CONCEPTUALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT OF «NATION BUILDING» IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE
( Pp. 26-29)

More about authors
Bakhlov Igor V. Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor; Head of the Department of General History, Political Science and Regional Studies; Ogarev Mordovian State University; Saransk, Russian Federation. ORCID: 0000-0001-6886-5762; Researcher ID: T-4657-2019; Scopus Author ID: 57212021385; SPIN: 9489-5152; Author ID: 270524; E-mail: bahlov@mail.ru
JSC “Kalinov Rodnik”
Saransk, Russian Federation Bakhlova Olga V. doktor politicheskih nauk, docent; professor kafedry vseobschey istorii, politologii i regionovedeniya
National Research Ogarev Mordovia State University
Abstract:
Objective: The main task of the study is to identify the main approaches to determining the content of the concept of «nation building» in political discourse. Model: The research is based on the analysis of a complex of theoretical sources of domestic and foreign authors and a comparative study of the semantic and structural characteristics of this concept, which allows to generalize the available achievements and possible directions of the relevant political studies. Particular attention is drawn to the comparison of the modernist paradigm (E. Gellner, etc.) and postmodern interpretations (R. Ashley, etc.). Conclusions: the main factors influencing the change of approaches to the consideration of the problem of nation building, the variability of the proposed mechanisms and tools of this process, the peculiarities of its interpretations with respect to the post-Soviet space are shown. Attempts are made to make practical use of the concept of «nation-state building» by illegitimate actors - states and criminal organizations, as well as their justification in political discourse. Practical significance and scope of the research: The findings can be used in the theoretical development of problems of nation building, forecasting of political processes and communications of different levels, to improve the effectiveness of political decision-making and national policy of the Russian Federation. Originality / Value: This work is intended for specialists engaged in studying the processes of nation building and the problems of the formation and implementation of national policies.
How to Cite:
Bakhlov I.V., Bakhlova O.V., (2018), CONCEPTUALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT OF «NATION BUILDING» IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE. Sociopolitical Sciences, 2 => 26-29.
Reference list:
Boyko S. I. Kontsept natsii: teoreticheskie predposylki // Politologicheskaya kontseptologiya. 2014. № 4. S. 68-103.
Bunakov M. YU., Lukin V. N. Natsionalizm i natsional naya identichnost v usloviyakh globalizatsii: problemy kontseptualizatsii. URL: http://credonew.ru/content /view/553/ (data obrashcheniya 05 marta 2018 g.).
Brubeyker R. Mify i zabluzhdeniya v izuchenii natsionalizma // Ab Imperio. Teoriya i istoriya natsional nostey i natsionalizma v postsovetskom prostranstve. CH. 1. 2000. № 1. S. 204-224.
ZHanbasinova A. S. Natsional naya strategiya Kazakhstana: grazhdanskaya identichnost ili ili etnicheskaya identichnost - vremya vybora // Rossiyskie regiony: vzglyad v budushchee. 2016. № 3. S. 183-200.
Kara-Murza S. G. Gosudarstvennaya politika natsiestroitel stva v sovremennoy Rossii // Kontury global nykh transformatsiy: politika, ekonomika, pravo. 2011. Vyp. 3. S. 62-76.
Kara-Murza S. G., Kuropatkina O. V. Natsiestroitel stvo v sovremennoy Rossii. M.: Algoritm: Nauchnyy ekspert, 2014. 408 s.
Kuzivanova O. YU. Politiko-ideologicheskie vektory natsional noy politiki Rossii // Vlast . 2015. № 1. S. 39-43.
Letnyakov D. E. Sozdavaya natsiyu. Politika identichnosti v postsovetskikh gosudarstvakh // Mir Rossii. Sotsiologiya. Etnologiya. 2016. № 2. S. 144-167.
Motyl A. Puti imperiy: Upadok, krakh i vozrozhdenie imperskikh gosudarstv. M.: Moskovskaya shkola politicheskikh issledovaniy, 2004. 248 s.
Rastimeshina T. V. Kul turnoe dostoyanie kak instrument sovremennoy politiki // Ekonomicheskie i sotsial no-gumanitarnye issledovaniya. 2014. № 2. S. 129-136.
Smit E. D. Natsii i natsionalizm. Kriticheskiy obzor sovremennykh teoriy natsii i natsionalizma. M.: Praksis, 2004. 464 s.
Stivenson D. K. Amerika. Narod i strana. M.: Olim - PPP, 1993. 192 s.
Tomaychuk L. V. Mifologizatsiya istorii kak instrument konstruirovaniya natsional noy identichnosti na sovremennoy Ukraine i v Belarusi // Obshchestvo. Sreda. Razvitie (Terra Humana). 2012. Vyp. 3. S. 52-55.
Fukuyama F. Sil noe gosudarstvo: Upravlenie i mirovoy poryadok v XXI veke. M.: AST: AST Moskva: KHranitel , 2006. 220 s.
CHernyakhovskiy S. Natsionalizm i Postmodern. URL: http://www.kremlin.mil.komunism.apn.ru/index.php newsid 30662 (data obrashcheniya 05 marta 2018 g.).