ANTI-SOFT POWER IN POLITICAL THEORY AND PRACTICE

Abstract

Thus, the present article aims at answering the question whether there exists an anti-soft power, both as ideology and practice, which could be efficient enough for the state to protect itself from the impact of external informational and cultural influence. The theory of soft power is based on the idea that its object accepts normative subordination. Consequently, such object should not pursue major political ambitions, should be ready to collaborate within the established world order and, above all, agree with superiority of the world leaders and the rules they impose. Anti-soft power is different. The core idea is that its holder is not willing to comply with the opponent’s superiority as well as its rules of the game. The subject of anti-soft power is politically ambitious and never recognizes its dependence or inferiority. Regardless of being strong or weak, it will not admit its junior or secondary position in a community. We saw a few such subjects during the era of globalization. However, the globalization crisis may change the situation and thus give rise to a new political trend, that is the resurgence of anti-soft power. The article states that anti-soft power has repeatedly blocked the attempts of one country to influence another country. In the course of history, we can single out three main types of policy: 1) the policy based on supremacism, or chauvinism; 2) the policy based on ideological alternatives; 3) the policy based on segment restrictions of the oppo nent’s soft power. Each of these, though, can bring its subjects both political benefits and unwanted costs.