Opposition and «public inpugnment» in the hybrid political system

А. В. Алейников


The article is about considering of opposition potential dependency from the political system. The author considers the opposition as both an institute realizing different political interests and positions and legitimizing conflicts and a set of ideas and public opinions tied with a critical attitude to the official politics. The author points how the mechanism of the power and the opposition interaction works, while picking out such dominant character of the hybrid system as the imitation of democracy institutes in the authoritarian model of political government. That is in substance institutes of the conflict management in political systems which are corresponding neither with democracy criteria nor with the sterile authoritarianism signs. On the basis of the methodological set of instruments offered by R. Dahl and called «public impugnment» it is showed that in Russia opposition is frequently considered as a pathology of political life. The struggle with opposition removes the distinction between ideology and justice and legitimizes domestic and foreign policy while providing ideological and value consensus by the suppression of dissidence. In the Russian political practice the model of the artificial possibility of political conflicts is realized. Besides the opposition suppression expenses are higher than the permissive attitude.


Russia; hybrid political system; power; conflict; opposition; public impugnment


Голосов Г. Г. Сравнительная политология. СПб.: Изд-во Европ.

ун-та в С.-Петербурге, 2001. 368 с.

Даль Р. А. Полиархия: участие и оппозиция М.. Изд. дом Гос. ун-та — Высшей школы экономики, 2010. 288 с.

Козер Л. Функции социального конфликта // Американская социологическая мысль. М.: Международный университет бизнеса и управления, 1996. 560 с.

Линц Х. Крушение демократических режимов: кризис, разрушение и восстановление равновесия // Проблемы Восточной Европы. 1993. № 3–4.

Луман Н. Социальные системы. Очерк общей теории. СПб.: Наука, 2007. 642 с.

Сайт Международного евразийского движения. URL: http://www.med.org.ru/article/3822(дата обращения: 01.11.2015).

Тилли Ч. Демократия. М.:АНО «Институт общественного проектирования», 2007.263 c.

Фурман Д. Е. Движение по спирали. Политическая система России в ряду других систем. М.: Весь Мир, 2010. 168 с.

Цыганков А. П. Современные политические режимы: структура,

типология, динамика. М.: Интерпракс, 1995. 296 с

Шевцова Л. Ф. Режим Бориса Ельцина. М.: Московский Центр

Карнеги, 1999. 535 с.

Шульман Е. Царство политической имитации // Ведомости. 2014. 15 августа.

Ekman J. Political Participation and Regime Stability: A Framework

for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes // International Political Science Review. 2009. Vol. 30. N 1. P. 7–31.

Guliyev F. Measuring Hybrid Regimes: An Alternative Measurement

Method and Classification of Post-Soviet Regimes // Working paper. 2012. Last revised Feb 22.

Kirchheimer O. The Waning of Opposition in Parliamentary Eegimes // Social Eesearch. 1957. Vol. 24. № 2.

Levitsky S., Way L. Competitive Authoritarianism: The Origins and Dynamics of Hybrid Regimes in the Post-Cold War Era. 2010. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 493 p.


  • There are currently no refbacks.