The article presents the problem of using the transformations in Russia of the last three hundred years as a material for creating the theory of bureaucracy, which differs from the Weber concept. This problem is being addressed through the application of concepts developed at the Rostov School of Political Science of the Southern Federal University (Russia). The conceptual apparatus is being developed to study the Russian, Soviet and post-Soviet bureaucracy in connection with the process of forming an opposition in Russia, (...) free from the stereotypes of bureaucratic activity, behavior and thinking. Such opposition could not emerge in either monarchical, Soviet or post-Soviet Russia. The reasons are explained in the theory of bureaucracy, which contains a reconstruction of the Marx definition of bureaucracy as a social parasite organism, reflection of many social contradictions and embodiment of political exclusion. The cognitive situation in modern Russia is discussed; ways for the researcher to bypass the choices imposed on him by the post-Soviet authorities, the specifics of genesis and the structure of the police society in the country. (shrink)

The author substantiates the principle of the researcher’s distance from the political situation in Russia and the entire post-Soviet space [Makarenko V. P., 2016, pp. 53–77] given that the main characteristics of the Russian, Soviet and post-Soviet state mind come from lie, violence and political mediocrity [Makarenko V. P., Akopyan A. G., Khaled R. K. B., 2020]. The leaders of the Russian Empire (Nicholas II) and the Soviet Union (Stalin) engaged the country in two world wars which implies that even (...) the Russian revolutions did not change the patterns of political thinking of the ruling minorities in Russia [Liven D., 2007]. The purpose of this article is to apply the author's concept of bureaucracy to explain the nature of post-Soviet wars. For this, the fundamental research of Hannah Arendt, the observations of writers, war journalists, and civilian analysts of the Soviet war in Afghanistan and the war between Russia and Chechnya in 1994–1996 are being used. The problems of reassessing the links between war and politics, the phenomenon of unknown wars in the history of the USSR and post-Soviet Russia, the reproduction of liars and the process of formation of unrecognized states in the post-Soviet space are considered. (shrink)

This article raises the issue of using Russia’s transformations over the last three hundred years as material for creating a theory of bureaucracy that differs from Max Weber’s understanding of it. This issue is addressed using the understandings developed at the Rostov School of Political Sciences of the Southern Federal University (Russia), which is working out a conceptual apparatus for studying the Russian, Soviet, and post-Soviet bureaucracy in relation to the process of forming an opposition free from stereotypes of bureaucratic (...) action, behavior, and thought. This kind of opposition could not have arisen in monarchical, Soviet, or post-Soviet Russia. The reasons for this are explained by a theory of bureaucracy that contains a reconstruction of Marx’s definition of bureaucracy as a social parasitic organism, a reflection of numerous social contradictions and the embodiment of political alienation. The article discusses the cognitive situation in contemporary Russia, ways for researchers to avoid the choice imposed by post-Soviet authorities, and the specific features of the genesis and structure of the assertion of police society in Russia. (shrink)

The article presents a fragment of the concept developed by the author in recent years [Makarenko V. P., 2018]. It discusses the problems of liberation of mind and conscience from the legacy of the Soviet era, the resuscitation of obscurantism in Russia against the background of the contrast between culture and the state along with the main characteristics of the twentieth century and constants of Russian history. The author also reviews the Old Testament concept of holy war, transformation of war (...) in Christianity, Russian and Soviet state mind, the civilizing dictatorship of the empire in the past and present, the evolution of government philosophy to a system of total lies, modern forms of its embodiment, including collaborationism, and the influence of these factors on the functioning of power in the country. (shrink)