Suchergebnisse

В статье рассматривается историография женского движения в Российской империи второй половины XIX – начала ХХ в. на предмет использования терминов применительно к данному историческому явлению, классификации женщин-участниц движения и методологии исследования. Основными источниками являются наиболее значимые публикации современных отечественных и иностранных ученых, занимающихся указанной проблематикой. На основе анализа представленной в тексте историографии можно сделать вывод, что в исторической ретроспективе при изучении женской общественной деятельности использовались такие термины, как феминизм, эмансипация женщин, женский вопрос, суфражизм, женское движение. На сегодняшний день наиболее часто употребляемым термином является женское движение, а методологией – теории социологии общественного движения. В вопросе классификации женщин-участниц нет устоявшегося деления. Cуществующий терминологический и методологический инструментарий не позволяют осмыслить разнообразие форм протекания социальных процессов и реальных феминистских стратегий в позднеимперский период. Для анализа проблемы женской активности второй половины XIX – начала ХХ в. предлагается использовать более широкие термины – женская общественная деятельность, новая женщина, а также концепции Ю. Хабермаса, Х. Арендт о публичной и приватной сферах и теорию И. Гофмана о гендерном дисплее. При этом «политизацию» публичной сферы дляженской деятельности не политико-правового характера позволит произвести высказывание Кэрол Ханиш – «личное есть политическое». В этом ключе женская общественная деятельность будет «политическим» поступком в сфере публичной, поскольку происходит выход за рамки существующих патриархальных институтов и практик. В заключительной части статьи делаются выводы о том, что расширение терминологического и методологического аппарата за счет внедрения понятия женская общественная деятельность и применения теорий/концепций Ю. Хабермаса, Х. Арендт, И. Гофмана позволит заполнить лакуны региональной и общероссийской женской истории путем включения в историческую память женщин, вышедших из частной приватной сферы в публичное пространство и реализовавших себя через высшее образование, благотворительность, предпринимательство, получение профессий, считавшихся ранее сугубо мужскими.
The article deals with the historiography of the women's movement in the Russian Empire in the second half of the 19th – early 20th century. It addresses the terms related to this historical phenomenon, classification of women-members of the movement, and research methodology. The main sources are the publications of the most significant modern Russian and foreign researchers working on this rahge of problems. Based on the analysis of the historiography presented in the text, we can conclude that in historical retrospect, researchers used such terms as feminism, women's emancipation, the woman question, suffragism, and women's movement. Nowadays, the most commonly used term is women's movement. The most commonly used methodology rests upon the theories of social movement sociology. There is currently no well-established classification of female participants in social movements. The existing terminological and methodological tools do not allow us to comprehend the diversity of forms of social processes and real feminist strategies in the late imperial period. To analyze the problem of women's activism in the second half of the 19th and early 20th century, we suggest using broader terms women's social activism and the new woman, the concepts of J. Habermas and H. Arendt of the public and private spheres, and E. Goffman's theory of gender display. At the same time, the slogan "The Personal is Political" coined by Carol Hanisch allows us to make certain "politicization" of the public sphere for women's activism of a non-political and non-legal nature. In this regard, women's social activism will be a "political" act in the public sphere because it transcends the existing patriarchal institutions and practices. The final part of the article concludes that the expansion of terminological and methodological framework due to the introduction of the concept of women's social activismand the application of theories/concepts of J. Habermas, H. Arendt, and E. Goffman will make it possible to fill the gaps of regional and all-Russian women's history by including in the historical memory those women who went out of the private sphere into the public space and fulfilled their potential through obtaining higher education, charity, entrepreneurship, and acquiring the professions that had been considered exclusively male earlier.

