In the footsteps of what we read:
a small book on a big problem


Baev V.G.,

Tambov State Technical University, Tambov, Russia, vgbaev@gmail.com


elibrary_id: 615831 | ORCID: 0000-0002-5837-4991 |

Marchenko A.N.,

Tambov State Technical University, Tambov, Russia, alexey_ctk@mail.ru


elibrary_id: 890830 | ORCID: 0000-0002-8446-2303 |


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.01.13


For citation:

Baev V.G., Marchenko A.N. In the footsteps of what we read: a small book on a big problem. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No. 4. P. 166-175. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.01.13



Abstract

In the proposed review, its authors subject to a thorough analysis of the book by A.D. Kerimov, “Democracy: An Experience of Critical Analysis” (Moscow: Norma, 2019). The authors consider the work of A.D. Kerimov as extremely relevant, because over the past 30 years, our country has not only talked about democracy, but also “practiced” it. Unfortunately, it should be admitted that the majority of scholars studying the problem of democracy do not predict its flourishing in the near historical perspective. From the main argument – the Russian people are not ripe to understand the essence of democracy as the rule of the people. We acknowledge that A.D. Kerimov is indicative, reflecting the attitude of the Russian scientific community to democracy as a subject of scientific discourse. He made an attempt to “reveal the vices and flaws” not only of democracy, but also of the corresponding ideology and world outlook. And, what is especially important, it considers ways to overcome the vices of democracy. The author proposes to overcome the flaws of democracy “by decisively introducing into the political systems of developed countries the elements characteristic, relatively speaking, of the aristocratic form of power”. Unfortunately, A.D. Kerimov does not explain how the governance of a democratic minority diminishes or denies the idea of democracy. The authors of the review believe that Professor A.D. Kerimov should designate democracy not as “the technology of the rule of the minority by means of the majority”, but as “the technology of rule of the minority under the influence of the majority”, or “the technology that allows taking into account the opinion of the minority”. Selected episodes of A.D. Kerimov demonstrate an example of the most widespread thesis against democracy: it is not the people who govern, but “behind the scenes”. But what can replace democracy if, according to A.D. Kerimov, can the “behind the scenes” rule within the framework of autocracy, totalitarianism, and even a monarchy? Meanwhile, the authors of the review believe that the developed demo-cracy (and not its “imitation” dummy) enables the majority of the population to somehow influence the content of government decisions. The conflict of positions “democracy” - “authoritarianism” is a conflict of worldviews. In our country, the lower strata (“poor”) and the middle class are still poorly aware of their interests. As such self-awareness grows, the demand for democracy will rise. The authors of the review are convinced that the time is not far off when the country will be ready, if not to accept, then to understand democracy. 

Keywords
A.D. Kerimov, state, law, politics, democracy, achievements of democracy, vices of democracy.


References

Campbell, D.F.J. (2019). Global quality of democracy as innovation enabler: measuring democracy for success. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

Geissel, B., Kneuer, M., & Lauth, H.-J. (2016). Measuring the quality of democracy: introduction. International Political Science Review, 37(5), 571-579. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512116669141

Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: the human devel­opment sequence. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.

In ‘t Veld, R.J. (Ed.) (2010). Knowledge democracy: consequences for science, politics, and media. New York: Springer.

Lauth, H.-J. (2016). The internal relationships of the dimensions of democracy: the relevance of trade-offs for measuring the quality of democracy. International Political Science Review, 37(5), 606-617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512116667630

Melville, A., Ilyin, M., Meleshkina, E., Mironyuk, M., Polunin, Y., Timofeev, I., & Vaslavskiy, Y. (2010). Political atlas of the modern world: an experiment in multidimensional statistical analysis of the political systems of modern states. Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell. 

 

Cherkasov, A.I. (2019). The institute of local referendum as a form of direct democracy in the countries – members of the European Union. State and Law, 8, 86-94. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S013207690006246-2

Chugrov, S.V. (2017). Post-truth: transformation of political reality or self-destruction of liberal democracy? Polis. Political Studies, 2, 42-59. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.02.04

Dobrynin, N.M. (2017). The people’’s governance and the sovereignty within the contemporary paradigm of the Russian constitutionalism: to the 10th anniversary of publication of “the starting point is the nation” by professor S.A. Avak’yan. State and Law, 7, 22-33. (In Russ.)

