Suchergebnisse

Introduction. The study of processes in societies in the post-Soviet space exceeds the scope of any single scientific discipline. All the existing attempts at interdisciplinary synthesis do not allow to overcome the fragmentation of scientific knowledge. The article describes the structure of the foundations of the supradisciplinary synthesis based on the ideas of I. Wallerstein. An analysis of the concept of Eurasianism (which, in the author's opinion, is the most influential interdisciplinary direction in modern domestic social science that studies processes in the post-Soviet space) was carried out with the aim of subsequent synthesis with the world-systems approach.Methodology and sources. The foundations of the supradisciplinary synthesis are the concept of the world-systems approach by I. Wallerstein, the characteristics of macro-, meso-, microsocietal levels by J. Turner, and the idea of four spheres of socio-historical existence by N. S. Rozov (biotechnosphere, psychosphere, cultural sphere, sociosphere).Results and discussion. The resulting structure of the supradisciplinary synthesis is a tool that will allow: to systematize the existing developments in the field of the world-systems approach; to discover existing gaps and fill them by synthesis with directions that do not contradict the world-systems approach; to carry out a critical analysis of theories of competing paradigms with world-systems analysis by comparing their empirical areas; systematically expand the empirical field and develop the world-systems theory. The tradition laid down by the historiosophy of Eurasianism is a culture-centered direction with additional accents in the biotechnosphere, sociosphere and psychosphere. At the present stage this contributes to its development as an interdisciplinary field of research. In Eurasianism, there is no ontology of the world as a system that includes societies in the structures of intersocietal ties and acts as a "containment environment" for their development. The Eurasian concept has an antisystemic ideological basis, and for this reason it is difficult to explain on its basis the desire of the post-Soviet states to integrate into the world system, their mutual competition and military conflicts.Conclusion. The supradisciplinary synthesis with world-systems analysis will allow Eurasianism to overcome the existing gaps in ontology and strengthen the explanatory potential. The empirical baggage accumulated by Eurasianism will receive a world-systems interpretation of processes in the post-Soviet space, which will serve to expand the empirical field of the world-systems approach.

Introduction. The paper examines the state of the modern world and the prospects for its multipolarity from the standpoint of synergetics, dialectics, the world-systems analysis and geopolitics. The world-systems approach substantiates the crisis and finiteness of the modern world-economy, the impossibility of its modernization and the emergence of a demand for the formation of an egalitarian world order. The idea of multipolarity is one of the answers to this request.Methodology and sources. Ideas of social synergetics in the works of E.N. Knyazeva, S.P. Kurdyumov and V.V. Tuzov made it possible to describe the state of the modern world system as a state of a non-equilibrium system at the stage of self-organization. Hegelian dialectical laws were used to describe the most general characteristics in the logic of the historical stages in the formation of a social system. The ideas of I. Wallerstein and the geopolitical theory of R. Collins made it possible to designate the properties of attractors that lead to the emergence of poles in the world-economy.Results and discussion. From the point of view of synergetics, multipolarity in the world-system is a state of chaos; from the point of view of dialectics, this is a state of a leap, a transition to a new quality. A geopolitical-world-system typology of attractors that can lead to the formation of poles is proposed. It is shown that the multipolar world contains different options for development, depending on what kind of economic relations will develop between the participants. Within the framework of the existing economic system (capitalist relations, relations of self-organization), multipolarity acts as an intermediate state from which a unipolar world is born. The authors came to the conclusion that for a new result, it is necessary to change the economic paradigm from a self-organizing world-system to one organized by the will of people and based on science. The requirements of a multipolar world on the part of the BRICS, SCO, and EAEU states are within the framework of the existing development paradigm, so the formation of egalitarian relations on this basis is problematic.Conclusion. Humanity gets a chance to overcome the spontaneity of self-organization processes and form a more egalitarian society in the course of the bifurcation of the existing system. Multipolarity can act as a stage of such a transition. However, if the issue of a qualitative change in social relations is not resolved, then multipolarity will turn out to be only a stage in the return to a unipolar world.

