Content uploaded by Mikhail Minakov
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mikhail Minakov on Jul 05, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Mykhailo Minakov
THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Philosophical Reflections on Social History
after the End of Communism
Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen
Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über
http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed
bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.
ISBN (Print): 978-3-8382-1943-1
ISBN (E-Book [PDF]): 978-3-8382-7943-5
© ibidem-Verlag, Hannover • Stuttgart 2024
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Das Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung
außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des
Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Dies gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen,
Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und elektronische Speicherformen sowie die
Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the
prior written permission of the publisher. Any person who commits any unauthorized act in relation to this publication
may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.
Printed in the EU
I dedicate this book to the generation that lived through
the caesura of 1989–1991, the post-Soviet era,
and that era’s catastrophic end.
May the force be with us and with those who come after.
7
Contents
List of Figures ......................................................................................... 9
Acknowledgments ............................................................................... 11
Introduction .......................................................................................... 13
1. Key Concepts in Post-Soviet History ........................................ 19
Human Being, World, and History ........................................... 20
Political Creativity and Imagination ......................................... 22
The Framework of the Post-Soviet Period ................................ 31
2. The Logic and Stages of Post-Soviet History ........................... 43
Perestroika and the 1991 Revolution......................................... 44
The Post-Soviet Diffusion, 1992–1994 ....................................... 58
Stabilization, 1995–2000 .............................................................. 66
New Century, New Conflicts, 2001–2008 ................................. 73
The Period of Conflicts, 2008 On ............................................... 79
Concluding the Era ...................................................................... 85
3. The Evolution of Perceptions of Post-Soviet Development ... 89
Stage 1: Living through the Caesura and Revolutionary
Change, 1989–1994....................................................................... 93
Stage 2: Humbled Conceptualization, 1995–2003 .................... 97
Stage 3: Questioning Post-Soviet Progress, 2003–2022 ......... 103
War and the Interrupted Transition ........................................ 110
4. The Achievements of Post-Soviet Political Creativity .......... 113
The Democratic Outcomes of Post-Soviet Political
Creativity .................................................................................... 114
Division of Supreme Power into Branches and Levels . 119
Refounding the State and the Nation .............................. 121
The Liberal-Democratic Potential of European
Integration .......................................................................... 124
Rule of Law ......................................................................... 125
8
Autonomy of the Judicial Branch .................................... 127
Elections as a Right and a Practice .................................. 128
Democracy as a Unity of Electoral, Liberal, and
Deliberative Practices ........................................................ 132
The Autocratic Outcomes of Post-Soviet Political
Creativity .................................................................................... 141
Unified Supreme Power and Neopatrimonial Rule ...... 144
Post-Soviet Sovereigntism ................................................ 150
The Autocratic Effects of War .......................................... 154
Conclusion .......................................................................................... 159
Bibliography ....................................................................................... 163
Index .................................................................................................... 181
9
List of Figures
Figure 1. Division of Power Index: Estonia, Russia, Ukraine,
and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 .......................................... 120
Figure 2. Legislative Constraints on the Executive Branch
Index: Estonia, Russia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan,
1989–2022 ......................................................................... 121
Figure 3. Rule of Law Index: Estonia, Russia, Ukraine, and
Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ................................................... 126
Figure 4. Judicial Constraints on the Executive Index: Estonia,
Russia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 .............. 128
Figure 5. Voter Turnout by Election Type: Estonia, Russia,
Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ........................... 130
Figure 6. Electoral Democracy Index: Estonia, Russia,
Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ........................... 131
Figure 7. Comparison of Electoral, Liberal, and Deliberative
Democracy Indices by Country: Estonia, Russia,
Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ........................... 133
Figure 8. Freedom of Expression and Alternative Sources
of Information Index: Estonia, Russia, Ukraine, and
Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ................................................... 135
Figure 9. Mobilization for Democracy Index: Estonia, Russia,
Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ........................... 135
Figure 10. Core Civil Society Index: Estonia, Russia, Ukraine,
and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ........................................... 138
Figure 11. GDP Per Capita (Purchasing Power Parity): Estonia,
Russia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1990–2022 .............. 142
Figure 12. Homicides per 100,000 Population: Estonia, Russia,
Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1990–2022 ........................... 143
Figure 13. Neopatrimonialism Rule Index: Estonia, Russia,
Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ........................... 149
Figure 14. Ideology Index: Estonia, Russia, Ukraine, and
Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ................................................... 152
Figure 15. Mobilization for Autocracy Index: Estonia, Russia,
Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, 1989–2022 ........................... 156
11
Acknowledgments
This book was conceived during a series of discussions held at the
School of Civic Education (London) in recent years. I am sincerely
grateful to Lena Nemirovskaya and Yuri Senokosov, Inna Be-
rezkina and Marina Skorikova, Lev Gudkov and Frank O’Donnell,
Ivan Krastev and Nikolai Petrov, John Lloyd and Michael Sohlman,
Pavel Viknyansky and Denis Semenov, Alexander Shmelev and
Yegor Chizhov for our spirited discussions, as well as for the truths
and fallacies we achieved in them.
I am vastly indebted to Maria Grazia Bartolini for her encour-
agement and constant support in the darkest of times. Without her
inspiration, I would not have completed this book.
The book was written at the Institute for Human Sciences
(IWM) in Vienna, to which I am indebted for the opportunity to
work in the quiet of its library and engage in spirited debate at the
Institute’s workshops and lunches. I owe to Misha Gleny, Ivan
Krastev, Katherine Younger, and all the other fellows of the IWM’s
Ukraine in European Dialogue Fellowship Program for insightful
conversations that strengthened many arguments put forth in the
book.
I am deeply grateful to the Wilson Center’s Kennan Institute,
which funded the editing of this book. Special thanks are owed to
Marjorie Pannell, William E. Pomeranz, and Izabella Tabarovsky,
who supported me in this endeavor and ensured that my research
turned into a book.
13
Introduction
The post-Soviet era in Eastern Europe and northern Eurasia began
in 1991 with the signing of the Belavezha and Alma-Ata Accords
and ended in 2022 with the launch of Russia’s full-scale invasion of
Ukraine in February of that year. Even though armed aggression—
and hence the early phase of the current war—in Ukraine had
started eight years earlier, it was the combined air and land assaults
by Russia on a sovereign neighboring state in February 2022 that
put the closing punctuation mark to the post-Soviet period.1 That
period, between the fall of the USSR and the invasion of Ukraine,
was a significant time of change for the post-Soviet states, change
that was driven by major developmental tendencies rooted in the
collapse of the USSR in 1991 and expressed in the creation of new
nation-states in Eastern Europe and northern Eurasia. Vladimir
Putin’s decision to launch the February 2022 invasion dealt the fi-
nal, decisive blow to the post-Soviet order.
This opening statement is the starting point for the linked ar-
guments about Post-Soviet Humans and their historical habitat that
unfold in this book. If I am correct that the post-Soviet era has
reached its terminus, then the era can be considered substantially
complete for the purposes of scholarly research while phenomeno-
logically open for philosophical reflection. For this reason, and un-
like before 2022, post-Soviet studies may finally enjoy some dis-
tance from the object of their investigation. With the declining role
of scholarly ideological engagement and identity bias, research on
the post-Soviet era now has a chance to become an academic disci-
pline.2
For the purposes of my argument, the post-Soviet period is
bookended by its beginnings in the simultaneously destructive and
1 The current war in Ukraine started with Russia’s seizure of the Crimean Penin-
sula in February 2014 and the installation of the pro-Russia Aksyonov govern-
ment there.
2 An ideological commitment and identity bias were two main drawbacks that
were obvious in studies in this area conducted over the past thirty years, in-
cluding my own.
14 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
creative processes of 1989–1991 in the Soviet Union and its terminus
in another set of military and revolutionary events that acquired
avalanche force in early 2022. These simultaneously destructive
and creative processes of 1989–1991 and 2022 emerged in the his-
torical caesuras that separated the post-Soviet period from what it
succeeded, the Cold War era, and what has succeeded it: a new, as
yet unnamed time kicked off by the big war in Eastern Europe.3
As a historical period, the post-Soviet era had its own logic
and dialectics. The logic of its evolution is connected with what I
call the post-Soviet tetrad, a set of four socioeconomic, cultural, and
political trends or tendencies that can be concisely summed up as
democratization, marketization, nationalization, and Europeaniza-
tion. Many initially thought these tendencies were conjoined in
such a way that each would support and imply the others, and that
if a country realized one, the probability was high that the others
would follow. That was the logical expectation. It turned out not to
be the case, for each tendency had its counterpart, its oppositional
value, so to speak, that was also always available, and how the dif-
ferent tendencies and their counterparts might combine turned out
to be unpredictable. Thus the dialectics of the era manifested in the
way these four trends combined in contradictory ways. Emerging
market economies, for example, could choose to support antidem-
ocratic actors, which would thenceforth limit their free market as-
pirations; the former socialist republics, now nation-states, could
turn hostile to common European norms and practices and con-
tinue on a modified Soviet path. The individual trends themselves
were the sites of struggles among countervailing forces as they
sought to establish themselves. The post-Soviet democratization
process had to compete with the pull toward autocratization. Ef-
forts to establish free markets had to struggle with oligarchical con-
trol over competition. Nation building was constantly being torn
between ethnonationalist, civic nationalist and individualist mod-
els. The Europeanization process in the former socialist republics
3 Thus the post-Soviet period can be seen as the second interwar interval, after
the interval between the two world wars (1918–1939), in the recent history of
Eastern European and northern Eurasian peoples.
