¹ 4, 2019
This article is devoted to the study of images of authorities during a new stage in the development of the Russian political system, which began after the presidential elections in 2018. The article is based on the research project implemented at the Department of Sociology and Psychology of Politics, Faculty of Political Science of the Lomonosov Moscow State University. The research methodology included surveys, in-depth interviews, as well as projective tests. The interpretation of the results was carried out using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Having theoretically substantiated the direction of the analysis, the authors focused on the objective, subjective, and temporal factors of political perception.
The article analyzes cognitive and emotional, visual and verbal components of the image of authorities. The authors described in detail the context of the perception of authorities that changed after the 2018 presidential elections, which led to an alteration of the mass consciousness of the Russian citizens. The psychological characteristics of Russians that affect their perception of authorities are revealed.
The study conducted by the authors indicates volatility of the psychological state of the Russian society, which is fraught with increased instability in political life, which may result in both increased political apathy and cynicism, as well as increased protest sentiments. There is a request for democratization, participation and closer interactions with the authorities in the Russian society. Since the authorities fail to handle this request, they lose people’s trust. The recent shifts in mass consciousness are caused both by the political context and deeper processes associated with the generational change and resocialization.
¹ 2, 2018
The article is based on the materials of the study of the perception of Russia by its citizens, implemented at the Department of Sociology and Psychology of Politics of the Faculty of Political Science of the Lomonosov Moscow State University. The research technique of the study included methods of semi-structured interviews and projective tests. To interpret the data, the authors used both qualitative and quantitative methods, in particular, coding and scaling answers to open questions and statistical analysis. As a result of the empirical analysis, the authors revealed certain features of the formation of the image of Russia in the minds of Russians regarding their rational and unconscious perceptions of territory, people, government, political leaders and the role of the country in the international arena. The authors also tracked the impact of certain factors on this process and recorded differences in the image of Russia among residents of different regions.
According to the conclusion of the authors, although the process of the development of the image of Russia and the formation of the Russian national-state identity has been going on for as long as a quarter of a century, it is still far from completion. The psychological state of Russian society is extremely volatile. The revealed distrust of the citizens towards the government and the state proves that the negative trends dating back to the 1980s that led to a serious complex of “national inferiority” have not been completely overcome. The rise of national pride that took place in 2014 has not yet taken root.
¹ 3, 2011
Based on the data from the politico-psychological research that has been conducted under the leadership of the author since 1993, the article analyses changes that images of the authorities on the whole and related perceptions of democracy have undergone in recent years. Having caught the clarification of positions in the society, E.Shestopal also draws attention to the nonlinear character of those transformations that the mass cognition was going through in the Post-Soviet time. She thinks that classical theories of democracy do not fit for the explanation of processes taking place in the Russian politics and social consciousness of the Russian citizens. The structure of perceptions of democracy is much more complicated and multifaceted than the widespread split within the consciousness into the authoritarian and the democratic. Analyzing political values, one has to take into account at least three dimensions: statism vs. anti-statism, freedom vs. equality, ethnocentrism vs. cosmopolitism.
¹ 4, 2005
The article is based on the materials of the study conducted in 2005-2006 in Moscow, Kemerovo, Chelyabinsk, Perm and Dagestan. E. Shestopal attempts to reveal the political views of the representatives of different age groups and to correlate these views with the models of their primary socialization. Besides, the author researches how different institutions and factors influence the acquisition of new political values.
In the article a special attention is paid to the adult population resocialization conditioned by the radical transformation of the country's political system, contradictions between the old and the new values. According to the author, each generation of Russian citizens had their own experience of primary and secondary political socialization and their experience of adaptation to the new political situation in the post-soviet period. This determines the differences in the perception of the most important landmarks of the soviet, late soviet and post soviet periods.
¹ 2, 2003
The article is based on the research, conducted in 1993-2003 in Moscow, the Moscow region, Vladimir, Ivanovo, Irkutsk and some other regions. The analysis focuses on the relations between citizens and power. The author studies the process of democratization on a micropolitical level, analyzes how this process changes the attitude of an individual towards the power. The article distinguishes several stages of changing the quality of democracy, and these stages are determined according to the change of attitudes to the power. According to the author, Russian mass consciousness has adopted main democratic values, though this adoption has not always been even. Some values turned out to better fit into the national political culture (such as freedom and law-abidance), while others (such as responsibility, individual autonomy) have recently seriously lost their significance and do not comply with the high democratic standards. In order to consolidate democracy, there should be made such changes in the mass and individual consciousness of the Russians that would lead to the prevalence of a non-authoritarian psychological type.
¹ 1, 2000
Proclaiming formally in 1990s the renunciation to the soviet model of state and the socialist values, the beginning of democratization, the ruling elites did not formulate the meaning of this process. The actual regime had no responses to the most of that challenges. The country wasn't stable in the political aspect. The legitimacy of this regime is very uncertain. It is still difficult to define what legal tradition the present regime inherited and whether it proceeded from the Russian empire, or the Soviet Union or the state formed in 1991. Russia didn't react to the challenges of the modernization and of the multipolar world. The actual key tasks should be the purposes determination and the restoration of the non-totalitarian statehood. The reinforcement of the civil society could lead to the broadening of the supreme power resources.
¹ 2, 1997
The aim of this paper is to find the specificity of the interrelation of branches of power in the post-Soviet Russia, mainly after 1993. Two groups of variables are the object of analysis in this paper. The first are political factors and especially institutional ones (an imperfect Constitution, vague functions of different branches, political conflicts, etc.). The second group factors have a psychological nature. Along with the formal lines of separation of power new borders appeared and act in the contemporary political life of Russia. They affect legally separated powers. Power as a whole and its separate branches and institutions are perceived negatively by citizens.
Main Page ~ Authors ~ Shestopal Elena