Introduction. The variety of approaches and topics in the study of terrorism, as well as the obvious difference in axiological grounds for assessing terrorist activity, allows the authors to raise the question of an interdisciplinary study of this problem. The authors understand terrorism as an illegal political confrontation in the struggle for power with the use of violence in order to intimidate or physically eliminate the enemy.Methodology and sources. The methodological basis of the work is the world-system concept of I. Wallerstein. The authors reveal the advantages of the world-system approach by comparing it with the paradigm of political realism in the theory of international relations. They indicate the boundaries of the paradigm of political realism, which operates at the level of the concepts of "States" and "International Coalitions", while the phenomenon of terrorism includes structures at the level of groups and organizations. The world-systems approach allows researchers to see terrorism as an anti-system movement generated by the contradictions in the development of the system itself, to distinguish between pro-system and anti-system terrorism, to analyze this phenomenon at all societal levels. One of the essential advantages of the world-systems approach is its ability to accumulate different approaches and related disciplines in order to describe the dynamics of modern societies. In their theoretical constructions, the authors rely on the typology of terrorist organizations by O. Lizardo and A. Bergesen, as well as on the concept of waves of terrorism by D. Rapport. The authors conduct a critical analysis of the typology of terrorism by O. Lizardo, A. Bergesen and note that this typology helps to see the structural source (core, semi-periphery, periphery) and the main structural goal of terrorist organizations, but leaves behind such a phenomenon as state terrorism.Results and discussion. The authors describe terrorism in its interrelation with processes in the world system at different societal levels. At the super-macro level, the world-systems conditions for the emergence of waves of terrorist activity are described, and the links between terrorism and the struggle to establish a global order are indicated. At the macro level (the level of political confrontation for the establishment of some form of order within the state), the authors investigate the differences between terrorism in "closed" and "open" societies. They note the connection between bursts of terrorist activity and the transition from a "closed" to an "open" state and vice versa. The authors consider the connection of terrorism with the processes of the peripheralization of societies as a meso-level phenomenon. Such terrorism, as a rule, is local and is inspired by the national liberation slogans of the societies of the internal periphery, the authors note that the struggle with the state here can go for both sovereignty and disputed territories. The authors refer to the meso-level the activities of terrorist organizations aimed at migrants who come from the outer periphery. The authors note that the subject of terrorism research at the micro level is, as a rule, the personality of the terrorist.Conclusion. The use of a world-systems approach to consider terrorism seems promising, and allows researchers to consider structural relations that are not available to other approaches. The authors express the hope that the interdisciplinary capabilities of the world-systems approach, its methodological potential woul be able to form a reliable basis for subsequent studies of terrorism as one of the means of illegitimate political violence in the modern world.

Introduction. The variety of approaches and topics in the study of terrorism, as well as the obvious difference in axiological grounds for assessing terrorist activity, allows the authors to raise the question of an interdisciplinary study of this problem. The authors understand terrorism as an illegal political confrontation in the struggle for power with the use of violence in order to intimidate or physically eliminate the enemy.Methodology and sources. The methodological basis of the work is the world-system concept of I. Wallerstein. The authors reveal the advantages of the world-system approach by comparing it with the paradigm of political realism in the theory of international relations. They indicate the boundaries of the paradigm of political realism, which operates at the level of the concepts of "States" and "International Coalitions", while the phenomenon of terrorism includes structures at the level of groups and organizations. The world-systems approach allows researchers to see terrorism as an anti-system movement generated by the contradictions in the development of the system itself, to distinguish between pro-system and anti-system terrorism, to analyze this phenomenon at all societal levels. One of the essential advantages of the world-systems approach is its ability to accumulate different approaches and related disciplines in order to describe the dynamics of modern societies. In their theoretical constructions, the authors rely on the typology of terrorist organizations by O. Lizardo and A. Bergesen, as well as on the concept of waves of terrorism by D. Rapport. The authors conduct a critical analysis of the typology of terrorism by O. Lizardo, A. Bergesen