Suchergebnisse

To fight climate change, democratic countries must find a way to work with autocratic ones.

Media coverage analysis of the four most important federal laws is carried out. These legislative initiatives - "The law on the protection of children", "Lugovoi's law", "Russian SOPA" and the "Blogger law" regulate legal relations in the Russian segment of the Internet. The research shows that Russian and foreign media reaction to these laws is sharply negative and quite similar. The author assumes that there are various reasons for this assessment. The Russian media see these laws as the violation of fundamental freedoms of speech and expression and regard them as the tool of censorship and suppression of opposition. The situation is quite natural, because the legal field of Internet regulation in Russia is now at the initial stage and legislators sometimes react too rigidly to the rapidly changing reality and growing influence of the virtual space, while foreign media direct their criticism primaryly to the Russian political regime, using it as the tool of information warfare and pressure on the world public opinion.

The report analyzes the importance of the memory of anti-fascism, in a country like Italy where fascism originated. The concept of long Resistance is examined, focusing on the early twenties of the twentieth century, when Mussolini rose to power, considering in particular the notable figure of Piero Gobetti and his activities as a publisher. In the short space of three years, he published 114 volumes. Among the authors there were all the major figures of the anti-fascist culture of the time, from Einaudi to Salvemini, from Amendola to Salvatorelli, from Ruffini to Monti, from Sturzo to Nitti, literary critics such as Fubini and Sapegno, novelists, poets, including Eugenio Montale, future Nobel laureate. A Committee chaired by me took the initiative to republish the entire corpus of Gobettian books, to make available to the new generations the best democratic literature of the time, as a contribution - in an era of right-wing populism and crisis of democracy in various parts of the world - to the struggle against fascism which is always taking on new forms, against the "eternal fascism" Umberto Eco spoke about. Eighty volumes have been released so far (October 2020) which - hopefully - will help to preserve the memory and to maintain an intergenerational message, foreseeing a future without oblivion. ; The report analyzes the importance of the memory of anti-fascism, in a country like Italy where fascism originated. The concept of long Resistance is examined, focusing on the early twenties of the twentieth century, when Mussolini rose to power, considering in particular the notable figure of Piero Gobetti and his activities as a publisher. In the short space of three years, he published 114 volumes. Among the authors there were all the major figures of the anti-fascist culture of the time, from Einaudi to Salvemini, from Amendola to Salvatorelli, from Ruffini to Monti, from Sturzo to Nitti, literary critics such as Fubini and Sapegno, novelists, poets, including Eugenio Montale, future Nobel laureate. A Committee chaired by me took the initiative to republish the entire corpus of Gobettian books, to make available to the new generations the best democratic literature of the time, as a contribution - in an era of right-wing populism and crisis of democracy in various parts of the world - to the struggle against fascism which is always taking on new forms, against the "eternal fascism" Umberto Eco spoke about. Eighty volumes have been released so far (October 2020) which - hopefully - will help to preserve the memory and to maintain an intergenerational message, foreseeing a future without oblivion.

This article presents the first historiographical attempt to examine and analyze systematically all the newspaper and journal responses to the first edition of the basic treatise on the moral philosophy by Vl. Soloviev – The Justification of Good (1897). The first part of the article examines the positive reviews of the book that were submitted or published by the closest friends of the philosopher, supposedly, at his personal request. The analysis of the responses allows us to conclude that The Justification of Good was generally received by the Russian readership unfavorably. The reason for this was a problem of assigning the philosopher to one or another camp of Russian thought. Vl. Soloviev's moral metaphysics and especially his socio-political views did not satisfy either liberals or conservatives, much less representatives of the radical left movements in social thought. The article notes that among the closest friends of Vl. Soloviev who gave a positive review of this treatise only E.L. Radlov was ready to accept the philosophical conception contained in The Justification of Good and support Soloviev in his polemic with the ethical views of Leo Tolstoy. Additionally, an examination of the positive reviews of The Justification of the Good is also important, because their authors as Soloviev's friends could interpret some of the most difficult theses of the book based on the explanation given by the philosopher himself. It is possible to suppose that in preparing to publish his new philosophical work Vl. Soloviev expected that the first sympathetic reviews would contribute to a correct perception of his moral philosophy in Russian society.

