Civil Society in Putin's Russia

Chebankova, Elena

doi:10.4324/9780203387818

Cited by 33 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(Re)politisering är då den process där individerna dras in i systemet av beslutsfattande och intresserepresentation (Clément & Demidov 2013), inte som ett sätt att uppnå ett specifikt mål utan som en symbolisk bekräftelse av deras medborgerliga rättigheter. Kollektiv handling är alltså beroende av samhällets förmåga att överbrygga klyftan mellan individuation som skapar social atomisering och den känsla av att tillhöra en gemenskap som krävs för en livskraftig politisk mobilisering (Chebankova 2013). Det råder ingen enighet i litteraturen om vad som exakt överbryggar eller vidgar klyftan: det hänvisas till besvikelse, moraliska krav, socialisation, strukturella förhållanden och hur de uppfattas och kommuniceras.…”

Section: Politiskt Eller Apolitiskt: Två Sidor Av Samma Myntunclassified

“…Under de senaste decennierna har de "ryska marscherna" -årliga demonstrationer av nationalistiska grupper av olika inriktning över hela landet -fått stöd från både offentliga tjänstemän och oppositionsledare. Vissa radikala grupper och organisationer på gräsrotsnivå har ägnat sig åt illegala och våldsamma aktiviteter (Sokolov 2006), medan andra försöker samarbeta med staten och bidra till olika sociala aktiviteter eller engagera sig i valarbete (Chebankova 2013). Den vänsterorienterade mobili-seringen har fått mindre uppmärksamhet än den högerpolitiska, kanske delvis, som Luke March (2006) har påpekat, för att den ansågs sammanfalla med kommunistpartiet, som i sin tur analyserades som en del av den större demokratiska krisen i Ryssland och inte som ett självständigt fenomen.…”

Section: Avslutande Kommentarerunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inledning

Kravchenko

2017

ATfS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Politiskt Eller Apolitiskt: Två Sidor Av Samma Myntunclassified

Section: Avslutande Kommentarerunclassified

Inledning

Kravchenko

2017

ATfS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While the literature and the debates on Russian civil society have generally been productive (for example Evans, Henry, and Lisa 2006;Uhlin 2006;Chebankova 2013), the term civil society itself is rendered less useful by competing normative and conceptual associations, in particular the teleological democratisation approach associated with mainstream Western usage of the term (Henry and Sundstrom 2006, 4). As Matt Killingsworth (2007, 74-75) argues, the term is often "underpinned by an almost Fukuyamaesque triumphalism", with an "implicit assumption that the establishment of a flourishing civil society is a given".…”

Section: Beyond Civil Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

State–society relations in contemporary Russia: new forms of political and social contention

Cheskin

March

2015

East European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much existing analysis of Russian state-society relations focuses on public, active forms of contention such as the "opposition" and protest movements. There is need for a more holistic perspective which adds study of a range of overt, "co-opted", and hidden forms of interaction to this focus on public contention. A theoretical and empirical basis for understanding state-society relations in today's Russia involves broadening the concept of "contentious politics" to include models of "consentful" as well as "dissentful" contention. A diffused model of contentious politics can situate claim-making along the axes of consentful and dissentful motivations, and compliant and contentious behaviours.Keywords: Russia; contentious politics; protest; opposition; civil society Prior to the contested 2011-2012 elections in Russia, many commentators held the view that Russian society did not pose an existential threat to the country's political status quo (Gel'man 2013, 6). While sporadic protests had occurred before 2011, they had been largely confined to specific geographic areas and tended to focus on relatively narrow issues (Evans 2012; Koesel and Bunce 2012, 412). Indeed it is no exaggeration to say that the vibrant street protests after the elections caught most analysts by surprise (Volkov 2012, 55). Since then, there has been a compensatory focus on new forms of opposition and public protest, evidence of instability within the Putin regime and a (partial) movement away from the perception of the Russian state as an efficiently operating presidential vertikal (e.g. Monaghan 2012; Greene 2013; Judah 2013).Much of the existing analysis, however, continues to focus on public, active forms of contention such as the "opposition" and social, issue-based movements that mobilise public protest (e.g. Koesel and Bunce 2012;Robertson 2013;White 2013;Ross 2015). These accounts provide a vitally important perspective on the interactions between state and society in contemporary Russia. However, as Evans (2012, 234) notes, "We should not expect that the study of groups in Russia that carry out public protests against the decisions of those in authority can give us a comprehensive understanding of Russian civil society". Chebankova (2015, 244) Vol. 31, No. 3, 261-273, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2015 Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 09:34 26 August 2015 arguing that researchers "tend to confine their analysis to the visible side of mobilisation, thus ignoring its latent dimensions". This special issue therefore joins a growing body of works that seek to switch the analytical lens more fully from state-centric analyses focusing on the mechanics of the Putinite presidential system towards the emergent Russian politics "from below". Such analyses (e.g. Beznosova and Sundstrom 2009; Chebankova 2009; Robertson 2010; Gladarev and Lonkila 2013) make several common arguments: (a) there has long been greater political contention in post-Soviet Russia than many acknowledge; (b) such contention is often more marked at loc...

show abstract

“…If we, however, accept civil society as an entity partly coterminous with the state, in either the Hegelian, Lockean, or even Hobbesian trend, then this claim could come across as somewhat more dubious. For parts of civil society in this trend are actively co-operating with the state in various aspects of social life (Keane 1988;Lewis 1992;Inoguchi 2002;Chebankova 2012bChebankova , 2013a and have the dual goal of curbing the state's influence and assisting it in the prevention of social chaos.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary Russian liberalism

Chebankova

2014

Post-Soviet Affairs

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyzes contemporary Russian liberalism through the prism of competing trends of moderate pluralist and monistic radical thought. The author focuses particularly on the pluralist trend, less well known in the West, arguing that its prospects are more promising over the long term. Ideological and tactical differences within the liberal camp in Russia are compared with those in the West, both for the purpose of emphasizing that such differences are not unique to Russia and to show the connections between Russian and Western strands of liberal political thought.

show abstract

Civil Society in Putin's Russia

Cited by 33 publications

References 0 publications

Inledning

Inledning

State–society relations in contemporary Russia: new forms of political and social contention

Contemporary Russian liberalism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About