Socio-political dynamics in the age of the global crisis: civilizational background

Socio-political dynamics in the age of the global crisis:
civilizational background


Lapkin V.V.,

Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, vvlh@politstudies.ru


elibrary_id: 43429 | ORCID: 0000-0002-0775-2630 | RESEARCHER_ID: AAB-9386-2021

Article received: 2022.08.29 . Accepted: 2022.09.28
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.06.10

For citation:

Lapkin V.V. Socio-political dynamics in the age of the global crisis: civilizational background. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No. 6. P. 135-150. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.06.10



Abstract

The article analyzes the processes of actualization of civilizational discourse in modern political science, facing today the challenge of comprehending political development that generates a global crisis. The perception of this discourse today contrasts markedly with the essentially negative attitude of most of the political science community with the still recently. This attitude was, in fact, a desire for a kind of “cancelling” of such discourse, an interpretation of involvement in it as not meeting the criteria of modern approaches to the analysis of politics and therefore reprehensible. Nevertheless, civilizational issues throughout the 20th century attracted the attention of political philosophers and the most insightful political researchers who are trying to advance in the development of ideas about the fundamental diversity of cultural and civilizational foundations for the development of modern society, as well as the about impact of this diversity on the nature of the current crisis of the world order and its likely consequences. One of the most important problem nodes of the study is the contradictory conjugation of concepts that characterize the universalist and particularist approaches to the conceptualization of a civilizational society. The first approach reduces all civilizational issues to the recognition of the legitimacy of talking about just the only – a universal civilization or one that can serve for the world as the only worthy model, an ideal type of social and cultural arrangement. The second approach insists that even within the framework of modern national societies and the territorial states that form them, the persisting cultural and civilizational “otherness” is worthy of the right to continue to exist. Moreover, it often turns out to be an indispensable development resource of these societies. Within the framework of the study, a comparative analysis of the conjugation and latent conflict of these two approaches to the conceptualization of the cultural and civilizational foundations of modern politics is carried out. From a civilizational perspective, the evolutionary limits of universalism and the prospects for the transformation of the world order are discussed.

Keywords
civilization, civilizational discourse, universal civilization, universalism, particularism, world order, development.


References

Arnason, J.P. (2003). Civilizations in dispute. Leiden: Brill. 286 p. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004405424

Bartelson, J. (2000). Three concepts of globalization. International Sociology, 15(2),180-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580900015002003

Braudel, F. (1993). A history of civilizations. London: Penguin Books. 600 p.

Chebankova, E., & Dutkiewicz, P. (2021). Ideology and civilizational discourse. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 43-57. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.04.05

Coker, C. (2019). The rise of the civilizational state. Cambridge: Polity Press. 224 p.

Eisenstadt, S.N. (2000). Multiple modernities. Daedalus, 129(1), 1-29. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20027613

Eisenstadt, S.N. (2001). The civilizational dimension of modernity: modernity as a distinct civilization. International Sociology, 16(3), 320-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/026858001016003005

Frear, M., Mazepus, H. (2021). Security, civilisation and modernisation: continuity and change in the Russian foreign policy discourse. Europe-Asia Studies, 73(7), 1215-1235. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2020.1843601

Hall, M., & Jackson, P. (Ed.). (2007). Civilizational identity: the production and reproduction of ‘civilizations’ in international relations. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 243 p.

Huntington, S.P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. 368 p.

Laruelle, M. (2016). Russia as an anti-liberal European civilization. In: Kolsto, P., & Blakkisrud, H. (Ed.), The New Russian Nationalism: Imperialism, Ethnicity and Authoritarianism 2000-2015. Between Imperial and Ethnic (pp. 275-297). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Linde, F. (2016) The Civilizational turn in Russian political discourse: from pan-Europeanism to civilizational distinctiveness. The Russian Review, 75(4), 604-625. https://doi.org/10.1111/russ.12105

Mazlish, B. (2004). Civilization and its contents. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 208 p.

Pye, L.W. (1992). The spirit of Chinese politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 278 p.

Rostow, W. (1960). The stages of economic growth. A non-communist manifesto. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 179 p.

Schlesinger, A.M. Jr. (1992). The disuniting of America: reflections on a multicultural society. New York, NY: W.W. Norton. 208 p.

Toynbee, A.J. (1934). A study of history. Vol. I. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 484 p.

Toynbee, A.J. (1948). Civilization on trial. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 263 p.