INTRODUCTION 15
was weakened by ambiguity in how common legal norms and po-
litical practices were to be adopted, as well as by negative social
reactions to those norms and practices in the emerging nations.
The post-Soviet development in all its complexity was imag-
ined—and not only by scholars but also by politicians and citi-
zens—mainly in terms of the post-communist transition, as a move-
ment from totalitarian darkness into democratic light. But this post-
Soviet imaginary was changing fast, and by the 2000s, transition
studies had changed their tone and focus: no longer espousing a
vision based in optimistic expectations, they now offered up pessi-
mistic assessments of the post-Soviet transition period. Growing
skepticism around how the transition was evolving in different
post-Soviet states reflected the growing autocratization that was
taking place; and together, observers’ skepticism and swelling on-
the-ground autocratization began to shape the political imagination
of Eastern European and northern Eurasian peoples, preparing
them for the tragic events of 2022 and the launch of new historical
caesura.
This book takes up many political, social, and cultural issues,
but at its core it is about the Post-Soviet Human, a cultural-anthro-
pological type that was shaped during the caesura of 1989–1991 and
found expression in the political creativity of the post-Soviet inter-
war interval, prior to the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. My concep-
tion of Post-Soviet Humans and the world they created, then inhab-
ited, stems from idea that one should judge human beings accord-
ing to the connection between their actions’ aims and achievements.
Accordingly, I interpret the post-Soviet period as an unprecedented
historical environment in which Post-Soviet Humans expressed
themselves in the creation of new social worlds, economies, and po-
litical and legal systems. The post-Soviet era provided the once So-
viet Man with a chance to overcome himself, to enjoy freedom and
to realize his creativity without Marxist-Leninist shortcuts.4 And in
4 Among other theories, Vladimir Lenin (1870–1924) offered an idea of how to
make a proletarian revolution in Russian society, which at the start of twentieth
century had a very small worker class. The vanguard (Bolshevik) party, the So-
viets, and a number of other “tricks” had to speed up history in Russia. Thus
16 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
this book, I demonstrate the collective and institutional outcomes
of Post-Soviet Humans’ seizure of this chance and how they used
it.
This book was written in three languages—English, Russian,
and Ukrainian. Each version of the book differs slightly from the
others as it addresses a different audience. However, the structure
and arguments as laid out above are the same. Before finalizing the
book, I tested its major arguments in a series of articles published
in 2021–2023.5 I collected both critical and supportive comments ex-
pressed by readers of these publications, sharpened the argumen-
tation, and brought in more evidence, which found a place in the
four chapters that follow. The work has gestated adequately and is
ready to meet the post-post-Soviet world in published form.
Organization of the Book
The first chapter is dedicated to philosophical reflections on the
foundations of the concepts of the Post-Soviet Human, political cre-
ativity, historical periodization, and the post-Soviet tetrad: democ-
ratization, marketization, nationalization, and Europeanization.
Readers already at home with such theoretical deliberations may
wish to move directly to the second chapter, where I describe the
sequence of stages and the common rhythm of the post-Soviet na-
tions’ development—those fifteen independent states, including
the Russian Federation, that were once socialist republics and part
Leninism offered a shortcut in the historical development and Marxist revolu-
tionary practice.
5 The third and the fourth chapters advance arguments based on previously pub-
lished articles. The third chapter is an expanded version of my article “The
Transition of ‘Transition’: Assessing the Post-Communist Experience and Its
Research,” in Meandering in Transition: Thirty Years of Identity Building in Post-
Communist Europe, edited by O. Kushnir and O. Pankieiev and published by
Rowman & Littlefield in 2021. The fourth chapter is a further elaborated study
of an article I wrote, the earlier version of which was published in 2023 as “Po-
litical Creativity and Its Democratic and Autocratic Outcomes: The Case of the
Post-Soviet Period, 1989–2022” in Ideology and Politics Journal. This use is made
with the permission of the copyright holders.
INTRODUCTION 17
of the USSR.6 The third chapter looks at how observers and political
leaders in Eastern Europe and northern Eurasia, as well as those
outside this broad region, imagined the post-Soviet development
and its ends. The fourth chapter provides a sort of a balance sheet,
listing both the democratic and the autocratic outcomes achieved
by Post-Soviet Human. The conclusion takes a final look at Post-
Soviet Humans’ historic mission, fitful attempts at political creativ-
ity, and, often, a ragged return to Soviet-style power practices while
under pressure to achieve democratization and Europeanization.
It is important to note that this book was written from the
depths of another historical caesura, the one that started engulfing
Eastern Europe and northern Eurasia beginning in early 2022. A
new historical era is emerging in the unpredictable fragmentation
of this region, where political creativity is no longer determined by
the Soviet experience and the countering anti-Soviet sentiments.
The thirty-year post-Soviet experience, though, is likely to be form-
ative for the foreseeable future, and this book is precisely about its
lessons. Which makes it a Post-Soviet Human’s testament to the
next generations, doomed to live in Eastern Europe and northern
Eurasia in what remains of the twenty-first century.
6 The fifteen post-Soviet, independent states are Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus,
Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
159
Conclusion
The post-Soviet period was in its own way an unprecedented era in
human history. Its uniqueness lies not only in the fact that the cae-
sura of 1989–1991 and the 1991 Revolution opened up opportunities
for the peoples of Eastern Europe and northern Eurasia to experi-
ence freedom and test their creative powers but also in the fact that
these opportunities did not extract a price in life or death compara-
ble to the cost in human lives of the Russian revolution and the Civil
War of 1917–1924. Attempts at building national republics and just
social systems subsequent to those conflicts were paid for in the
coin of millions of lives lost in the continued violence of World War
I and the “class struggle,” and in the establishment of a long-lived
Soviet totalitarian system. The post-Soviet attempts at establishing
free politics and economy have led to the sacrifice of tens of thou-
sands killed in interethnic clashes and the criminal revolution of the
early 1990s, as well as in the upended lives of several million forced
migrants. But we must not forget that those who survived the So-
viet system were given opportunities that their ancestors were de-
prived of in the early 1920s, for Post-Soviet Humans gained collec-
tive emancipation and personal freedom, a minimally invasive
state (at least in the 1990s to early 2000s), and the real possibility of
taking charge of their lives.
Post-Soviet Humans have lived through this era without
meeting expectations—of their own, their parents’, or those of their
contemporaries in other parts of the world. It is hard not to agree
with Vladimir Sorokin that the Post-Soviet Human has disap-
pointed even more than the Soviet Man (Sorokin, 2015). Homo sovi-
eticus was horrifying in its selflessness and cruelty to others as it
strived to fulfill the Communist utopian project. Post-Soviet Hu-
mans, on the other hand, disappointed much more by failing to ful-
fill their historic mission of a titanic self-overcoming—overcoming
the Soviet legacy. Although the dashing—as well as free and dar-
ing—1990s offered every opportunity for Promethean achieve-
ments, the Post-Soviet Human too often succumbed to the simple
pleasures of opportunism, the terror of the possibilities of freedom,
160 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
the instincts of conflictual individualism, the temptations of con-
sumer capitalism, and the lures of postmodern decadence. Political
creativity under such conditions was increasingly fitful, incon-
sistent, and unsophisticated, and the results were a fragile freedom
and sturdy subjugation. The authoritarian tendency seems to have
prevailed in the political creativity of Post-Soviet Humans.
Looking back from the 2022 caesura, it becomes piercingly
clear: post-Soviet societies have failed to travel the path of emanci-
pation and to break out of the historical rut of imperialism and co-
lonialism. Russian citizens have betrayed their federation as a guid-
ing idea, a republican model, and an emancipative practice of the
early 1990s. Other post-Soviet nations have not been able to break
out of the colonial imagination and to present their successful col-
lective sociopolitical projects to the world, preferring to choose be-
tween the peripheries of warring geopolitical cores.
The mainstream processes of the post-Soviet tetrad largely
faded away as the growing contradictions they exposed ceased to
be a source of creative energy for achieving the transition and its
goals. Democratization hampered the effectiveness of state institu-
tions, and governments eventually began to perceive the political
freedoms of citizens as a challenge to their own security. Authori-
tarian tendencies were born out of both the failures of democratic
experiments and the traditional temptations of subordination. Only
at the beginning did the nationalization of the new states proceed
in alliance with the development of democracy. The thirst for uni-
fication of a population’s diversity that the post-Soviet leviathans
inherited from the Soviet Union reinforced the inequalities that the
new market economies produced. The post-Soviet traumatic knot
was tightened by freedom, which was increasingly torn between
law and corruption. In the tangle of these conflicting tendencies,
Europeanization, which for a time supported increased civil rights
and freedoms within political systems, legal and economic integra-
tion, and peace among the peoples of the region, soon became an
additional factor contributing to regional fragmentation. One Big
Europe and its constituent countries underwent a tragic transition,
which started on the Dublin-Vladivostok axis but somewhere along
the way jumped the track to the Belfast-Magadan axis, a radically
CONCLUSION 161
alternative pair of symbolic poles of Europe that stretch from eth-
noreligiously conflictogenic Ulster to the gulag’s Kolyma.
