Suchergebnisse

Until now, the Russian centre and regions have not found a sustainable balance in the distribution of power, although after the collapse of the USSR and the formation of the Russian Federation there has been more than twenty years. The reasons appear, at first, to be the asymmetry of the Federation and the Constitution, founded on the concepts accepted in 1993, and, secondly, on a variety of economic, social, cultural, ethnic and other differences in the regions. This indicates that the mechanisms of relationships rest on the distribution of power, on the one hand, and on the other on that the regions in its current state have not reached subjectivity, domestic economic and social independence, which is indirectly witnessed by rising debt of the regions. Debt is only a symptom of the fact that the regions either have not learned to manage efficiently the available financial resources, or regions are oriented to subsidized development model. Attempts to shift the responsibility to the centre, to distortions in the budget policy only partly explain the situation. Local societies - regions, are selected on the basis of the administrative division of the state, and, in legal terms, are the subjects of the Russian Federation and the actual place of forming the foundations of social and economic stability, cultural standards and traditions of self-regulation. They are a source of self-organizing interaction of real social communities. The conditions for the development of the real existing community are based on self-organization. There is a single point of management of the economy, politics, social, military and other spheres of government in the face of the region, its legislative, judicial and military power. This advantageously distinguishes regional socio-cultural space based on administrative - state division of larger territorial associations, and include a number of areas and edges, and autonomous republics. The article notes that the Russian regions do not act as equal and interested partners of the state in addressing regional development. The author not only raises the issue of updating the subjectivity of the region, but also proposes ways and options to strengthen the subjectivity of regional society. DOI:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s3p223

The article analyzes paradigmatic fundamentals of national security studies and shows that methodologically these fundamentals are unilateral and do not allow to consider the national security as a holistic phenomenon. The authors argue that the development of the multi-dimensional methodological constructs of national security studies within the neoclassical model of research is a prerequisite for overcoming the methodological unilateralism of the "paradigm of interests" and the "paradigm of values". This model for studying the national security is based on the synthetic use of the methodological capacity of various paradigmatic fundamentals of its research, supplemented with heuristic capabilities of the "soft power" theory, which is considered to induce others to do what is required by the government, without direct violence. In the context of globalization, "soft power" is an important tool for protecting the national security. DOI:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n5s4p266

The article presents a conceptual and methodological analysis of xenophobia study in social sciences. In order to investigate the phenomenon of xenophobia, the authors propose to use the methodology of constructive realism that makes it possible to substantiate the social nature of criteria for defining the "outsiders" and their dynamics. By interpreting xenophobia as a way of organizing social relations based on the antagonistic opposition of "insiders - outsiders," the authors state that this method allows us to control human behavior forming the desired images of "outsiders" in our minds. The implementation of the methodology of constructive realism within the study of xenophobia offers the possibility to distance oneself from the purely psychological and sociobiological approaches dominating in the social cognition, and to consider xenophobia as a sufficiently complex and contradictory social phenomenon that, on the one hand, is one of the ways to protect the identity of an individual and a group of individuals in the unpredictable and dangerous world, and on the other hand, is an element of political technology that constructs the image of an "outsider" for achieving specific goals. DOI:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n4s4p183