Article name Context Approach to Explaining the Differentiated Perception of the State in Various Societies
Authors Obukhov A.A.Candidate of Economics
Yazykova N.A.Researcher
Bibliographic description Obukhov A. A., Yazykova N. A. Context Approach to Explaining the Differentiated Perception of the State in Various Societies // Humanitarian Vector. 2019. Vol. 14, No. 2. PP. 27–32. DOI: 10.21209/1996-7853-2019-14-2-27-32.
Heading Social philosophy
UDC 172.1+321
DOI 10.21209/1996-7853-2019-14-2-27-32
Article type
Annotation One of the traditional problems of the analysis of statehood is the question of its perception by society and the search for its most significant characteristic features. In the Weberian sociological tradition, the state is associated with the notion of legitimized violence, advocates of the libertarian approach insist on the need to limit the functions of the state by providing public goods by redistributing finance collected in the form of taxes. The aim of the work is to explain in detail the reasons for different perception by different cultures of the leading function of the state. We suppose that the key factor determining the attitude of society to the state is its context according to E. Hall’s classification. High-context cultures tend to see in the state, first of all an actor of legitimized violence, while low-context cultures emphasize socially significant functions of the state, such as the provision of public goods.
Key words high-context and low-context cultures, state, public goods, monopoly on violence, E. Hall
Article information
References 1. Weber M. Politics as a Vocation. Moscow: Ripol Classic, 2018. (In Rus.) 2. Genindorzhieva, D. B. The concept of charisma by Max Weber. Vestnik BGU. Obrazovaniye. Lichnost’. Obshchestvo, no. 5, pp.131–135, 2013. (In Rus.) 3. Komarovskiy, A. V. Cultural sociology by Max Weber // Sotsiologicheskiy al’manakh, no. 3, pp. 379–407, 2012. (In Rus.) 4. Korolkov, A. V., Rusakova T. Yu. Charismatic leadership as a factor of power in Venezuela. Kontury globalnyh transformatsiy: politika, ekonomika, pravo, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 120–137, 2017. (In Rus.) 5. Pavkin, L. M. Libertarianism: principles, theory, evaluation. Severo-Kavkazskiy yuridicheskiy vestnik, no. 1, pp. 27–33, 2014. (In Rus.) 6. Pisarchik, L. Yu. Philosofy of culture by M. Weber. Vestnik OGU, no. 1, vol. 107, pp. 35–45, 2010. (In Rus.) 7. Polyakov, D. B. Anarcho-capitalism. Powerlessness and Economics of Free Market. Uchenyye zapiski ZabGU. Seriya: Filosofiya, sotsiologiya, kul’turologiya, sotsial’naya rabota, no. 4, vol. 63, pp. 33–38, 2015. (In Rus.) 8. Rothbard, M. For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto. Moscow: Novoe Izdatelstvo, 2009. (In Rus.) 9. Bergland, D. Libertarianism in One Lesson. London: Orpheus Publications, 1997. (In Engl.) 10. Hall E. Beyond Culture. Anchor Books, 1989. (in Engl.) 11. Haney C., Banks C., Zimbardo P. Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology & Penology, no. 1, vol. 1, pp. 69–97, 1973. (In Engl.) 12. Krauze, E. El poder y el delirio. México: Tusquets Editores, 2008. (In Spanish) 13. McConnell, C., Brue, S., Flynn, S. Economics: Principles, Problems, and Policies. McGraw-Hill Education, 2011. (In Engl.) 14. Nozick R. Anarchy, State and Utopia. New York: Basic Books, 2013. (In Engl.) 15. Ronen, S., Shenkar, O. Clustering Countries on Attitudinal Dimensions: A Review and Synthesis. Academy of Management Review, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 435–454, 1985. (In Engl.)
Full articleContext Approach to Explaining the Differentiated Perception of the State in Various Societies