Vol 11, No 2 (2024)

The paper examines the conditions and stages of formation of various types of power relations from 1991 to 2021 using the example of a comparative analysis of political processes in Siberian cities. To explain the differences in political trajectories, the author uses, on the one hand, the conceptual apparatus of the theory of assemblages by the Mexican-American researcher M. Delanda and builds his conclusions on the basis of the deductive method, and on the other hand, considers the course and results of election campaigns in the selected cities, inductively constructing ideal-typological models of winning coalitions. The main concept of the study is the “political-administrative assembly”, an autonomous entity consisting of heterogeneous parts of different nature, capable of providing forced coordination of other assemblies based on the legitimate recognition of its right to determine the target priorities of the community, mandatory social standards and to exercise control over their observance. Assemblies differ from each other in their assessments of electoral competition (personification-corporatism) and the transparency of administrative procedures (transparency-aberration). Thus, four models of assemblages are identified, two of which are designated as “Hobbesian patterns”, two as “Locke patterns”. To explain the discrepancy between the processes of formation of various patterns, a “place” hypothesis has been formulated, where the geographical location acts as a condition determining the nature of economic, social and cultural manifestations (a hub city or an administrative center city), which largely sets the parameters of the spatial, infrastructural and information environment of the city in question, which, in addition to the material component, finds its expression in the symbolic environment, the expressive pole (the city coat of arms), becoming the basis of the city’s identity (a trading city, an industrial city, an administrative center). Analysis of election campaigns shows a shift in local political agendas from complexes of local problems (1991–2000) to issues of the local economy (2000–2011) to the articulation of large-scale problems of a national scale at the local level (2011–2021). The latest trends mean the unification of management and the transition to the “Hobbes pattern”, which, within the framework of the chosen theoretical model, inevitably leads to a decrease in the social activity of the population, the impoverishment of the symbolic environment and the weakening of the signal complexes about the state of the infrastructural environment.

The study of the phenomenon of political elites in political theory has many dimensions. In its modern form, the conceptual foundations for interpreting elites were formulated more than a century ago in the works of V. Pareto, G. Mosca and R. Michels, imbued with unprecedented realism and a desire to apply scientific methods to the study of politics. Elite analytics, which has evolved over the centuries under the influence of a wide variety of determining factors, has nevertheless always maintained a connection with classical paradigms that go back to the political philosophy of early modernity, which, in turn, was closely linked to the tradition of ancient political philosophy — from Pythagoras and the early sophists to Plato and Aristotle. In this regard, virtually all the latest interpretations, one way or another, include — spontaneously or deliberately — some “traditionalist” element. The initial premise is the obvious statement that all societies are governed by elites and each society has certain means of creating its elites. An analysis of the latter suggests the need to establish clear distinctions between societies that have mechanisms for creating elites and societies that do not create institutional conditions for their formation. In modern political science, the analysis of problems related to the political status and ambitions of elites is quite often carried out within the framework of the dichotomy “elite theory versus theory of democracy”. At the same time, democratic theory and elite theory in their current state cannot by definition be considered as purely scientific or “descriptive”, since at any stage of their evolution they organically included a number of elements characteristic of normative political theory. Many scholars openly acknowledge that the concept of the elite is fraught with problems, and the unpredictable nature of elite choice can become an obstacle to theoretical progress (D. Higley, M. Burton, etc.). Such conclusions in a certain sense correlate with some postulates of the “positive political theory”, which has been actively developing in Western political thought since the beginning of the 21st century. “Statistics of disputes” within the positive political theory indicate that in recent years one of its most sensitive “pain points” has become the “hypothesis of democratic peace”. The central assumption underlying this hypothesis is that liberal democracies have rarely or never fought each other: wars have occurred and can occur only between autocracies or between democracies and autocracies. Many of the controversies and theoretical doubts regarding the democratic peace hypothesis are largely due to the heated debate that unfolded around the works of the American political scientist J.L. Snyder, in which this hypothesis was subjected to uncompromising criticism. Snyder’s main argument is that traditional autocratic elites, faced with a situation in which the spread of democracy begins to threaten their power, create “exclusionist” ethnic nationalist regimes. In order to protect their own interests, they provoke nationalist conflicts in a completely “rational” way. Snyder’s analysis also has specific links with the so-called “minimalist concept of democracy.” Its emergence is largely associated with the hypothesis substantiated in the mid–20th century by Kenneth Arrow. At the level of normative political theory, an attempt to overcome the abovementioned philosophical problems and moral dilemmas is quite vividly presented in the works of Patrick Deneen, one of the most prominent representatives of modern American conservatism. The starting point of the discussion he initiated is the same concerns about the growth of “neo-oligarchic tendencies” in modern Western democracies. In Deneen’s own “project”, outlined only in general terms, elements of the classical political-philosophical concept of a “mixed constitution” are bizarrely combined with futurological forecasts marked by the striving for a “conservative synthesis”.

The article discusses the relevant problem of the personal and professional potential of one of the leading strata of modern society — the political elite. It is precisely this potential that should shape the image of the elite personality itself, distinguishing it from other social subjects, both individuals and groups. In recent years, research has paid more attention to the psychological and axiological features of the basic traits and structure of personal or professional potential. The specifics of their manifestation in various social groups, including public servants, are being studied. This study focuses primarily on the features of the professional and personal potential of the elite. It determines the basic specificity of the modern Russian elite, where mobilization factors with the dominance of the political and status components predominate. In achieving the goals set, the author pays attention to the analysis of both objective factors (civilizational and regional), and subjective-personal factors (including the influence of socialization processes, generational, demographic, educational, and career trajectories). Their consideration (along with the content analysis of the biographies of 671 representatives of the federal and 165 regional elite groups (using the example of a typical 26 economic indicators of the Saratov region and equally typical indicators of the Middle Volga region of the Volgograd region) allowed the conclusion about the formation of a special hybrid type of professional and personal potential. It is characterized by formal-position characteristics, which somewhat suppress (but, in some cases, do not exclude) creative-personal characteristics.

Studies in Western and Central-Eastern Europe show that participation in parliamentary elections is structured according to demographic and sociostructural grounds — it clearly increases with age and with increasing socio-economic status, reflecting differences in the political competence of voters, motivation and opportunities for their mobilization. The paper discusses demographic and socio-structural inequalities of participation in the elections of the State Duma on September 17–19, 2021. To identify such inequalities, a logistic regression analysis of data from a representative Russian survey conducted under the ISSP program in 2022 was carried out. The results show that electoral participation in these elections was closely related to age — absentees prevailed among the younger voters, while the majority of the older ones participated in the voting. Such dependence, as we found earlier, arises as a result of a gradual increase in interest in politics and party identification with age, and may partly indicate clientelistic relations between the government and older people who received significant cash payments on the eve of the elections. In accordance with the theory of resources-motivation-mobilization, high education and income also contribute to electoral activity. It is related to employment, membership in trade unions, and attendance at religious services. In addition, the results support theoretical assumptions about the forced voting of the population dependent on the authorities — employees of the public sector of the economy, especially younger and middle-aged, do this much more often than those employed in private firms or not at all. However, it was not possible to detect differences between urban and rural populations, although it is believed that the latter is also easier for the authorities to influence. Regional comparisons add confidence that the highest official turnout rates in the republics of the North Caucasus, which, on the contrary, turn out to be the lowest according to the survey materials, appear as a result of massive fraud on the part of their leadership.