Tsygankov, A.P. (2007) Finding a Civilisational Idea: “West”, “Eurasia”, and “Euro-East” in Russia’s Foreign Policy. Geopolitics, 12(3), 375-399. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650040701305617

Weiwei, Z. (2012). The China wave: rise of a civilizational state. Hackensack, NJ: World Century Publishing Corporation. 205 p.

 

 

Akhiyezer, A.S. (1991). Rossiya: kritika istoricheskogo opyta [Russia: criticism of historical experience]. Moscow: Filosofskoe obshchestvo. Vol. 1: 319 p.; Vol. 2: 378 p.; Vol. 3: 471 p. (In Russ.)

Baranov, A.V. (2014). History and political science: potential for methodological synthesis for the study of civilizations. METHOD: Moscow Yearbook of Social Studies, 4, 290-299. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_22633478_81848885.pdf

Benveniste, E. (2010) Civilisation: contribution a l’histoire du mot. (Russ. ed.: Benveniste E. Tsivilizatsiya. K istorii slova. In: Benveniste E. Obshchaya lingvistika (pp. 396-432). Moscow: URSS).

Chugrov, S.V. (2022). Cancel culture in world politics: historical and philosophical roots. Polis. Political Studies, 5, 88-98. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.05.07

Eisenstadt, S.N. (1999). Revolution and the transformation of societies. (Russ. ed.: Eisenstadt, S.N. Revolyutsiya i transformatsiya obshchestva: sravnitel’nyi analiz tsivilizatsii. Moscow: Aspect Press. 416 p.).

Erasov, B.S. (2002). Tsivilizatsii: Universalii i samobytnost’ [Civilizations: universals and identities]. Moscow: Nauka. 524 p. (In Russ.)

Ilyin, M.V. (1997). Slova i smysly. Opyt opisaniya klyuchevykh politicheskikh ponyatii [Words and meanings. Experience in describing key political concepts]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 432 p. (In Russ.)

Ionov, I.N. (2007). Tsivilizatsionnoe soznanie i istoricheskoe znanie [Civilization consciousness and historical knowledge]. Moscow: Nauka. 499 p. (In Russ.)

Kapustin, B.G. (2010). Kritika politicheskoi filosofii: Izbrannye ehsse [Critique of political philosophy: selected essays]. Moscow: “Territoriya budushchego” Publishing House. 424 p. (In Russ.)

Khoros, V.G. (2022). Tsivilizatsiya v sovremennom mire [Civilization in the modern world]. Vol. 1. Indiiskaya, Afrikanskaya, Islamskaya i Kitaiskaya tsivilizatsii. Latinoamerikanskaya tsivilizatsionnaya obshchnost’ [Indian, African, Islamic and Chinese civilizations. Latin American civilizational community]. Moscow: LELAND. 304 p.; Vol. 2: Evropeiskaya tsivilizatsiya. Rossiiskaya tsivilizatsiya [European civilization.Russian civilization]. Moscow: LELAND. 240 p. (In Russ.)

Kul’pin, E.S. (Ed.) (1999). Landshaft i ehtnos. Sotsioestestvennaya istoriya [Landscape and ethnicity. Socionatural history]. Vol. XIII. Moscow: Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 212 p. (In Russ.)

Lane, D. (2021). Civilisation and the Globalisation of Capitalism. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 58-75. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.04.06

Lapkin, V.V. (2016). The nature and factors of interethnic and ethnopolitical conflict in the modern world. In: N.O. Kovaleva, S.K. Kostovska, & E.A. Borisova (Eds.), Nature and Society: Technologies of Food and Environmental Safety. The series “Social-Natural History. The Genesis of Сrisis of Nature and Society in Russia”. Vol. XL (pp. 33-39). Moscow: MAKS Press. (In Russ.)

Lapkin, V.V. (2017). Sotsial’no-politicheskii kontekst transformatsii identichnosti v XXI veke [Sociopolitical Contexts of Identity Transformations in the 21st Century]. In: I. Semenenko (Ed.), Identichnost’: Lichnost’, obshchestvo, politika. Entsiklopedicheskoe izdanie [Identity: The Individual, Society, and Politics. An Encyclopedia]. Moscow: Ves Mir Publishers. P. 88-101. (In Russ.)

Mchedlova, M.M. (2017). Identichnost’: novye povoroty tsivilizatsionnoi teorii [Identity: New Turns in Civilization Theory]. In: I. Semenenko (Ed.), Identichnost’: Lichnost’, obshchestvo, politika. Entsiklopedicheskoe izdanie [Identity: The Individual, Society, and Politics. An Encyclopedia]. Moscow: Ves Mir Publishers. P. 148-155. (In Russ.)