and note that this typology helps to see the structural source (core, semi-periphery, periphery) and the main structural goal of terrorist organizations, but leaves behind such a phenomenon as state terrorism.Results and discussion. The authors describe terrorism in its interrelation with processes in the world system at different societal levels. At the super-macro level, the world-systems conditions for the emergence of waves of terrorist activity are described, and the links between terrorism and the struggle to establish a global order are indicated. At the macro level (the level of political confrontation for the establishment of some form of order within the state), the authors investigate the differences between terrorism in "closed" and "open" societies. They note the connection between bursts of terrorist activity and the transition from a "closed" to an "open" state and vice versa. The authors consider the connection of terrorism with the processes of the peripheralization of societies as a meso-level phenomenon. Such terrorism, as a rule, is local and is inspired by the national liberation slogans of the societies of the internal periphery, the authors note that the struggle with the state here can go for both sovereignty and disputed territories. The authors refer to the meso-level the activities of terrorist organizations aimed at migrants who come from the outer periphery. The authors note that the subject of terrorism research at the micro level is, as a rule, the personality of the terrorist.Conclusion. The use of a world-systems approach to consider terrorism seems promising, and allows researchers to consider structural relations that are not available to other approaches. The authors express the hope that the interdisciplinary capabilities of the world-systems approach, its methodological potential woul be able to form a reliable basis for subsequent studies of terrorism as one of the means of illegitimate political violence in the modern world. ; Введение. Многогранность подходов и тематик исследования терроризма, а также очевидные различия аксиологических оснований в оценках террористической активности позволяют авторам поставить вопрос о междисциплинарном исследовании данной проблемы. Под терроризмом они понимают нелегитимное политическое противостояние в борьбе за власть с применением средств насилия в целях устрашения или физического устранения противника.Методология и источники. Методологической основой работы является миросистемная концепция И. Валлерстайна. Авторы раскрывают преимущества миросистемного подхода посредством его сравнения с парадигмой политического реализма в теории международных отношений. Они указывают на границы парадигмы политического реализма, которая оперирует на уровне понятий «государство» и «международные коалиции», а явление терроризма включает в себя структуры на уровне групп и организаций. Миросистемный подход позволяет увидеть терроризм как антисистемное движение, порождаемое противоречиями развития самой системы, различать просистемный и антисистемный терроризм, проводить анализ данного явления на всех социетальных уровнях. Одним из существенных достоинств миросистемного подхода является его способность аккумулировать разные подходы и смежные дисциплины в целях описания динамики современных обществ. В своих теоретических построениях авторы опираются на типологию террористических организаций О. Лизардо и А. Бергесена, а также на концепцию волн терроризма Д. Раппорта. Они проводят критический анализ типологии терроризма О. Лизардо, А. Бергесена и отмечают, что данная типология помогает увидеть структурный источник (ядро, полупериферия, периферия) и основную структурную цель террористических организаций, однако оставляет за рамками такое явление, как государственный терроризм.Результаты и обсуждение. В статье описывается терроризм в его взаимосвязи с процессами в миросистеме на разных социетальных уровнях. На супермакроуровне описаны миросистемные условия возникновения волн террористической активности, указаны связи терроризма с борьбой за установление глобального порядка. На макроуровне (уровне политического противостояния за установление некоторой формы порядка внутри государства) авторы исследуют различия терроризма в «закрытых» и «открытых» обществах, отмечают связь всплесков террористической активности с процессом перехода от «закрытого» состояния к «открытому» и наоборот. Связь терроризма с процессами периферизации обществ рассматривается как явление мезоуровня. Такой терроризм, как правило, локальный и вдохновлен национально-освободительными лозунгами обществ внутренних периферий. Авторы считают, что борьба с государством здесь может идти и за суверенитет, и за спорные территории. К мезоуровню в статье относится деятельность террористических организаций, направленная на мигрантов – выходцев из внешних периферий. Авторы отмечают, что предметом исследований терроризма на микроуровне является, как правило, личность террориста.Заключение. Использование миросистемного подхода при рассмотрении терроризма видится перспективным и позволяет рассмотреть структурные взаимосвязи, недоступные другим подходам. Авторы выражают надежду, что междисциплинарные возможности миросистемного подхода, его методологический потенциал сможет составить надежные основания последующих исследований терроризма как одного из средств нелегитимного политического насилия в современном мире.

