ON SOME DIFFERENCES IN POTESTARISM AND TOTALITARISM IN THEORY AND SOCIO-POLITICAL PRACTICES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2292.2023/1-57/5-13Keywords:
potestarism, totalitarianism, fascism, communism, exoculturalism, endoculturalism, exopolitarianism, endopolitanism, ethnacratic nationalism, nationalist nationalismAbstract
The aim of the article is a theoretical description of some of the distinguishing characteristics of totalitarian and potestary regimes. The construction of a descriptive characteristic of the differences between potestarism and totalitarianism implies, first of all, an understanding of the differences in their ethnopolitical strategies. Under the conditions of a potestary state, the strategy of conquest is used with the creeping ethnic assimilation of the titular ethnos by ethnic minorities. Such a strategy reflects the ideas of pre-modern culture, in which ethnic (and, moreover, national) differences are not articulated, since the conquering ethnic group turns into the ruling class and either does not have the opportunity to declare its ethnic identity, or is interested in its conscious concealment.
Both the first and the second correspond to central cultural corruption, the manifestations of which are interethnic tensions in the absence, on the part of cultural and political elites, of understanding its causes. Potestary states reveal their exoculturality and exopolitarity, which is associated with the import of cultural and political elites, hidden internal (cultural and political) colonization, cultural imperialism of some societies in relation to others, and, as a result, with the loss of the vector of progress.
In relation to society, potestary states apply a theatrical (performative) model of governance: they are not interested in the social situation in a set of any empirical features, but in artifacts constructed by the authorities themselves. These artifacts are created as a result of the destruction of social capital, a complete loss of trust, an increase in the toxicity of social relations and an increase in the external reference of cultural elites, a concomitant manifestation of a vertical cultural split in society
References
Гугнін Е.А. Теоретико-соціологічна рефлексія зовнішнього впливу на соціальні системи.- Дисертація на здобуття наукового ступеня доктора соціологічних наук. Спеціальність 22.00.01 – теорія та історія соціології.- Запоріжжя, Класичний приватний університет, 2021- 660 c.- с.579.
Куббель Л.Е. Потестарная и политическая этнография: Исследования по общей этнографии / Отв. ред. Ю.В. Бромлей. М., 1979. С. 241-277.
Куббель Л.Е. "Формы, предшествующие капиталистическому производству" К. Маркса и некоторые аспекты возникновения политической организации // Советская этнография. 1987. № 3. С. 3-12.
Романенко Ю.В. Культуропатии и социопатии в Украине: развитие теоретической социологии девиаций в рамках культурной и социальной системологии (часть 2)//Соціальні технології: актуальні проблеми теорії та практики, 2020, Вип. 87, с.37-51.
Шмитт К. Диктатура. От истоков современной идеи суверенитета до пролетарской классовой борьбы / под ред. Д.В. Кузницына; пер. с нем. Ю.Ю. Коринца.- СПб.,: Альтера, 2005.-332с.
Arendt, H. (1968). Totalitarianism: Part three of the origins of totalitarianism. HMH.
Baldwin P. Social interpretations of Nazism: renewing a tradition P. Baldwin // Journal of contemporary history. – 1990. – Vol. 25, № 1. – P. 5 – 37.
Bauerkämper A. Der Faschismus in Europa 1918-1945 / A. Bauerkämper. – Stuttgart: Reclam, 2006. – 210 p.
Bauerkämper A. A New Consensus? Recent Research on Fascism in Europe, 1918-1945 / A. Bauerkämper // History Compass. – 2006. – Vol. 4. – № 3. – P. 536 – 566.
Breuer St. Nationalismus und Faschismus: Frankreich, Italien und Deutschland im Vergleich / St. Breuer. – Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2005. – 202 S.
Brzezinski, Z. (1962). Ideology and power in Soviet politics. (New York: Frederick A. Praeger)
Borowski, A. (2017). Totalitarianism in Sociological Research. Retrieved on June 16, 2020. from www.worldscientificnews.com
Fenner A. Fascism and Neofascism: Critical Writings on the Radical Right in Europe / Fenner A., Weitz E.D. eds. – New York, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. – 304 p.
Griffin R. Notes towards the Definition of Fascist Culture: The Prospects for Synergy between Marxist and Liberal Heuristics / R. Griffin // Culture, Theory and Critique. – 1999. – Vol. 42. –. № 1. – P. 95 – 114.
Griffin R. The Nature of Fascism / R. Griffin. – London: Pinter, 1991. – 196 p.
Ignazi P. The silent counter-revolution: Hypotheses on the emergence of extreme right-wing parties in Europe / P. Ignazi // European Journal of Political Research . – Dordrecht etc. – 1992. – Vol. 22, № 1. – P. 3 – 34.
Josephson, Paul R. Totalitarian science and technology / Paul R. Josephson.—2nd ed. p. cm. (2005). Faculty Books. 2. https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/facultybooks/2, p.45
Kelsen H. Rechtswissenschaft und Recht Erledigung eines Versuchs zur Überwindung der "Rechtsdogmatik" / H. Kelsen // Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht. – 1922-1923. – Bd. 3. – S. 103 – 235.
Mann M. Fascists. / Michael Mann. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. – 429 p.
Pakulski J. Mass social movements and social class / J. Pakulski // International sociology. – 1993. – Vol. 8, N2. – P. 131 – 158.
Stroinska, M. (2002). Language and Totalitarian Regimes. Economic Affairs, 22(2).
Sosa, A. (2018). The Demon in Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies. Perspective on Political Science, 47(1), 50-52.
I. A. Svyatnenko, Yu. V. Romanenko Сentral corruption as a culturopathyс and sociopathyс phenomenon: to the statement of the problem//Соціальні технології: актуальні проблеми теорії та практики, 2022, Вип. 95, с.47-61.
Wippermann W. Faschismustheorien: Zum Stand der gegenwärtigen Diskussion / Wolfgang Wippermann; [6. Auflage]. – Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1995. – 129 S.