The increasing role of small-circulation opposition propaganda and the professional interest to the study of this problem in the historical aspect explain the actuality of the present research. It focuses on primary print editions of newformat parties in the early 1990s. The historical principle and general method of content-analysis of the press are basic for this research. The result of the work was the analysis of the primary independent editions which allowed the author conclude that all print periodicals of the post-soviet period political organizations were different in types, contents and ideology, but they had a comon goal: influencing voters' mass consciousness. ; Актуальность темы исследования обуславливается возрастающей ролью малотиражной оппозиционной пропаганды и проявлением интереса к изучению проблемы в историческом аспекте. Предметом научной работы являются первичные печатные издания партий нового формата начала 1990-х гг. XX столетия. В основе исследования лежит принцип историзма, а главным методом является контент-анализ прессы. Результатом работы стал анализ первичных независимых изданий, который позволил автору сделать выводы о том, что все печатные издания политических организаций постсоветского периода различались по типам, содержанию, идеологии, но имели общую цель – влияние на массовое сознание избирателей.

This article is devoted to the analysis of the so-called «Yarovaya package», which entered into force in July 2016. And directly those of them which concern the regulation of the Russian segment of Internet. In our opinion, these anti-terrorist amendments became the expected continuation of the Runet rigid regulation. The article draws a parallel between the "antiterrorist package" and similar laws adopted in the USA and Europe. The reaction of the leading Russian and foreign editions on the adoption of this legislative initiative is also studied and compared in the article. The results of the conducted research show that Western media met the amendments much more negatively than one would expect. While the first negative reaction of the Russian media was eventually replaced by loyalty and even justification of these restrictive measures. ; Статья посвящена анализу законодательных инициатив, получивших название«антитеррористический пакет Яровой» и вступивших в силу в июле 2016 года. И непосредственно тех из них, которые касаются регулирования сети Интернет. Изменения, внесенные в ряд Федеральных законов Российской Федерации, стали, по нашему мнению, ожидаемым продолжением курса жесткого регулирования российского сегмента сети Интернет. В статье проводится параллель между «антитеррористическим пакетом» и схожими законами, принятыми в США и Европе. А также изучается и сравнивается реакция ведущих российских и зарубежных изданий на принятие этой законодательной инициативы. Проведенный анализ показывает, что западные СМИ встретили поправки куда более негативно, чем можно было бы ожидать. В то время как первая негативная реакция российских СМИ сменилась со временем лояльностью и даже оправданием ограничительных мер.

The currently being prepared for publication "Foreword" to F. Tönnies' work "Community and Society" was written by Harvard University professor P.A. Sorokin (1889–1968), who was a Russian/American sociologist. It was first published alongside the English translation of Tönnies' book, issued in New York back in 1940. According to P.A. Sorokin, Tönnies' community and society dichotomy represents a universal categorical description of two opposing forms of social organization. They appear in the social evolution of various civilizations and in the writings of their founders. P.A. Sorokin considered Tönnies to be one of the contemporary successors to the tradition of describing society in such a way. Tönnies' book was ahead of its time. It is mentioned in "Foreword" that the first German edition, published in 1887, did not attract readers' attention. However, when the 20th century came around — this book became a point of reference for German social scientists, as well as for educated individuals among the general public. "Foreword" mentions the reason for its rapid increase in popularity, which turned out to be a rapid and widespread transition from "community" to a "society" based on contractual relations. P.A. Sorokin points out that Tönnies created his essay during a time when the "Gesellschaft type of society" was "triumphantly rooting out the Gemeinschaft". However, even back then Tönnies highlighted the shortcomings of capitalism as a form of social life. The American edition of Tönnies' book, published in 1940, was its first complete translation to a foreign language (the 1927 Japanese edition had been shortened). P.A. Sorokin's "Foreword" to this edition marked the beginning of this writing's worldwide fame. This is the first time "Foreword" has ever been published in Russian. It was not included in the 2002 Russian edition of Tönnies' book. This publication, however, makes up for such an omission in theoretical sociology. The publication together with commentary has been prepared by N.A. Golovin.