Efremov, O.A. (2019) Anomie as a fundamental concept of social theory in the context of modern cap­italism. Voprosy Filosofii, 1, 35-38. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S004287440003616-2

Frolova, E.A. (2017). L.V. Lukyanchikova. The Implementation of Direct Democracy in Russia in the XVI-XX centuries: genesis, historical experience. Moscow: Yurlitinform, 2016. 400 p. State and Law, 9, 119-121. (In Russ.)

Grudtsyna, L.Yu. (2017). Electoral democracy. State and Law, 8, 21-26. (In Russ.)

Kapustin, A.Ya. (2018). Revolutions and constitutions: where modern constitutional reforms lead. Khabrieva, T.Ya, & Chirkin, V.E. “Color revolutions” and the “Arab spring” in constitutional dimension: political and legal research. Moscow: Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of Russian Federation: Norma: Infra-M, 2018, 192 p. State and Law, 6, 113-115. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.7868/S0132076918060136

Kerimov, A.D. (2019). Demokratiya: opyt kriticheskogo analiza [Democracy: The Experience of Critical Analysis]. Moscow: Norma.

Khamatova, S.Kh. (2019). On the issue of the correlation between the ideology and the law in modern Russia. State and Law, 5, 155-160. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S013207690004889-9

Kozlov, N.D. (2008). Political cultures of Russia’s regions: an equation with many unknown quantities. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 8-26. (In Russ.)

Kuryachaya, M.M. (2018). The development of civil society institutions in the political agenda of modern Russia. State and Law, 3, 99-104.

Neretina, S.S. (2017). Great lie of our times. Vox, 23, 340-348. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24411/2077-6608-2017-00024

Ryabchenko, N.A., Malysheva, O.P., & Gnedash, A.A. (2019). Presidential campaign in post-truth era: innovative digital technologies of political content management in social networks politics. Polis. Political Studies, 2, 92-106. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.02.07

Ryabchun, N.P. (2018). Mass culture as a threat to state stability: prophecies of K.N. Leontiev. K.N. Leontiev. The coming fate of Russia. Moscow: Exmo Publ., 2017. 640 p. State and Law, 2, 126-128. (In Russ.)

Salmina, A.A. (2019). Perception and attitudes toward democracy in Russia and Europe. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 119-131. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.04.09

Savenkov, A.N. (2019). The values of the constitution of the russian federation in a changing world. State and Law, 3, 5-16. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S013207690004422-6

Shulzhenko, Yu.L., Vinogradova, E.V., Krotkova, N.V., & Danilevskaya, I. L. (2019). A quarter of century of the Constitution of Russia: understanding experience (for results of all-Russian scientific conference “XXV anni­versary of the Constitution of the Russian Federation: transformation of the paradigm of rights in the civilizational development of mankind”). State and Law, 3, 17-25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S013207690004421-5

Solovyov, A.I. (2019). Political agenda of the government, or why the state needs the society. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 8-25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.04.02

Zelenko, B.I. (2008). Democracy and modern Russia: an uneasy combination. Voprosy Filosofii, 5, 3-13. (In Russ.)  

Content No. 1, 2022

See also:


,
Mirage of democracy. – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No6

Krasin Yu.A.,
Metamorphoses of Democracy in the Changing World. – Polis. Political Studies. 2006. No4

Zubov A.B.,
Democracy’s organic preferences. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No2

Shapiro Ien,
Rethinking Democratic Theory in the Face of Contemporary Politics. – Polis. Political Studies. 2001. No4

Bondarenko S.V.,
Particularities of the formation and of the functioning of «electronic democracy» sites. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No5

 

   

Introducing an article



Polis. Political Studies
6 2011


Bocharov V.V.
Russian power in politico-anthropological perspective

 The article text
 

Archive

   2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991