Naumkin, V.V. (2020). Non-West model: does the civilization-state exist? Polis. Political Studies, 4, 78-93. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.04.06

Neklessa, A.I. (2021). Civilization as a process: multiplied subjects of Postmodernity. Polis. Political Studies, 5, 39-55. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.05.04

Pabst, A. (2021). Civilization and liberal democracy. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 26-42. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.04.04

Pantin, V.I. (2017a). Tsivilizatsionnaya identichnost’ v politicheskom izmerenii [Civilizational identity in the political dimension]. In: I. Semenenko (Ed.), Identichnost’: Lichnost’, obshchestvo, politika. Entsiklopedicheskoe izdanie [Identity: The Individual, Society, and Politics. An Encyclopedia]. Moscow: Ves Mir Publishers. P. 143-147. (In Russ.)

Pantin, V.I. (2017b). Natsional’no-tsivilizatsionnaya identichnost’ [National-civilizational identity]. In: Identichnost’: Lichnost’, obshchestvo, politika. Entsiklopedicheskoe izdanie [Identity: The Individual, Society, and Politics. An Encyclopedia] (ed. by I. Semenenko). 2017. Moscow: Ves Mir Publishers. P. 461-464. (In Russ.)

Safranchuk, I.A., & Lukyanov, F.A. (2021). The contemporary world order: the adaptation of actors to structural realities. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 14-25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.04.03

Semenenko, I.S., Lapkin, V.V., & Pantin, V.I. (2021). Cleavages and political divides in a theoretical perspective: criteria for assessment and classification. Polis. Political Studies, 5, 56-77. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.05.05

Sorokin, P. (1992). Chelovek, tsivilizatsiya, obshchestvo [Man, civilization, society]. Moscow: Politizdat. 543 p. (In Russ.)

Sorokin, P. (1999). Obshchie printsipy tsivilizatsionnoi teorii i ee kritika [General principles of civilizational theory and its criticism]. In: Sravnitel’noe izuchenie tsivilizatsii [A Comparative Study of Civilizations] (pp. 47-54). Moscow: Aspect Press. (In Russ.)

Spencer, H. (1999). Essays: scientific, political, and speculative. (Russ. ed.: Spencer, H. Opyty filosofskie, obshchestvennye i politicheskie. Moscow: Sovremennyi literator. 1408 p.).

Spengler, O. (1993). Der Untergang des Abendlandes. (Russ. ed.: Spengler, O. Zakat Evropy. Ocherki morfologii mirovoi istorii. Vol. 1. Moscow: Mysl’. 667 p.).

Spengler, O. (1998). Der Untergang des Abendlandes. (Russ. ed.: Spengler, O. Zakat Evropy. Ocherki morfologii mirovoi istorii. Vol. 2. Moscow: Mysl’. 606 p.).

Toffler, A. (2002). Future shock. (Russ. ed.: Toffler, A. Shok budushchego. Moscow: AST. 557 p.).

Toynbee, A.J. (1991). Postizhenie istorii [Comprehension of history]. Moscow: Progress. 736 p. (In Russ.)

Toynbee, A.J. (1995). Tsivilizatsiya pered sudom istorii [Civilization before the court of history]. Moscow: Publishing group “Progress” – “Culture”; St. Petersburg: Juventa. 447 p. (In Russ.)

Tzymbursky, V.L. (1997). Europe – Russia: the third autumn of the system of civilizations. Polis. Political Studies, 2, 56-76. (In Russ.)

Tzymbursky, V.L. (2000). How many civilizations? (With Lamansky, Spengler and Toynbee over a 21st century map). Pro et Contra. 5(3), 173-197. (In Russ.)

Yakovenko, I.G. (2021). Poznanie Rossii: tsivilizatsionnyi analiz [Knowledge of Russia: a civilizational analysis]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 671 p. (In Russ.)

Vreede de, E. (2012). Culture, civilization and identity. Polis. Political Studies, 5, 17-23. (In Russ.)

 

Content No. 6, 2022

See also:


De Vreede E.,
Culture, civilization and identity. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No5

Lane D.,
Civilisation and the Globalisation of Capitalism. – Polis. Political Studies. 2021. No4

Iordansky V.B.,
Contradictory nature of nationalism. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No6

Rodionov V.A.,
Mongolia we never knew. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No4

Lapkin V.V.,
Nation vs Empire in the Modern World Order. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No4

 

   

Introducing an article



Polis. Political Studies
6 2005


Skogorev A.P.
At the Approaches to Public Policy

 The article text
 

Archive

   2024      2023      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