Introduction. The modern educational space are transformed under the influence of many factors in the conditions of approaching V techno-economic paradigm. The determining factors are technological breakthroughs that qualitatively change not only educational practices, but also the nature of the educational space. The globalization of the educational services market, the growing economic inequality and the inequality of opportunities in different regions force large numbers of people to migrate in search of optimal educational conditions. In turn, the educational migration is increasingly turning into an economic mechanism for generating profit and it is becoming a kind of indicator of the regional educational systems' competitiveness. The study of these processes is relevant today. The authors analyze the current trends and peculiarities of education migration in Russia.Methodology and sources. The methodological basis of the work is the interdisciplinary approach. The range of attitudes has already been set forth within the framework of sociocultural and activity approaches (N. Yu. Harari, J. Knight), the economic layer of considering problems related to theory migration processes (E. G. Ravenstein, E. Lee, M. Piore, I. Wallerstein and others), studies of Russian economists, political scientists and sociologists (A. N. Dzhurinsky, I. V. Ivakhnyuk, etc.).Results and discussion. The history of the national academic capital formation shows that today internationalization is a leading trend in its development along with the economic, technological and intellectual components. This means that educational migration as part of the internationalization process is becoming an indicator of the regional educational systems' competitiveness. The general trend can be traced quite clearly: the higher quality of the educational services is provided and the ecosystem of the educational space is more comfortable, then the vector of migration is more relevant to this region. This tendency has just begun to be studied in Russia. But it is quite obvious today that the regional Russian educational space is clearly ''skewed'', and the state educational policy carried out is not always contributing to its leveling.Conclusion. There is a necessity for the realization of the positive potential of educational migration and the overcoming of its negative consequences: multivariate analysis of the processes of educational migration, not only at the level of individual universities and regions, but on all-Russian scale; the formation of such an education ecosystem in the regions, which would reduce the gap between the ''Centre and the regions'' and as well as between ''universities leaders'' and ''universities of more lightweight category''. ; Введение. Современное образовательное пространство в условиях приближения VI технологического уклада трансформируется под влиянием многих факторов. Определяющими из них являются технологические прорывы, качественно изменяющие образовательные практики. Глобализация рынка образовательных услуг, развивающееся экономическое неравенство и неравные возможности в разных регионах заставляют людей мигрировать в поисках оптимальных образовательных условий. В свою очередь образовательная миграция все более превращается в экономический механизм извлечения прибыли и становится для региональных образовательных систем своеобразным индикатором их конкурентоспособности. Изучение процессов образовательной миграции становится актуальным. В статье анализируются современные тенденции и особенности образовательной миграции в России.Методология и источники. Методологическую основу работы составляет междисциплинарный подход. Ряд установок представлен в рамках социокультурного и деятельностного подходов (Н. Ю. Харари, Дж. Найт), экономического пласта рассмотрения проблематики, связанной с теорией миграционных процессов (Э. Г. Равенштейн, Э. Ли, М. Пиоре, И. Валлерстайн), исследованиях российских экономистов, политологов и социологов (А. Н. Джуринский, И. В. Ивахнюк и др.).Результаты и обсуждение. История формирования национального академического капитала показывает, что сегодня интернационализация является ведущим трендом в его развитии, наряду с экономической, технологической и интеллектуальной составляющими. Это означает, что образовательная миграция как часть процесса интернационализации становится показателем конкурентоспособности региональных образовательных систем. Общая тенденция прослеживается достаточно четко: чем выше качество предоставляемых образовательных услуг и комфортнее экосистема образовательного пространства, тем актуальнее вектор миграции в данный регион. Этот тренд только начали исследовать в России. Но уже очевидно, что состояние регионального образовательного пространства страны имеет явно «перекошенный» характер, а проводимая государственная образовательная политика, далеко не всегда способствуют его оптимизации.Заключение. Для реализации позитивного потенциала образовательной миграции и преодолению ее негативных последствий необходимо: проведение многофакторного анализа процессов миграции, не только на уровне отдельных вузов и регионов, но и в общероссийском масштабе; формирование такой экосистемы образования в регионах, которая позволила бы сократить разрыв между «центром и регионами», а также между «вузами-лидерами» и «вузами другой весовой категории».