The sociological study of volunteerism typically uses a definition which includes all possible types of free, unpaid activities which benefit other people. Such an approach transforms the very phenomenon of volunteerism into an analytical tool for studying various fields of economic and social life: degrees of development of civil society, employment structure, features of a certain economic mode. Regardless, the use of such a definition when researching volunteer movements presents certain problems. Multiple critics point out that such an approach towards understanding volunteerism, on one hand, leads to various types of volunteer activity being excluded from the scope of research, namely those which do not fully comply with the aforementioned criteria of free choice and gratuitousness; on the other hand, it waters down the concept of volunteerism, by merging it with other forms of civil action, such as political activism. Furthermore, most studies exhibit a tendency towards highlighting volunteerism as a special type of action, which possesses persistent intrinsic characteristics regardless of the field in which it is being undertaken. Such an approach results in a complete lack of care for certain essential features of various types of those productive activities which volunteers can partake in. It's also worth noting that research doesn't tend to include practices of volunteerism when the main focus of analysis shifts towards studying the socio-demographic characteristics of participants, as well as issues concerning their motivation. Based on analyzing Russian and foreign sources, the article presents an overview of the issues associated with defining the boundaries of the field in question, while discussing the main difficulties when it comes to constructing a general theory of volunteerism, and analyzing the separation of various forms of civil activity which is typically present in foreign literature: volunteerism, grassroots political involvement, civil activism. The article brings forth arguments for limiting the subject of research and for analytical separation between various forms of civil activity.

The purpose of the work is to identify a special subject area in the research of symbolic capital of cities – symbolic geopolitical capital – and to identify its connection with urban space. The author defines environmental symbolic resources – urban signs or symbol carriers – the category of symbolic geopolitical capital (SGC), reveals their structure based on the applied example of St. Petersburg, as well as the principles of interaction with the urban environment and some ways in which SGK in symbolic politics are determined. The material carriers of symbols have at least four special properties that give the actors of urban symbolic politics an advantage when using these carriers in a competitive struggle: the duration of their existence and anchoring in the fabric of the city; the power of nomination – ideas about their legitimacy and public recognition; they are more likely to be encoded by the consciousness of the citizen in the form of a priori "normal", "comfortable" and positive perception; and they provide the actors of symbolic politics with special means of political maneuver, using the principle of separation and variability of interpretations of such signs. In addition to the principles of placement described for each category of signs, their generalized types are highlighted: spatial concentration, spatial confinement, spatial hierarchy and effective spatial representation. The means of symbolic management using SGC are described, such as: all kinds of physical actions with the carriers themselves; activism correlated with them; producing new political meanings of their nominations and renominations; reinterpretation of existing and production of new symbols and associated signs, thereby – the production of new symbolic resources and the reconfiguration of the symbolic space of the city. Examples are given of urban conflicts related to geopolitical urban signs reflected in public discourse. They are grouped by potential sources of conflictogenicity due to the different attitudes of actors to: practices and manifestations of territorial strategies, their results and consequences; concepts and proposed worldviews; ideas about control over territory. A number of principles and patterns for the formation and use of symbolic geopolitical capital associated with urban space in politics are formulated: specialization in the nomination, the "latent" nature of the potential for conflict inherent in the SGC, the change of hierarchies, stages or "waves" of geopolitical symbolic policy in urban space, the formation of a "geopolitical symbolic footprint".

В публикации рассматривается монография П.Н. Базанова, посвященная политической и издательской деятельности «просоветских» организаций русской эмиграции первой волны: сменовеховцев, младороссов, национал-максималистов и других представителей пореволюционного движения, отвергавших идею «активизма» – террористической и вооруженной борьбы с Советской Россией. Анализируются взгляды и деятельность эмигрантских движений, вышедших за пределы дореволюционных партийных рамок и политических концепций, сумевших творчески подойти к осмыслению большевистской революции и новой эпохи в жизни нашей страны. Особое внимание в рецензии уделено возникновению терминов «фиолетовые» и «ультрафиолетовые», проблеме появления лозунга «Царь и Советы», фактам биографии видных деятелей пореволюционного движения.
The review examines the monograph by P. Bazanov devoted to the political and publishing activities of the "pro-Soviet" organizations of Russian emigration of the first wave: the Smenovekhovtsy, the Mladorossi, the National Maximalists, and other representatives of the post-revolutionary movement who rejected the idea of "activism," i.e. terrorist and armed struggle against Soviet Russia. The analysis focuses on the views and activities of the emigrant movements that went beyond the pre-revolutionary party framework and political concepts and managed to creatively approach the understanding of the Bolshevik revolution and the new era in the life of our country. Special attention in the review is paid to the emergence of the terms "violet" and "ultraviolet," the problem of the appearance of the slogan "The Tsar and the Soviets," and biographical facts of the prominent figures of the post-revolutionary movement.