History does try to teach, but it has few students. In this book,
I have highlighted only some of the lessons of post-Soviet history—
only those that I have been able to identify to date. There is still time
to study this era, not just out of academic interest but also for en-
tirely pragmatic reasons. For the sake of the future, which will in-
evitably come after the Russian-Ukrainian war and the current cae-
sura end, it is necessary to figure out how to put the region’s levia-
thans on the chain of the rule of law, ensure the stability of political
and legal systems that respect the divided branches of power, min-
imize the malignancy of the resulting socioeconomic systems, and
build an infrastructure of peace among the peoples of Europe and
Eurasia. We must be willing to work through our post-Soviet trau-
matic experience and be able to undertake many deconstructions—
de-Putinization (as well as de-Lukashevization and the like), denu-
clearization, war crimes tribunals, and the rejection of imperialism
and ethnonationalism. The new, post-post-Soviet republics, once
under new geopolitical conditions and with little connection to the
Soviet experience, will be able to cope with the imperial-colonial
ruts and clan structures of their systems and lifeworlds only if they
take into account the lessons of post-Soviet history.
Without learning the lessons of our recent history, we are
doomed to perpetually go in circles repeating it: from revolutionary
traumas to Bolshevik-style experiments, to Stalinist thermidors, to
fragile thaws, to Brezhnevite stagnation, to new futile revolutions.
This endless spinning undermines and destroys creative achieve-
ment. This abortive reversibility indeed characterizes the history of
modernity in Eastern Europe and northern Eurasia. But our moder-
nity is also characterized by critical rationality, solidarity, and ded-
ication to the common good. And it is the choice of each human
being how to be and who to be, and thus to determine what the
world of our presence and becoming will be like after the current
caesura ends.
163
Bibliography
Abdullaev, N., & Saradzhayan, S. (2006). The trade-offs between security
and civil liberties in Russia’s war on terror: The regional dimension.
Demokratizatsiya, 14(3), 361–406.
Abdullaev, Y. (2023). Philosophy in post-Soviet Uzbekistan. In M. Minakov
(ed.), Philosophy unchained: Developments in post-Soviet philosophical
thought (pp. 232–242). Stuttgart: ibidem.
Adam, B., Van Loon, J., & Beck, U. (2000). The risk society and beyond. Lon-
don: Sage.
Adorno, T. (1968). Sociology and psychology II. New Left Review, 47(1), 79–97.
Ágh, A. (2022). The third wave of autocratization in East-Central Europe.
Journal of Comparative Politics, 15(2), 72–87.
Ambrosio, T. (2015). Leadership succession in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan:
Regime survival after Nazarbayev and Karimov. Journal of Balkan and
Near Eastern Studies, 17(1), 49–67.
Antonenko, O. (2008). A war with no winners. Survival, 50(5), 23–36.
Antonov, M. (2021). Legal positivism and problems of development of Rus-
sian law. Ideology and Politics Journal, 2(18), 120–151.
Antonov, M., & Vovk, D. (2021). Soviet and post-Soviet law: Failed transi-
tion from socialist legality to rule of law. Ideology and Politics Journal,
18(2), 4–9.
Appolonov, A. (2015). Neozhidannye prikljuchenija Hajdeggera v Rossii
[Unexpected adventures of Heidegger in Russia]. Logos (2), 224–232.
Arel, D. (2018). How Ukraine has become more Ukrainian. Post-Soviet Af-
fairs (2–3), 186–189.
Arendt, H. (2006). On revolution. New York: Penguin.
Arrighi, G., Silver, B. J., & Brewer, B. D. (2003). Industrial convergence,
globalization, and the persistence of the north-south divide. Studies
in Comparative International Development, 38(1), 3–31.
Åslund, A. (2013). How capitalism was built: The transformation of Central and
Eastern Europe, Russia, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Atlani-Duault, L. (2008). Humanitarian aid in post-Soviet countries: An an-
thropological perspective. London: Routledge.
Bandelin, O. J. (1998). Return to NEP: The search for a program and ideological
rationale for reform in the Gorbachev years, 1985–1991. Seattle: Univer-
sity of Washington Press.
164 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Barbott, B., & Eff, H. (2019). The genetic basis of creativity: A multivariate
approach. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (eds.), The Cambridge
handbook of creativity (pp. 132–147). Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Barrett, T. (2021). Oligarchs and judges: The political economy of the courts
in post-Soviet unconsolidated democracies. Ideology and Politics,
18(2), 260–291.
Barshynova, O., & Martynyuk, O. (2021). Ukrainian art of the independ-
ence era: Transitions and aspirations. In M. Minakov, G. Kasianov, &
M. Rojansky (eds.), From “The Ukraine” to Ukraine: A contemporary his-
tory (pp. 134–167). Stuttgart: ibidem.
Bartram, D. (2013). Happiness and “economic migration”: A comparison
of Eastern European migrants and stayers. Migration Studies, 1(2),
156–175.
Bassin, M. (2016). The Gumilev mystique: Biopolitics, Eurasianism, and the con-
struction of community in modern Russia. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press.
Beacháin, D. Ó., & Polese, F. (eds.). (2010). The colour revolutions in the former
Soviet republics. London: Routledge.
Beck, U. (1992). From industrial society to the risk society: Questions of
survival, social structure and ecological enlightenment. Theory, Cul-
ture & Society, 9(1), 97–123.
Bell, D. S. (1996). Post-Communism in Western Europe. Journal of Com-
munist Studies and Transition Politics, 12(2), 247–52.
Bell, D. S., & Dahrendorf, R. (1989). Wir sollten endlich alle Revisionisten
sein. Die Zeit, December 29.
Berekashvili, B. (2021). Ideological dialectics of post-Soviet nationalism. Co-
pernicus Journal of Political Studies, (2), 73–90.
Blackburn, M., & Petersson, B. (2022). Parade, plebiscite, pandemic: Legitima-
tion efforts in Putin’s fourth term. Post-Soviet Affairs, 38(4), 293–311.
Bod, R., Kursell, J., Maat, J., & Weststeijn, T. (2016). A new field: History of
humanities. History of Humanities, 1(1), 1–8.
Brill, S. (2020). Aristotle on the concept of the shared life. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Bromley, R. (1990). A new path to development? The significance and im-
pact of Hernando De Soto’s ideas on underdevelopment, production,
and reproduction. Economic Geography, 66(4), 328–348.
Brown, R. T. (1989). Creativity: What are we to measure? In J. A. Glover, R.
R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–33).
New York: Springer.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 165
Brubaker, R. (1996). Nationalism reframed: Nationhood and the national ques-
tion in the New Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brubaker, R. (2011). Nationalizing states revisited: Projects and processes
of nationalization in post-Soviet states. Ethnic and Racial Studies,
34(11), 1785–1814.
Bugaric, B. (2008). Populism, liberal democracy, and the rule of law in Cen-
tral and Eastern Europe. Communist and Post-Communist Studies,
41(2), 191–203.
Calder, K. E. (1995). Strategic capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Carothers, T. (2002). The end of the transition paradigm. Journal of Democ-
racy, 13(1), 5–21.
Chateaubriand, F. R. (2000 [1838]). Génie du christianisme. Paris: Lefèvre-Re-
print.
Cheterian, V. (2009). From reform and transition to “coloured revolutions.”
Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, 25(2–3), 136–160.
Clapham, C. S. (1985). Third world politics: An introduction. Madison: Uni-
versity of Wisconsin Press.
Cohen, J. L., & Arato, A. (1994). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Collier, S. J. (2011). Post-Soviet social: Neoliberalism, social modernity, biopoli-
tics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Coppieters, B., Huysseune, M., Kovziridze, T., Noutcheva, G., Tocci, N.,
Emerson, M., & Vahl, M. (2004). Europeanization and conflict resolution:
Case studies from the European periphery, vol. 3. Brussels: Academia
Press.
Corbet, J., & Gummich, A. (1990). The Soviet Union at the crossroads: Facts
and figures on the Soviet republics. Frankfurt am Main: Deutsche Bank.
Cornell, S. E., & Nilsson, N. (2009). Georgian politics since the August 2008
war. Demokratizatsiya, 17(3), 251–277.
de Saint-Laurent, C. (2018). Thinking through time: From collective memories
to collective futures. In C. de Saint-Laurent, S. Obradović, & K. R. Carri-
ere (eds.), Imagining collective futures: Perspectives from social, cultural and
political psychology (pp. 2–13). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
De Waal, T. (2018). Uncertain territory. New Eastern Europe, (3–4), 7–14.
Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. New York: Columbia Univer-
sity Press.
Denisenko, M., Strozza, S., & Light, M. (2020). Migration from the newly in-
dependent states: 25 years after the collapse of the USSR. Cham, CH:
Springer.
166 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Dewey, J. (1998 [1935]). Liberalism and social action. New York: SUNY Press.
Dewey, J. (2021 [1939]). Creative democracy: The task before us. In Amer-
ica’s public philosopher (pp. 59–66). New York: Columbia University
Press.
Dickey, H., Drinkwater, S., & Shubin, S. (2018). Labour market and social
integration of Eastern European migrants in Scotland and Portugal.
Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, (6), 1250–1268.
Ditrych, O. (2010). Georgia: A state of flux. Journal of International Relations
and Development, 13(1), 3–25.
