№ 2, 2008
The article analyzes the tentative contribution of geo-policy, geo-economy and geo-culture in developing political globalization studies as an empirical science. Having scrutinized basic geo-political, geo-economic and geocultural concepts A.Kazantsev is showing that two approaches having an expressed normative and ideological orientation are fighting one another: these are the universalist and particularist approaches. While deeming it necessary to give up posing the universal opposite to the local as a precondition for bringing together the multitude of global studies in one and the same discipline, the author assumes that special aspects of the relationship between the universal and local must form the content of global studies.
№ 2, 2006
The author immediately clarifies that he reads the book from the point of view of the differentiation of the professional Russian historical science from the general context of the political thought. He focuses his attention on the articles by V. Kurennoy (on intellectuals), M. Remizov (on conservatism), B. Makarenko and А. Makarkin (on liberalism), T. Dmitriev and M. Fetisov (on the left-wingers), V. Malakhov (on modern Russian nationalism), an interview with B. Kapustin, S. Kordonskiy, V. Radiev. Andrey Kazantsev comes to the conclusion that this very differentiation is not completed and that it leads to a number of negative consequences including the gap between political science and social political reality, the weak differentiation of the structure of political science, and the insufficient self-organization of the scientific community.
Main Page ~ Authors ~ Kazantsev Andrey