State and Civil Society in Post-Communist System Transformation: Russian Experiences

정치적 다원주의화, 시장경제체제의 도입 등 중층적 탈공산주의 체제전환에 있는 러시아에서 국가와 시민사회의 관계는 국가의 역할 및 민주주의 발전과 관련해 커다란 중요성을 갖는다. 러시아연방 출범 후 옐친 대통령은 국가건설의 문제를 충분히 다루지 못했고 국가능력의 취약 상태를 쉽사리 극복할 수 없었다. 이에 따라 러시아 국가는 새롭게 성장의 계기를 맞은 러시아 시민사회를 발전적 방향으로 이끌진 못했다. 새로운 자율성의 공간이 부여된 시민사회도 일반 시민들이 원자화된 사적 관계와 수동적 자세, 그리고 이에 따른 비정부단체들의 불충분한 역할로 인해 약한 상태를 벗어나지 못했다. 푸틴은 일차적으로 국가 강화를 추구했으며, 이 과정에서 시민사회에 대하여 통제, 협력, 포섭의 다양한 접근을 시도했다. 이 중에서 특히 국가와 시민사회 사이에 공식적 연계구조를 구축하려는 포섭적 시도는 탈공산주의 체제전환 과정에서 커다란 의미를 지녔다. 특히 푸틴은 자신의 국가 중심적 입장에 다라 포섭 전략을 중심으로 국가-시민사회의 연계구조를 구축하려고 노력했다. 푸틴 정권의 이와 같은 대 시민사회 접근법은 러시아의 독특한 정치문화 요소인 국가성(gosudarstvennost) 관념에 근거하고 있는 것으로 보인다. 그리하여 러시아에서 시민사회에게 아무리 많은 자율권이 부여된다 하더라도 국가 주도하에 인도되고 조절해야 하는 것으로 인식되었다.In the context of post-communist multiple systemic transformation, the relationships between the state and civil society is very important with regard to the role of the state and democratic development. Yeltsin could not dealt with the question of state building enough to surmount the Russian states weakness. Consequently, the Russian state could not contribute to the progress of Russian civil society. The latter also had to remain weak because of the attachment of the atomized, passive population to their private networks. Putin made primary endeavor to strengthen the state, and in the process, tried diverse approaches of control, cooperation, and cooptation toward civil society. In particular, he tried to establish a linkage mechanism between the state and society with a coopatative strategy based on his statist position. His approach seems to originate from the idea of gosudarstvennost (stateness), visible in Russias unique political culture. Autonomy accorded to civil society had to be managed and guided by the state

Soviet Society Under Stalin

The predominant feature of the Soviet society during the NEP years was its "du머" structure: coexistence of town and countryside, of public and private sectors, and of proletarian and peasant cultures. Although it may have provided a gradua1 and evolutionary model for socia1ist society in its own right, the NEP order showed its inherent contradictions stemming from its "dua1" nature in the development of the actua1 relations between the Soviet regime and society. Sta1in destroyed the NEP structure and built the new St려inist system through rapid industria1ization and forced collectivization. In the course of this state-led "revolution from above", Soviet society underwent an enormous stuctura1 transformation, and new socia1 relations and sentiments were shaped. A large number of peasants migrated to the cities and were absorbed into the urban industria1 workforce. These new workers brought about a big change in the composition of industria1 labor. Accordingly, heterogeneity among the workers increased with the development of the Stali띠st system. at the same time, they sowed individua1istic behaviour pursuing persona1 interests at the expense of both soci허ist orientation and collective solidarity in their interaction with the regime and factory managers. The peasants, who remained in the countryside, at first responded to the collectivization drive with a variety of resistant moves. However, once the collective farm system was irreversibly established across the country, they a1so got adapted to the new life on the farm in search for the opportunities to rea1ize their individua1 interests. Intellectua1s - professiona1s, specia1ists, and those employed in the govemment administration - were not the exception to this trend of individua1istic pursuit. Especia11y after the Sta1in regimes shift to anti-ega1itarian and conservative policies in the early 1930s, they showed a strong tendency toward the acquisition of materia1 wea1th and philistinistic kul tumost . The above revea1s a very important aspect of the Sta1inist system that is essenti머 to the understanding of the Soviet version of modemization under the officia1 slogan of socia1ist construction. However, the Sta1inist system gave birth to various socia1 groups which in re머ity pursued individua1 interests detracting from socia1ist ideology, while taking the regimes demands formally

Changing Authority Structure of the CPSU under Lenin and Stalin: With Focus on the Party Apparatus - Mass Party Relations

The relationship between the party apparatus and the mass party during the communist party's evolution under Lenin and Stalin saw the former's increasing dornination of the latter and the growing gulf between the party's two elements. War Communism was the period of the party structure's comprehensive rebuilding after the party's status changed from a revolutionary party to a single ruling party. During this period, although the activism and influence of the p따.ty masses was to a substantial extent maintained, both the harsh realities of the Civil War and the party center s elitist orientation led to the incipient emergence of the party apparatus as a corporate ruling entity in Soviet society after the revolution. In the course of the expansion of the party' s size and its growing involvement in economic administration during the years of the NEP and the First Five Year Plan, the centralist thrust received much more impetus than the democratic one. Thus the party apparatus continually enlarged with its increasing separation from the party masses

Russian Studies in Korea after the "Third Generation": With Focus on Social Sciences

Studies in Korea still offer the room for continuing improvement. First, compared with those countries with more advanced Russian Studies, the Russian Studies communíty in Korea is still much small, and there are very few specialists on other CIS countries than Russia. Second, Russian politics and economy still command a disproportionally high position in terms of research topic. Third, researches are lopsidedly tilting toward policy-oriented studies rather than contributing to strengthening the foundation of Russian Studies. Fourth, the previous tendency to approach the Russian experiences from the viewpoint of break with the past has not been fully overcome. Fifth, although efforts have been made for establishing a "Korean style of studying Russia", the Westem approaches to the Russian realities still enjoy a disproportionately high popularity. Sixth, strenuous endeavor among the Russian Studies community is required for implementing interdisciplinary researches of Russia as subject of area studies

Party Reforms and Political Participation under Khrushchev Regime

This article deals with Khrushchevs attempts to reform the CPSU structure and its mode of operation. Its specific focus is on the introduction of public principle' into the party during the 1953"-'64 period. The background, development and contents of the reform efforts are analysed, discussed and evaluated. The major finding of this article is that emphasis on public principle was largely limited to the areas in support to local party organization while leaving basically untouched areas where the status of the party vis-a-vis Soviet society and rank-and-files of the party were virtually left unaffected. Even such limited reforms were rebuffed under Brezhnev regime. The policy of full trust in cards" did not leave any room for expansion of mass participation in discussion of political matters