Dryzek, J. S., & Holmes, L. (2002). Post-communist democratization: Political
discourses across thirteen countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Dugin, A. (2002). Filosofija tradicii [Philosophy of tradition]. Moskva:
Arktogeja.
Dugin, A. (2010). Martin Hajdegger: filosofija drugogo nachala [from Rus.:
Martin Heidegger: The Philosophy of Another Principle]. Moskva:
Arktogeja.
Dugin, A. (2015). Etnosociologija [Ethnosociology]. Moskva: Arktogeja.
Dugin, A. (2021). Bol'shaja perezagruzka i Velikoe probuzhdenie [The
great reset and greater awakening]. RIA Novosti, March 15. https://ri
a.ru/20210215/perezagruzka-1597564983.html?fbclid=IwAR1m-Hz
HPOcoA8YUVjiUX0Lo_fQ6_RzTZINFq9KTMEuOVkZ2ZaqPKAgB
Rlo.
ECA (European Court of Auditors). (2021). Reducing grand corruption in
Ukraine: Several EU initiatives, but still insufficient results. A special re-
port. Brussels: ECA.
Esanu, O. (2013). Transition in post-Soviet art: The Collective Actions Group
before and after 1989. Budapest: CEU Press.
Etkind, A., & Minakov, M. (2020). Post-Soviet ideological creativity. In A.
Etkind & M. Minakov (eds.), Ideology after union (pp. 9–18). Stuttgart:
ibidem.
Fairbanks, C. H. (1990). The suicide of Soviet communism. Journal of De-
mocracy, 2(1), 18–26.
Feist, G. J. (2007). An evolutionary model of artistic and musical creativity.
In C. Martindale, P. Locher, & V. M. Petrov (eds.), Evolutionary and
neurocognitive approaches to aesthetics, creativity, and the arts (pp. 15–
30). Amityville: Baywood Publishing.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 167
Fisun, O. (2003). Developing democracy or competitive neopatrimonial-
ism? The political regime of Ukraine in comparative perspective. In
Institution building and policy making in Ukraine (pp. 1–7). Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.
Fisun, O. (2012). Rethinking post-Soviet politics from a neopatrimonial per-
spective. Demokratizatsiya, 20(2), 87–96.
Forest, J. (1990). Religion and the new Russia: The impact of perestroika on the
varieties of religious life in the Soviet Union. New York: Crossroads.
Freeden, M. (1996). Ideologies and political theory: A conceptual approach. Lon-
don: Clarendon Press of Oxford University Press.
Freud, S. (2012 [1927]). The future of an illusion. New York: Broadview Press.
Fukuyama, F. (1989). The end of history? National Interest, 16(1), 3–18.
Galeotti, M. (2017). Russian and post-Soviet organized crime. London:
Routledge.
Galvan, D. C., Hattam, V. C., & Berk, G. (2013). Introduction: Beyond du-
alist social science: The mangle of order and change. In G. Berk, D. C.
Galvan, & V. C. Hattam (eds.), Political creativity: Reconfiguring insti-
tutional order and change (pp. 1–28). Philadelphia: University of Penn-
sylvania Press.
Gans-Morse, J. (2004). Searching for transitologists. Post-Soviet Affairs,
20(4), 320–349.
Gaidar, E. (2022). Gosudarstvo i evoljucija [State and evolution]. Moskva: Litres.
Gaidar, E., Mau, V., Sinelnikov-Muryliov, S., & Uliukajev, F. (1998).
Ekonomika perekhodnogo perioda [the economy of the transition]. Mos-
kva: IEPP.
Gel'man, V. (2003). Post-Soviet transitions and democratization: Towards
theory-building. Democratization, 10(2), 87–104.
Gel'man, V. (2006). From “feckless pluralism” to “dominant power poli-
tics”? The transformation of Russia’s party system. Democratization,
13(4), 545–561.
Gelashvili, T. (2023). Opportunities matter: The evolution of far-right pro-
test in Georgia. Europe-Asia Studies, 75(4), 649–674.
Gibbs, J. (1999). Gorbachev’s glasnost: The Soviet media in the first phase of pe-
restroika. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Gilbert, L., & Mohseni, P. (2018). Disabling dissent: The colour revolutions,
autocratic linkages, and civil society regulations in hybrid regimes.
Contemporary Politics, 24(4), 454–480.
Gill, G. (1994). The collapse of a single-party system: The disintegration of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
168 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Glaveanu, V. P., & Kaufman, J. C. (2019). Creativity. A historical perspec-
tive. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (eds.), The Cambridge handbook
of creativity (pp. 9–26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Golovakha, E., & Panina, N. (1994). Social'noe bezumie: Istorija, teorija i sov-
remennaja praktika [Social madness: History, theory and practice].
Kyiv: Abris.
Grant, T. (2014). The Budapest Memorandum of 5 December 1994: Political
engagement or legal obligation? Polish Yearbook of International Law,
34(2,) 89–114.
Grigorishin, S. (2023). Wuquf Yelbasy: Islamic mysticism and Kazakh de-
mocracy. Ideology and Politics Journal, 23(1), 172–218.
Gudkov, L. (2022). Vozvratnyj totalitarizm [fThe returning totalitarianism].
Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie.
Guihai, G. (2010). The influence of the collapse of the Soviet Union on
China’s political choices. In T. P. Bernstein & H.-Y. Li (eds.), China
learns from the Soviet Union, 1949–present (pp. 505–516).Lexington,
MA: Lexington Books. 505–516.
Gunitsky, S. (2018). Democratic waves in historical perspective. Perspectives
on Politics, 16(3), 634–651.
Gurchiani, K. (2017). How Soviet is the religious revival in Georgia: Tactics
in everyday religiosity. Europe-Asia Studies, 69(3), 508–531.
Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Band 1: Hand-
lungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung. Band 2: Zur Kri-
tik der funktionalistischen Vernunft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J. (1991). What does socialism mean today? In R. Blackburn
(ed.), After the fall: The failure of communism and the future of socialism
(pp. 25–46). London: Verso.
Hafso, J. P. (2019). The first major reform: Mikhail Gorbachev’s anti-alcohol
policies in the 1980s. Constellations, 11(1), 332–346.
Haggard, S., & Kaufman, R. (2016). Democratization during the third wave.
Annual Review of Political Science, 19(2), 125–144.
Hale, H. (2005). Regime cycles: Democracy, autocracy, and revolution in
post-Soviet Eurasia. World Politics, 58(1), 133–165.
Hale, H. (2011). Formal constitutions in informal politics: Institutions and
democratization in post-Soviet Eurasia. World Politics, 63(4), 581–617.
Hale, H. (2014). Patronal politics: Eurasian regime change in comparative per-
spective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Havel, V. (1992). Paradise lost. New York Review of Books, 39(7), 4.
Havrylyshyn, O. (2006). Divergent paths in post-communist transformation.
London: Palgrave Macmillan.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 169
Hegel, G. W. F. (2018 [1807]). The phenomenology of spirit. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Heidegger, M. (2010 [1928]). Being and time. New York: SUNY Press.
Heidegger, M. (2014). Introduction to metaphysics. New Haven: Yale Univer-
sity Press.
Heiss, A. (2019). NGOs and authoritarianism. In T. Davies (ed.), Routledge
handbook of NGOs and international relations (pp. 557–572). London:
Routledge.
Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2004). Informal institutions and comparative
politics: A research agenda. Perspectives on Politics, 4(2), 725–740.
Hemment, J. (2012). Nashi, youth voluntarism, and Potemkin NGOs: Mak-
ing sense of civil society in post-Soviet Russia. Slavic Review, 71(2),
234–260.
Honneth, A. (1998). Democracy as reflexive cooperation: John Dewey and
the theory of democracy today. Political Theory, 26(6), 763–783.
Horowitz, S. (2003). Sources of post-communist democratization. National-
ities Papers, 31(2), 119–137.
Horvat, P., & Evans, G. (2011). Age, inequality, and reactions to marketiza-
tion in post-communist Central and Eastern Europe. European Socio-
logical Review, 27(6), 708–727.
Huntington, S. P. (1965). Political development and political decay. World
Politics, 17(3), 386–430.
Huntington, S. P. (1991). Democracy’s third wave. Journal of Democracy,
2(2), 12–34.
Huntington, S. P. (1993). The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth
century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Huntington, S. P. (2000). The clash of civilizations? (99–118). New York: Pal-
grave Macmillan.
Huss, O. (2020). How corruption and anti-corruption policies sustain hybrid re-
gimes. London: ibidem.
Hutcheson, D. S., & Korosteleva, E. A. (2006). Patterns of participation in
post-Soviet politics. Comparative European Politics, 4(1), 23–46.
IDEA (International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance).
(2023). IDEA Voter Turnout Database. https://www.idea.int/data-t
ools/data/voter-turnout.
Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change and democ-
racy: The human development sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
170 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Isaev, E. (2020). The militarization of the past in Russian popular historical
films. In A. Etkind & M. Minakov (eds.), Ideology after union (pp. 237–
250). Stuttgart: ibidem.
Isakava, V., & Beumers, B. (2017). Reality excess: Chernukha cinema in the
late 1980s. In B. Beumers & E. Zvonkine (eds.), Ruptures and continui-
ties in Soviet/Russian cinema (pp. 147–165). New York: Routledge.
