The political effects of the authoritarian syndrome in the modern political process in Russia

In the last decade, Russia's political system has survived a successive stage of transformation, the content of which is the creation of federal districts, the new procedure for the formation of the Federation Council, the change of the electoral law, the abolition of direct elections for the heads of subjects of the Russian Federation, the increase of the terms of the President and members of the State Duma, the adoption of amendments to the law on non-profit organizations, according to which, the majority of Russian NGOs were equated to the political "foreign agents" with all the consequences of their activities. Clearly, this situation is due to a number of factors, not the least of them is the fact that the current President of the Russian Federation bases on the strong support of the public opinion. The August surveys by Levada-Center show support for the political regime and the policy pursued by the President. Laws on giant fines for violations at rallies, the return of the article on defamation in the Criminal Code (58%), a register of banned sites (62%) and introduction of the "foreign agent" concept for non-profit organizations, which were adopted in the first months of his term have the support of the citizens (45%), and were accepted as an attempt of the authorities to turn Russia into a great and economically prosperous empire. 36% of respondents believe that the government, therefore, establishes the order in the country. Citizens formed a request for the order, and paternalism still dominates in the society. Putin did not create an authoritarian regime in Russia, and the specificity of the situation is that the reduction of political competition, changes in the electoral system, obstacles in the way of the multi-party system, corrupted elite, non-confidence of business in the government / state, elimination of some elements of direct democracy, post-Soviet political culture, prolonged economic crisis and failed reforms, in general, corresponded to the public demand for authoritarianism and paternalism, and predetermined Putin's coming to power on the wave of people's hope for the best. Gradual transformation is required of the personal legitimacy of the Russian President into the structural (by D. Easton) legitimacy of the Russian President, whoever takes the post in the future. British researcher R. Rose said that the more Putin's contribution to ensure popular support for the current political regime in Russia is, the more likely is the shock after he leaves his post. In order to understand what the prospects for the transformation of the Russian political system, namely, the transfer from the personal type of legitimacy to the structural one (by D. Easton) are, we have analysed the components of the authoritarian syndrome in their dynamics presented in the mass consciousness of Russian citizens since the collapse of the USSR.

Keywords

Authors

References