating process of rise and fall of public interest to the different political models. In particular, there are periods of waning of interest in socialism, followed by a period of its temporary rehabilitation, restoring of interest in democracy, then a temporary retreat from it, and again short-lived interest to authoritarian forms of government. The paper focuses on the reversible fluctuations of Russian public opinion in 1990-2000s on values related to traditionalism and modernization, attitude toward the West and, particularly, ethnic identity, as the major interest of the author. This article demonstrates some features of ethno-national identity of residents of the Russian Federation (especially - of its ethnic majority) in relation to the evaluation of policies, emphasizing at the same time the typological similarity of trends of change and fluctuations of public opinion in Russia and in many other countries. Waves of ethnosociological vibrations are compared with the change in attitude of the Russians toward the ideas of socialism and to the neo-liberal political stereotypes, in perception of Russians. The author emphasizes that there is a universal wavelike process that has its own specifics in Russia, as in any other country, but there is no any «special way» interpreted by its ideologists as a mystical predetermination of the Russian authoritarianism.

Federalism, gubernatorial power and the incorporation of subnational authoritarianism in Russia: A theory-testing empirical inquiry

This article investigates the complex relationship between federalism and electoral authoritarianism by making an empirical inquiry into the structure of incentives that shaped the reform of Russia’s regional election laws in 2004–2009. The idea behind the reform was to make the incumbent governors more manageable and more dependent on the federal authorities. However, the process of its practical implementation largely coincided with Russia’s transition to electoral authoritarianism, as a result of which this original intention was reversed by endowing regional authorities with an unrestricted effective power to determine the course of the reform. The main hypothesis of this study is that bounded only by the reform framework, the governors exerted their influence to maximize one of their main assets, the loyalty of the regional assembles. In order to substantiate this hypothesis empirically, a model formalizing the governors’ optimization problem is constructed, its possible implications are discussed and their statistical support is examined. The results obtained support the theory according to which electoral authoritarianism, rather than simply suppressing the autonomy of most powerful subnational actors, incorporates them by expanding their effective control over the regional political arenas. The previously existing federal arrangements are instrumental in pursuing this goal.

Ruling Russia: authoritarianism from the revolution to Putin

Acknowledgments vii Introduction 1 Chapter 1 From Democratic Centralism to Democratic Centralism 14 Chapter 2 Alternative Mobilization Strategies, 1917-1934 43 Chapter 3 From Narrow Selectorate to Autocracy 75 Chapter 4 The Great Purge 102 Chapter 5 From Totalitarianism to Welfare Authoritarianism 130 Chapter 6 Uncertainty and Democratization: The Evolution of Post-Brezhnevian Politics, 1982-1991 164 Chapter 7 Democratizing Russia, 1991-1997 196 Chapter 8 The Demise of Schumpeterian Democracy, the Return to Certainty, and Normal (Full) Authoritarianism, 1998-2008 220 Chapter 9 The Return of Uncertainty? The 2011-2012 Electoral Cycle 267 Chapter 10 The Past and Future of Russian Authoritarianism 291 Selected Bibliography 311 Index 323