Jayatilleka, D. (2014). The fall of global socialism: A counter-narrative from the
south. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jeffries, I. (2004). The countries of the former Soviet Union at the turn of the
twenty-first century. London: Routledge.
Jensen, C. B. (2003). Latour and Pickering: Post-human perspectives on sci-
ence, becoming, and normativity. In D. J. Haraway, A. Pickering, &
B. Latour (eds.), Chasing technoscience: Matrix for materiality (pp. 225–
244). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Joas, H. (1996). The creativity of action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Jonson, L. (2015). Art and protest in Putin’s Russia. London: Routledge.
Judt, T. (1988). The dilemmas of dissidence: The politics of opposition in
east-central Europe. East European Politics and Societies, 2(2), 185–240.
Judt, T. (1990). The rediscovery of Central Europe. Daedalus, 119(1), 23–54.
Kant, I. (2008 [1795]). Toward perpetual peace and other writings on politics,
peace, and history. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Kasianov, G. (2008). Ukraina 1991–2007: Ocherki novejshej istorii [Ukraine
1991–2007: Notes to the contemporary history]. Kyiv: Nash chas.
Kasianov, G. (2022). Memory crash: Politics of history in and around Ukraine,
1980s–2010s. Budapest: CEU Press.
Kasianov, G., & Minakov, M. (2020). The image of “the other” in post-so-
cialist societies. Ideology and Politics Journal, 16(2), 3–5.
Kavadze, A. (2018). The contemporary authoritarianism in the Post-Soviet
space: Case study of Belarus and Georgia under Saakashvili rule.
Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2), 7–20.
Keynes, J. M. (2010 [1926]). The end of laissez-faire. In The Keynes reader
(272–294). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Khomeini, R. M. M. (2001 [1940]). Forty hadith. Tehran and Paris: Creative
Space.
Kiryukhin, D., & Shcherbak, S. (2022). The people, values, and the state:
How Vladimir Putin's views on ideology evolved. Studia Politica: Ro-
manian Political Science Review, 22(1), 43–63.
Kolakowski, L. (1990). Uncertainties of a democratic age. Journal of Democ-
racy, 1(1), 47–50.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 171
Köllner, T. (2020). Religiosity in Orthodox Christianity: An anthropological
perspective on post-Soviet Russia. In S. Demmrich & U. Riegel (eds.),
Religiosity in East and West: Conceptual and methodological challenges
from global and local perspectives (pp . 121–140). Ber lin: Springer Nature.
Kolsto, P. (2018). Political construction sites: Nation building in Russia and the
post-Soviet states. London: Routledge.
Kordonsky, S. (2000). Rynki vlasti [Power markets]. Moscow: OGI.
Korobkov, A., & Zaionchkovskaia, Zh. (2004). The changes in the migration
patterns in the Post-Soviet States: The first decade. Communist and
Post-Communist Studies, 37(4), 481–508.
Kubicek, P. (2009). Problems of post-post-Communism: Ukraine after the
Orange Revolution. Democratization, 16(2), 323–343.
Kudlenko, A. (2015). From colour revolutions to the Arab Spring: The role
of civil society in democracy building and transition processes. Jour-
nal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, 23(2–3), 167–179.
Kupatadze, A. (2012). Organized crime, political transitions and state formation
in post-Soviet Eurasia. New York: Springer.
Kutuev, P. (2016). Transformaciji modernu: Instytuciji, ideji, ideologiji [Trans-
formations of modernity: Institutions, ideas, ideologies]. Kherson:
Gel’vetyka.
Kuzio, T. (2002). History, memory and nation building in the post-Soviet
colonial space. Nationalities Papers, 30(2), 241–264.
Kuzio, T. (2014). Crime, politics and business in 1990s Ukraine. Communist
and Post-Communist Studies, 47(2), 195–210.
Kuzio, T. (2022). Russian nationalism and the Russian-Ukrainian war: Autoc-
racy-orthodoxy-nationality. London: Routledge.
Labanauskas, L. (2019). Highly skilled migration from Lithuania: A critical
overview of the period 1990–2018. İstanbul University Journal of Soci-
ology, 39(2), 229–248.
Langenbacher, E., & Shain, Y. (2010). Power and the past: Collective
memory and international relations. Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press.
Laruelle, M. (2007). Central Asian labor migrants in Russia: The “diaspori-
zation” of the Central Asian states? China & Eurasia Forum Quarterly,
5(3), 2–4.
Latour, B. (2007). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-the-
ory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lavrukhin, A. (2016). Hajdegger Dugina i nadezhdy na russkuju konserva-
tivnuju revoljuciju. Russkaja Ideja, 17(6). https://politconservatism.ru
/experiences/hajdegger-dugina-i-nadezhdy-na-russkuyu-konserva
tivnuyu-revolyutsiyu.
172 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Ledeneva, A. V. (1998). Russia’s economy of favours: Blat, networking and in-
formal exchange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lenin, V. I. (1974). Polnoe sobranye sochynenyj [Complete works], vol. 35.
Moskva: GIPL.
Levada, Iu. (2000). The Soviet Man ten years later, 1989–1999: Preliminary
findings of comparative research. Sociological Research, 39(4), 30–54.
Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid re-
gimes after the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2010.
Li, Hua-Yu. (2010). Political choices. In T. P. Bernstein (ed.), China learns
from the Soviet Union, 1949–present. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Little-
field, 505–516.
Libanova, E. (2018). External labor migration of Ukrainians: Scale, causes,
consequences. Demografija ta socialna ekonomika, 2, 11–26.
Long, D., & Wilson, P. (eds.). (1995). Thinkers of the twenty years’ crisis: Inter-
war idealism reassessed. Oxford: Clarendon Press of Oxford University
Press.
Lough, J. (2021). Ukraine’s system of crony capitalism. The challenge of disman-
tling “systema.” London: Chatham House.
Love, J. (ed.). (2017). Heidegger in Russia and Eastern Europe (annotated edi-
tion). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Lübbe, H. (1981). Zwischen Trend und Tradition: Überfordert uns die Gegen-
wart? West Berlin: Interform.
Luhmann, N., Baecker, D., & Gilgen, P. (2013). Introduction to systems theory.
Cambridge: Polity.
Lührmann, A., & Lindberg, S. I. (2019). A third wave of autocratization is
here: What is new about it? Democratization, 26(7), 1095–1113.
Lutsevych, O. (2013). How to finish a revolution: Civil society and democracy in
Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. London: Chatham House.
Magyar, B. (2016). Post-Communist mafia state. Budapest: CEU Press.
Magyar, B., & Madlovics, B. (2022). A concise field guide to post-communist
regimes: Actors, institutions, and dynamics. Budapest: CEU Press.
Magyari, L. (2019). The Romanian patronal system of public corruption. In
B. Magyar (ed.), Stubborn structures: Reconceptualizing post-Communist
regimes. Budapest: CEU Press, 275–319.
Maier, C. S. (1999). Dissolution: The crisis of communism and the end of East
Germany. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mälksoo, M. (2009). The memory politics of becoming European: The East
European subalterns and the collective memory of Europe. European
Journal of International Relations, 15(4), 653–680.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 173
Marat, E. (2009). Labor migration in Central Asia: Implications of the global economic
crisis. Stockholm: Institute for Security and Development Policy.
March, L. (2002). The Communist Party in post-Soviet Russia. Manchester:
Manchester University Press.
Marx, K. (2004 [1867]). Capital: Volume I. London: Penguin.
Men’, A. (1997). Istoria religii v dvukh knigakh [History of religion in two vol-
umes]. Moscow: Forum-Press.
Minakov, M. (2012). ‘Tsvetnyie revoliutsyi’ v postsovetskom mire: Prichiny
i posledstviia [Color revolutions in the post-Soviet world: Causes and
consequences]. Obshchaia Tetrad, 12(2–3), 93–111.
Minakov, M. (2017a). Big Europe’s Gap: Dynamic Obstacles for Integration be-
tween EU and EAU. In A. Di Gregorio & A. Angeli (eds.), The Eurasian
Economic Union and the European Union: Moving toward a greater under-
standing (pp. 45–56).The Hague: Eleven International Publishing.
Minakov, M. (2017b). (Not only) Russian Revolution: Centennial media-
tions. Kennan Focus Ukraine, November 7. https://bit.ly/3ErSFAY.
Minakov, M. (2018). The third sector entering the first: Cooperation and
competition of civil society, state and oligarchs after Euromaidan in
Ukraine. In R. Marchetti (ed.), Government-NGOs relationship in Africa,
Asia, Europe, and MENA (pp. 123–143). London: Routledge.
Minakov, M. (2019a). Post-Soviet Eastern Europe: Achievements in post-
Soviet development in six Eastern European nations. Ideology and Pol-
itics Journal, 3(14), 171–193.
Minakov, M. (2019b). Republic of clans: The evolution of the Ukrainian po-
litical system. In B. Magyar (ed.), Stubborn structures: Reconceptualiz-
ing post-Communist regimes (pp. 217–245). Budapest: CEU Press.
Minakov, M. (2019c). Democratisation and Europeanisation in the 21st cen-
tury Ukraine. In M. Emerson (ed.), The struggle for good governance in
Eastern Europe (2nd ed., pp. 83–121). Brussels: CEPS.
