Suchergebnisse

Studies the transformation of Russian domestic politics and foreign policy under Vladimir PutinAsks what kind of political system 'Putinism' denotesEngages with the scholarly and policy debate on the growth of illiberal politics and authoritarianism globally in the post-Soviet space and in countries as diverse as Hungary, Egypt, Turkey and the PhilippinesUses contemporary case studies – including Russia's legal system, the annexation of Crimea and Russian policy in Syria – to critically examine Russia's political ideologyWhy did Russia's post-Soviet political system developed into a new form of authoritarianism? And how did its foreign policy came to pose such a profound challenge to the West? David G. Lewis goes beyond current polemical debates to address these questions. Lewis investigates the Russian understanding of key concepts such as sovereignty, democracy and political community. He analyses the Russian political system as a novel form of authoritarian political order, unpacking the ideological paradigm that underpins it. He reveals that Russia's new order is characterised by the consolidation of political and economic power around a sovereign leader, together with a willingness to take political decisions outside the law both at home and in international affairs

David G. Lewis explores the transformation of Russian domestic politics and foreign policy under Vladimir Putin. Using contemporary case studies - including Russia's legal system, the annexation of Crimea and Russian policy in Syria - he critically examines Russia's new authoritarian political ideology.

Studies the transformation of Russian domestic politics and foreign policy under Vladimir Putin
Asks what kind of political system 'Putinism' denotes
Engages with the scholarly and policy debate on the growth of illiberal politics and authoritarianism globally in the post-Soviet space and in countries as diverse as Hungary, Egypt, Turkey and the Philippines
Uses contemporary case studies – including Russia's legal system, the annexation of Crimea and Russian policy in Syria – to critically examine Russia's political ideology
Why did Russia's post-Soviet political system developed into a new form of authoritarianism? And how did its foreign policy came to pose such a profound challenge to the West? David G. Lewis goes beyond current polemical debates to address these questions.

Lewis investigates the Russian understanding of key concepts such as sovereignty, democracy and political community. He analyses the Russian political system as a novel form of authoritarian political order, unpacking the ideological paradigm that underpins it. He reveals that Russia's new order is characterised by the consolidation of political and economic power around a sovereign leader, together with a willingness to take political decisions outside the law both at home and in international affairs.

Studies the transformation of Russian domestic politics and foreign policy under Vladimir Putin Asks what kind of political system 'Putinism' denotes Engages with the scholarly and policy debate on the growth of illiberal politics and authoritarianism globally in the post-Soviet space and in countries as diverse as Hungary, Egypt, Turkey and the Philippines Uses contemporary case studies – including Russia's legal system, the annexation of Crimea and Russian policy in Syria – to critically examine Russia's political ideology Why did Russia's post-Soviet political system developed into a new form of authoritarianism? And how did its foreign policy came to pose such a profound challenge to the West? David G. Lewis goes beyond current polemical debates to address these questions. Lewis investigates the Russian understanding of key concepts such as sovereignty, democracy and political community. He analyses the Russian political system as a novel form of authoritarian political order, unpacking the ideological paradigm that underpins it. He reveals that Russia's new order is characterised by the consolidation of political and economic power around a sovereign leader, together with a willingness to take political decisions outside the law both at home and in international affairs.

Are rising authoritarian powers such as China and Russia converging towards or challenging the normative structures of the liberal international order? This article argues that scholarship on norm contestation provides a fruitful theoretical avenue for addressing this question. It finds, however, that this literature has problematically tended to either overlook or externalize power dynamics from norm contestation. The article therefore proposes and develops a power political approach to norm contestation that, informed by a realpolitik sensibility, more explicitly and consistently makes power central to the analysis. A power political perspective conceptualizes norm contestation as the expression of battles for influence in world politics that take place at the ideational level and through symbolic instruments. It understands these struggles as occurring in the context of an international system profoundly marked by conflicting interests, cultural pluralism, hierarchical structures, and power asymmetries. This power political lens is then used to identify four modes of contestation that Russian and Chinese actors are engaged in: liberal performance, liberal mimicry, civilizational essentialization, and counter-norm entrepreneurship. It empirically explores how these contestatory practices express themselves at different intensity levels—applicatory, meaning, and validity—and display specific power political logics—fragmenting and integrative—with the goal of undermining the ideational hegemony of liberal Western-based actors and structures in world politics, and advancing alternative non-liberal visions of domestic and international order. Along with contributing to the literature on norms, this article also makes a broader intervention in current debates about rising powers and the future of the liberal international order.

Discourses and practices reproducing a world where a plurality of distinct civilizations clash or dialogue, rise or fall, color multiple facets of global politics today. How should we interpret this unexpected surge in civilizational politics, especially notable in the United States, Europe, the Middle East, China, and Russia? This paper argues that the growing turn to civilizations or, better, civilizationism should be understood as a counter-hegemonic ideological reaction to the globalization of the liberal international order. It theorizes the deepening and widening of the liberal international order in the aftermath of the Cold War as enabled by powerful constitutive ideological forces, which congeal into a distinctively modern, informal, universal standard of civilization. This liberal civilizational standard can be experienced by a particular category of non (fully) liberal actors within and beyond the West as ideologically entrapping them - through processes of socialization or stigmatization - in a state of symbolic disempowerment. The paper shows how civilizationism provides an ideological path for resisting and contesting the liberal standard of civilization by articulating a distinct and valued (essentialized) sense of collective belonging, and an alternative (generally illiberal) normative system and (broadly multipolar) vision of international order. Along with theorizing and exploring in original ways the drivers of civilizational politics in the current historical juncture, the paper makes two further contributions. It highlights and unpacks the key role of ideological dynamics in the making and contestation of international orders in general and the liberal one in particular. It suggests and shows why civilizations are best approached as ideological constructs rather than cultures, identities, or discourses.