Minakov, M. (2020a). Dialektika sovremennosti v vostochnoj Evrope [Dialectics
of modernity in Eastern Europe]. Kyiv: Laurus.
Minakov, M. (2020b). Shades of periphery: A typology of states in new
Eastern Europe. In: N. Hayoz, J. Herlth, & J. Richers·(eds.), Centres
and peripheries in the post-Soviet space (pp. 63–102). Berlin: Peter Lang.
Minakov, M. (2021a). The sovereigntist turn: Sovereignty as a contested
concept again. Ideology and Politics Journal, 1(17) 87–114.
Minakov, M. (2021b). The transition of “transition”: Assessing the post-
Communist experience and its research. In O. Kushnir & O. Pank-
ieiev (eds.), Meandering in transition: Thirty years of identity building in
post-Communist Europe (pp. 25–41). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Little-
field.
174 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Minakov, M. (2021c). The world-system and post-Soviet de facto states. In
M. Minakov, G. Sasse, & D. Isachenko (eds.), Post-Soviet secessionism
(pp. 59−88). Stuttgart: ibidem.
Minakov, M. (2022a). Ideological creativity. Introduction into post-Soviet
ideological processes. In M. Minakov (ed.), Inventing majorities: Ideo-
logical creativity in post-Soviet societies (pp. 7−26). Stuttgart: ibidem.
Minakov, M. (2022b). Towards an ontology of the caesura: Reflections on
the Russian-Ukrainian war. Kοινὴ, 2(2), 67–79.
Minakov, M. (2022c). The protest movements’ opportunities and outcomes:
The Euromaidan and the Belarusian protest–2020 compared. Protest,
1(2), 272–298.
Minakov, M. (2023). War, de-oligarchization, and the possibility of anti-pa-
tronal transformation in Ukraine. In B. Madlovics & B. Magyar (eds.),
Ukraine's patronal democracy and the Russian invasion: The Russia-
Ukraine war, vol. 1 (pp. 141–166). Budapest: CEU Press.
Minakov, M., Isachenko, D., & Sasse, G. (eds.). (2021). Post-Soviet secession-
ism, nation-building and state-failure after Communism. Stuttgart:
ibidem.
Minakov, M., & Mylovanov, T. (2016). Why the post-Soviet institution of
president is flawed. Vox Ukraine, June 6.
Mitchell, L. A. (2012). The color revolutions. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Moghadam, V. M. (1990). Gender and restructuring: Perestroika, the 1989 rev-
olutions, and women. Helsinki: United Nations University.
Monaghan, A. (2012). The vertikal: Power and authority in Russia. Interna-
tional Affairs, 88(1), 1–16.
Muhametov, R. (2018). Rol' dekommunizacii v politicheskom tranzite
gosudarstv Vostochnoj Evropy [The role of decommunization in the
political transit of East European states]. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta.
Istoricheskie nauki, 1, 204–210.
Muravska, L. (2002). Assessment / Mapping activities of the Soros Centers
for Contemporary Arts. Budapest: Open Society Institute.
Murdoch, J. (2001). Ecologising sociology: Actor-network theory, co-con-
struction and the problem of human exemptionalism. Sociology, 35(1),
111–133.
Neumayer, L. (2008). Euroscepticism as a political label. European Journal of
Political Research, 47(2), 135–160.
Oakeshott, M. (2011). Lectures in the history of political thought. London: An-
drews UK.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 175
Olson, D. M., & Norton, P. (2007). Post-Communist and post-Soviet parlia-
ments: Divergent paths from transition. Journal of Legislative Studies,
13(1), 164–196.
Pain, E. A. (2007). Xenophobia and ethnopolitical extremism in post-Soviet
Russia: Dynamics and growth factors. Nationalities Papers, 35(5), 895–911.
Panina, N., & Golovakha, Ye. (1994). Socialnoje bezumije: Istoria, teoria i sov-
remennaja praktika [Social madness: History, theory and current prac-
tice]. Kyiv: Abris.
Partlett, W. (2018). Postsovetskoe superprezidentstvo [Post-Soviet super-pres-
identialism]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, 27(3), 103–123.
Petrov, N. (2019). Putin’s neo-nomenklatura system. In B. Magyar (ed.),
Stubborn structures: Reconceptualizing post-Communist regimes (pp.
179–216). Budapest: CEU Press.
Pickles, J., & Smith, A. (eds.). (2005). Theorizing transition: The political econ-
omy of post-Communist transformations. London: Routledge.
Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: The decline of violence in his-
tory and its causes. London: Penguin.
Pocheptsov, G. (2017). Transformacii virtualnogo prostransva v proces-
sakh vlijanija [Transformations of virtual space in the processes of in-
fluence]. Mediasapiens, April 4. http://osvita.mediasapiens.ua/trend
s/1411978127/transformatsii_virtualnogo_prostranstva_v_protsess
akh_vliyaniya.
Pomeranz, W. E. (2016). How “the state” survived the collapse of the Soviet
Union. Kennan Cable, 18, 1–9.
Pomeranz, W. E. (2021). Russia’s perennial search for the rule of law: Origins,
detours, revival, impasse. Ideology and Politics Journal, 18(2), 10–29.
Popovych, M. (1998). Mіfologіja v suspіl'nіj svіdomostі post kommun іstich-
noї Ukraїni [Mythology in the social consciousness of post-com-
munist Ukraine]. Dukh і lіtera, (3–4), 57–69.
Popper, K. (2012 [1945]). The open society and its enemies. London: Routledge.
Potter, W. C. (1994). Nuclear insecurity in the postSoviet states. Nonprolif-
eration Review, 3(1), 61–65.
Puglisi, R. (2003). The rise of the Ukrainian oligarchs. Democratization, 10(3),
99–123.
Rabinovych, S. (2021). Can the Ukrainian constitutional justice be depoliti-
cized? Ideology and Politics Journal, 2(18), 234–259.
Rabkin, Y., & Minakov, M. (eds.). (2019). Demodernization: Future in the past.
Stuttgart: ibidem.
Radnitz, S. (2010). The color of money: Privatization, economic dispersion, and
the post-Soviet “revolutions.” Comparative Politics, 42(2), 127–146.
176 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. New York: Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press.
Reuter, O. J. (2017). The origins of dominant parties: Building authoritarian institu-
tions in post-Soviet Russia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ricoeur, P. (1994). Imagination in discourse and in action. In J. Robinson &
G. Robinson (eds.), Rethinking imagination: Culture and creativity (120–
125). London: Routledge.
Rorty, R. (1998). Truth and progress: Philosophical papers. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Rorty, R. (1999). Philosophy and social hope. London: Penguin.
Rouda, U. (2019). Is Belarus a classic post-Communist Mafia state? In B.
Magyar (ed.), Stubborn structures: Reconceptualizing post-Communist
regimes. Budapest: CEU Press, 247–274.
Round, J., & Williams, C. (2010). Coping with the social costs of “transi-
tion”: Everyday life in post-Soviet Russia and Ukraine. European Ur-
ban and Regional Studies, 17(2), 183–196.
Sablin, I. (2022). A spiritual perestroika: Religion in the late Soviet parlia-
ments, 1989–1991. Entangled Religions, 13(8), 3–22.
Sakwa, R. (2021). Sad delusions: The decline and rise of Greater Europe.
Journal of Eurasian Studies, 12(1), 5–18.
Sakwa, R. (ed.). (1999). The experience of democratization in Eastern Europe.
Berlin: Springer.
Sartre, J. P. (1960). Existentialism and humanism. London: Methuen.
Sasse, G. (2018). The Crimea question: Identity, transition, and conflict. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sato, Y., Lundstedt, M., Morrison, K., Boese, V. A., & Lindberg, S. I. (2022).
Institutional order in episodes of autocratization. V-Dem Working
Paper 133.
Schmahl, S., & Breuer, M. (eds.). (2017). The Council of Europe: Its law and
policies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmäing, S. (2021). “Dictatorship of applause”? The rise of direct repre-
sentation in contemporary Ukraine. Topos, (1), 11–31.
Schumpeter, J. A. (2013). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. London:
Routledge.
Sen, A. (2001). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sharlet, R. (2019). Post-Soviet constitutionalism: Politics and constitution-
making in Russia and Ukraine. In Russia and Eastern Europe after com-
munism (15–34). New York: Routledge.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 177
Sheiko, K. (2012). Nationalist imaginings of the Russian past: Anatolii Fo-
menko and the rise of alternative history in post-Communist Russia.
Stuttgart: ibidem.
Shekhovtsov, A. (2017). Russia and the Western far right: Tango noir. London:
Routledge.
Shekhovtsov, A., & Umland, A. (2014). The Maidan and beyond: Ukraine's
radical right. Journal of Democracy, 25(3), 58–63.
Shevtsova, L. (2001). Ten years after the Soviet breakup: Russia’s hybrid
regime. Journal of Democracy, 12(4), 65–70.
Shlapentokh, D. (1992). Lovemaking in the time of “perestroika”: Sex in the
context of political culture. Studies in Comparative Communism, 25(2),
151−176.
Shlikhar, T. (2020). Between history and memory: Cultural war in contem-
porary Russian and Ukrainian cinema. PhD diss., University of Pitts-
burgh.
Shnirelman, V. (2022). Race, ethnicity, and cultural racism in Soviet and
post-Soviet ideology, communication, and practice. Oxford research
encyclopedia of communication, July 18, https://oxfordre.com/commu
nication/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-
9780190228613-e-1323.
Shparaga, O., & Minakov, М. (2019). Ideology and education in post-Soviet
countries: Editorial introduction. Ideology and Politics Journal, 13(2), 4–8.
Silitski, V. (2010). Survival of the fittest: Domestic and international dimen-
sions of the authoritarian reaction in the former Soviet Union follow-
ing the colored revolutions. Communist and Post-Communist Studies,
43(4), 339–350.
Simmel, G. (1949). The sociology of sociability. American Journal of Sociology,
55(3), 254–261.
Sinkkonen, T. (2011). A security dilemma on the boundary line: An EU per-
spective to Georgian–Russian confrontation after the 2008 war. South-
east European and Black Sea Studies, 11(3), 265–278.
Slater, W., & Wilson, A. (eds). (2004). The legacy of the Soviet Union. Berlin:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Sorokin, V. (2015). Postsovetskij chelovek razocharoval bol'she, chem so-
vetskij [The Post-Soviet Human has disappointed more than the So-
viet Man]. Kommersant, August 17.
Steblyna, N., & Dvorak, J. (2021). Reflections on the independent mass me-
dia of post-Soviet countries and political competitiveness. Politics in
Central Europe, 17(3), 565–588.
Sultanova, S. (2014). Challenging the Aliyev regime: Political opposition in
Azerbaijan. Demokratizatsiya, 22(1) 15–27.
178 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
Sundstrom, L. M. I. (2006). Funding civil society: Foreign assistance and NGO
development in Russia. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Surkov, V. (2008). Osnovnye tendencii i perspektivy razvitija sovremennoj Rossii
[Major tendencies and perspectives of the development of contempo-
rary Russia]. Sankt-Petersburg: Izdatelstvo SPBGU.
Surkov, V. (2018). Odinochestvo polukrovki [The loneliness of a half
blood]. Rossija v global'noj politike, (1–3), 124–129.
Surkov, V. (2019). Dolgoe gosudarstvo Putina [The long state of Putin]. No-
vaja gazeta, February 11. https://www.ng.ru/ideas/2019-02-11/5_75
03_surkov.html.
Szczerbiak, A., & Taggart, P. (eds.). (2008). Opposing Europe? The compara-
tive party politics of Euroscepticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tishkov, V. (1997). Ethnicity, nationalism and conflict in and after the Soviet
Union: The mind aflame. London: Sage.
Tishkov, V. (2004). Chechnya: Life in a war-torn society. Los Angeles: Univer-
sity of California Press.
Tismaneanu, V. (2009). Fantasies of salvation: Democracy, nationalism, and
myth in post-Communist Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Treisman, D. (2011). Presidential popularity in a hybrid regime: Russia under
Yeltsin and Putin. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 590–609.
Trochev, A. (2022). Between blaming and naming: Constitutional review of
bans on Communist parties in post-Soviet states. In C.-Y. Huang
(ed.), Constitutionalizing transitional justice (pp. 222–248). New York:
Routledge.
Tucker, J. A. (2007). Enough! Electoral fraud, collective action problems,
and post-Communist colored revolutions. Perspectives on Politics, 5(3),
535–551.
Turovsky, R. (2011). Party systems in post-Soviet states: The shaping of po-
litical competition. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 12(2),
197–213.
Uhlin, A. (2006). Post-Soviet civil society: Democratization in Russia and the
Baltic states. London: Routledge.
Umland, A. (2023). Historical esotericism as a method of cognition: How
Russian pseudoscientists contributed to Moscow's anti-Western turn.
Ideology and Politics Journal, 23(1), 294–308.
V-Dem. (2023a). V-Dem Project / V-Dem methodology, by Kyle Mar-
quardt. Varieties of Democracy, data version 13. https://v-dem.net/
about/v-dem-project/methodology/.
V-Dem. (2023b). Research Programs / Varieties of autocratization. Varie-
ties of Democracy, data version 13, February 2023. https://www.v-d
em.net/our-work/research-programs/varieties-of-autocratization/.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 179
Vachudova, M. A., & Snyder, T. (1996). Are transitions transitory? Two
types of political change in Eastern Europe since 1989. East European
Politics and Societies, 11(1), 1–35.
Varlamova, N. (2021). Universal legal concepts in the Soviet socio-political
context. Ideology and Politics Journal, 2(18), 30–56.
Verdery, K. (1998). Transnationalism, nationalism, citizenship, and prop-
erty: Eastern Europe since 1989. American Ethnologist, 25(2), 291–306.
Vorobiyova-Ray, K. (2010). The capitalist elephant in Kremlin: Surges of cher-
nukha in post-Soviet cinema & television. PhD diss., Carleton University.
Waller, M. J., & Yasmann, V. J. (1995). Russia’s great criminal revolution:
The role of the security services. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Jus-
tice, 11(4), 276–297.
Wallerstein, I. (1984). The politics of the world-economy: The states, the move-
ments and the civilizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Way, L. A. (2016). The authoritarian threat: Weaknesses of autocracy pro-
motion. Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 64–75.
Way, L. A. (2021). The party of power: Authoritarian diaspora and plural-
ism by default in Ukraine. Democratization, 28(3), 484–501.
Wheatley, J. (2017). Georgia from national awakening to Rose Revolution: De-
layed transition in the former Soviet Union. London: Routledge.
Williamson, J. (1993). “Democracy and the ‘Washington Consensus.’”
World Development, 21(8), 1329–1336.
World Bank. (2023). GDP per capita (constant 2010 US$)—Ukraine. World
Bank Official Database. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.
GDP.PCAP.KD?locations=UA.
Youngs, R. (2019). The new patchwork politics of wider Europe. Centre for
European Policy Studies, October 28. https://3dcftas.eu/publication
s/the-new-patchwork-politics-of-wider-europe.
Yurchak, A. (2013). Everything was forever, until it was no more. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Zabortseva, Y. N. (2018). Niyazov’s ideology and its symbolism: The cult
of the leader, nationalism and its suppression of critical thinking. Pol-
itics, Religion & Ideology, 19(4), 510–530.
Index
Abkhazia 48, 54, 60, 67, 79, 80,
82, 118, 123
actor-network theory 35
Aitmatov, Chingiz 45
Akaev, Askar 75
Alexievich, Svetlana 69
Aliyev, Heydar 146, 150, 177
Alma-Ata Accords / Protocol
13, 54
Andrukhovych, Yuri 69, 111
anti-Maidan 81
Arendt, Hannah 23, 28, 49, 163
art, contemporary, in post-
Soviet countries 19, 26, 27,
30, 37, 45, 71, 84, 85, 105,
106, 107, 125, 163, 164, 166,
170, 176, 177, 178
authoritarian belt 155
axis, Belfast-Magadan (see
Belfast-Magadan axis) 41,
63, 160
axis, Dublin-Vladivostok (see
Dublin-Vladivostok axis)
41, 63, 160
Azerbaijan 17, 34, 48, 53, 54, 66,
67, 73, 76, 80, 81, 84, 86, 118,
122, 123, 125, 140, 146, 151,
154, 157, 177
Bakiyev, Kurmanbek 75, 76
Being as such 19, 20
Being, being 7, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22,
24, 25, 30, 37, 41, 51, 58, 60,
66, 73, 78, 81, 97, 105, 108,
111, 113, 118, 120, 123, 126,
154, 161, 169
Being-in-the-world 24
Belarus, elections in; suspicion
of rigged elections in 17,
34, 41, 43, 48, 54, 59, 60, 61,
62, 66, 67, 73, 76, 80, 84, 86,
105, 109, 118, 124, 131, 134,
139, 140, 146, 147, 154, 157,
170, 176
Belavezha Accords 13, 54
Belfast-Magadan axis 41, 63,
160
Bell, Daniel 95, 99, 103, 164
Bolotnaya Square 109
Bolotnaya, protests 109
Bolshevism, Bolshevik 15, 48,
107, 114, 161
Budapest Memorandum 43, 59,
60, 124, 168
Bulgakov, Mikhail 45, 56
caesura, defined; caesura, 1989–
1991 1, 15, 17, 31, 32, 34, 35,
36, 42, 43, 47, 50, 53, 58, 70,
72, 79, 84, 85, 89, 91, 92, 93,
95, 97, 99, 101, 103, 108, 110,
116, 143, 153, 159, 160, 161,
174
Castoriadis, Cornelius 30
catastrophe 19, 32
chaos 23, 29, 46, 68, 90, 93, 141,
143, 144, 145
chernukha 44, 59, 65, 179
civil society organization (CSO)
75, 131
182 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
clan, patronal 67, 73, 105, 144,
146, 147, 148, 157, 161, 172,
174
clientelism 148
Cold War 14, 36, 39, 93, 100, 172
color revolutions (see Orange
Revolution, Rose
Revolution, Tulip
Revolution) 40, 75, 76, 77,
101, 103, 134, 146, 156, 174
Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) 54, 59, 103
constitution, of USSR 115
continuity, interwar 14, 15, 35,
36, 41, 43, 94, 113, 143
core, of world-system 15, 38, 44,
47, 59, 69, 72, 74, 79, 90, 92,
99, 102, 107
corruption, grand, systemic 45,
56, 68, 76, 100, 104, 105, 145,
148, 149, 160, 166, 169, 172
Council of Europe 41, 95, 97, 99,
105, 119, 124, 125, 126, 176
creativity, and destruction 91,
94
creativity, autocratic 144, 150,
154, 155, 157
creativity, democratic 87, 113,
114, 124, 128, 134, 136, 140,
144, 155, 157
Crimea, Crimean Peninsula,
annexation of 13, 48, 53, 54,
60, 81, 124, 147, 155, 156,
176
Criminal Code, Russian 51
Darendorf, Ralf 95
de Soto, Hernando 96
decommunization, in post-
Soviet countries 60, 115,
116, 174
deideologization 151
demodernization 64, 87, 155
de-Putinization 161
de-Stalinization 56
Donbas, war in, occupation of
81, 83, 156
Dublin-Vladivostok axis 160
East 28, 39, 93, 95, 96, 97, 100,
102, 103, 104, 108, 163, 170,
171, 172, 174, 179
Eastern Bloc 32, 40, 44, 90, 92,
93, 95, 99, 101, 107, 108
Eastern Neighborhood policy
80
educational system 78
elections 37, 60, 63, 67, 102, 109,
113, 115, 128, 129, 131, 134,
136, 140, 150, 154, 156
elites 32, 41, 43, 52, 54, 55, 56,
57, 58, 59, 60, 63, 64, 66, 70,
73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 90, 103,
111, 119, 128, 129, 134, 139,
141, 150, 153
emancipation 27, 28, 32, 36, 51,
87, 89, 141, 159, 160
ethnonationalism,
ethnonationalist 14, 68, 103,
107, 146, 161
Eurasianism, Eurasianist 71,
107, 164
Euromaidan 80, 83, 109, 157,
173, 174
European integration 96, 103,
105, 125, 140
Europeanization 14, 16, 36, 39,
41, 43, 59, 75, 84, 91, 92, 93,
95, 97, 99, 105, 160, 165
Euroskepticism 100, 104
Fomenkovians 71
INDEX 183
Fukuyama, Francis 96, 167
German, Aleksei 84, 85
glasnost 39, 46, 72, 167
Golovakha, Yevhen 98, 141,
168, 175
Gorbachev, Mikhail 32, 39, 46,
63, 73, 74, 117, 148, 163, 167,
168
Gumilevians 71
Habermas, Jürgen 27, 39, 95,
168
Havel, Václav 95, 98, 168
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
24, 169
hegemony, Western, Soviet
state 13, 15, 36, 37, 38, 41,
44, 46, 48, 55, 59, 60, 63, 66,
69, 70, 71, 72, 75, 76, 79, 84,
86, 87, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 99,
102, 103, 106, 110, 111, 115,
116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 125,
138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 144,
158, 164, 165, 171, 175, 177,
178
Heidegger, Martin 19, 24, 28,
30, 108, 163, 166, 169, 172
history 14, 15, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24,
25, 30, 32, 35, 36, 40, 44, 45,
48, 54, 56, 67, 71, 89, 92, 93,
108, 111, 150, 159, 161, 164,
167, 170, 174, 175, 177
Huntington, Samuel 28, 29, 37,
40, 83, 96, 169
Husserl, Edmund 30
ideologeme 94
imagery 29, 89, 90, 91, 98, 108,
109
inequality 39, 56, 57, 78, 85, 109,
169
interobjectivity, interobjective
22, 25
intersubjectivity, intersubjective
22, 25, 26
intimacy 48, 117
Islam Karimov 152
jeansa 72
Judt, Tony 92, 95, 170
KGB 56, 60, 115, 150
khozraschet 50
koinônia 22, 31
Kolakowski, Leszek 95, 170
Kuchma, Leonid 63, 73, 75
legitimacy, legitimation 49, 59,
67, 80, 94, 95, 121, 123, 134,
147, 148, 150
Lenin, Vladimir 15, 28, 61, 172
Lukashenka, Aliaksandr 66, 73,
109, 118, 147
Maidan 81, 177
Marxism, Marxist 15, 16, 32, 45,
48, 50, 57, 65, 92, 94, 95, 96,
97, 109, 114
memory, policies; memory,
suppression of 30, 34, 57,
77, 78, 87, 106, 108, 111, 152,
171, 172, 177
Meshkov, Yuriy 60
migration 61, 78, 164, 171, 172,
173
Nagorno-Karabakh 48, 53, 54,
60, 67, 82, 118, 122, 123
narrative, narration 93, 170
national-conservative 77, 108,
111, 157
Nazarbayev, Nursultan 74, 146,
163
neoimperialism, neoimperialist
107
184 THE POST-SOVIET HUMAN
neoliberal 37, 46, 55, 56, 57, 58,
59, 64, 94, 96, 102, 107, 144
neopatrimonialism 105, 149,
167
neo-Sovietism 150
neotraditionalism 152
Niyazov, Saparmurat 146, 147,
152, 179
nongovernmental organization
(NGO) 137, 138, 139, 150,
169, 173, 178
nonprofit organization (NGO)
137, 138, 139, 150, 169, 173,
178
North Caucasus 54, 60, 79, 124,
154
Nothing, Nothingness 24, 31,
32, 47
oligarchization 146, 147, 174
One Big Europe 39, 93, 99, 160
Orange Revolution (Ukraine,
2004) 76, 103, 156, 171
Ossetia 54, 60, 67, 79, 80, 82,
119, 123
Ostalgie 59, 65, 150
Panina, Natalia 71, 98, 141, 168,
175
Panslavism, Panslavist 107
patrimonial 105
Pelevin, Viktor 69, 85
perestroika 32, 34, 39, 44, 46, 48,
49, 50, 51, 55, 57, 58, 64, 68,
72, 74, 86, 116, 143, 167, 176,
177
periphery, of world-system 44,
53, 59, 72, 78, 79, 81, 82, 85,
90, 99, 110, 165, 173
political freedom 37, 61, 73, 74,
76, 86, 114, 125, 128, 131,
136, 140, 141, 147, 148, 160
polyarchy 67
Popovych, Myroslav 109, 111,
175
power vertical 74, 145
presidentialism 148, 157, 175
press freedom 134
public sphere, enlargement of
during communism 46, 49,
53, 58, 92, 114, 115, 116, 134,
136, 144
Putin, Vladimir 13, 74, 84, 109,
131, 134, 147, 150, 151, 152,
155, 156, 164, 170, 175, 178
pyramid, of power, patronal 74,
146, 147
reideologization 151
religion 48, 52, 58, 62, 65, 80,
137, 173
religious freedom 52, 117, 150
revolution 15, 23, 28, 29, 32, 47,
49, 50, 51, 54, 55, 76, 85, 89,
95, 141, 159, 163, 168, 172,
179
Revolution, 1991 7, 44, 50, 52,
55, 56, 58, 59, 64, 65, 69, 73,
76, 78, 93, 97, 116, 159
revolution, entrepreneurial 50
Revolution, February (Russia,
2017) 47
Revolution, October, Great
Socialist (Russia, 2017) 47
Revolution, Orange 76, 103,
156, 171
revolution, religious 50
Revolution, Rose 75, 103, 179
revolution, sexual 50, 51
INDEX 185
Revolution, Tulip 75, 76, 103
Ricoeur, Paul 30, 176
rule of law 37, 86, 94, 105, 116,
122, 125, 126, 132, 140, 141,
145, 151, 156, 161, 163, 165,
175
Rus’ 52, 71
Russian-Ukrainian war 87, 108,
161, 171, 174
Russo-Georgian War 79, 80,
104, 155
Saakashvili, Mikhail 75, 76, 79,
154, 155, 170
Salnikov, Alexey 85
Sartre, Jean-Paul 24, 30, 176
Schumpeter, Joseph 91, 176
Schütz, Alfred 30
Second Karabakh War (2020) 82
Serebrennikov, Kirill 84, 85
sexuality 48, 58, 117
Shevardnadze, Eduard 75
Sorokin, Vladimir 45, 85, 159,
177
South Caucasus, de facto states
in 49, 54, 57, 64, 75, 90, 123
Soviet Man 15, 48, 50, 51, 53, 65,
69, 70, 117, 143, 159, 172,
177
Supreme Soviet, state/central,
republican 55, 115, 117, 118,
122, 127, 128, 129
terrorism [inflicted by who on
whom?] 74
tetrad, post-Soviet 14, 16, 36, 41,
43, 84, 86, 129, 141, 160
Thaw 56
The Master and Margarita, novel
by Mikhail Bulgakov 45, 56
transgressive 25, 26, 29, 31
transit 90, 174
transition 15, 47, 58, 59, 64, 65,
66, 73, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94,
95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101,
102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107,
110, 111, 143, 160, 163, 165,
167, 171, 173, 175, 176, 179
transitology 104, 110
Tymoshenko, Yulia 109, 154
Union Treaty 53, 117
Varieties of Democracy 37, 113,
178
Vasyanovych, Valentyn 84, 85
Washington Consensus 96, 179
world-system 44, 59, 72, 74, 78,
79, 90, 92, 99, 174
Yanukovych, Viktor 76
Yeltsin, Boris 54, 63, 67, 74, 117,
118, 178
Yushchenko, Viktor 75, 76
Zelensky, Volodymyr
(president of Ukraine,
2019−) 119
Zhirinovsky, Vladimir 109, 154
