{"title":"苏中政府模式与自由民主政府模式的悖论","authors":"Rouslan Khestanov, Artyom Kosmarski","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-75-94","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on two models of political and state formations, those of liberal-democratic and Soviet-Chinese. The use of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of decision in analyzing their systemic foundations opens a new perspective on both these models and the contemporary political process. A brief overview of the discussion on the topic of decision-making in organizations was offered, and the heuristic value of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of decision was substantiated. One of his key definitions of decision is that decision-making can be described as the transformation of uncertainty into risk. In this view, decision is seen as a function and element of the organization or organizational systems. An organization continuously makes decisions, though none solve the problem because it is based on a paradox: only those issues that are fundamentally undecidable can be decided. At the same time, each new decision is not only a response to the challenges of the surrounding world, but is contingently determined by a series of previous decisions. Therefore, one can say that the decision-making process is based on the paradox that constitutes the organization and determines its specificity and identity. The article demonstrates that the liberal-democratic model is based on the paradox of politics and administration. The Soviet-Chinese model is based on the paradox of party and state.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Paradoxes of the Soviet-Chinese and Liberal-Democratic Models of Government\",\"authors\":\"Rouslan Khestanov, Artyom Kosmarski\",\"doi\":\"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-75-94\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article focuses on two models of political and state formations, those of liberal-democratic and Soviet-Chinese. The use of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of decision in analyzing their systemic foundations opens a new perspective on both these models and the contemporary political process. A brief overview of the discussion on the topic of decision-making in organizations was offered, and the heuristic value of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of decision was substantiated. One of his key definitions of decision is that decision-making can be described as the transformation of uncertainty into risk. In this view, decision is seen as a function and element of the organization or organizational systems. An organization continuously makes decisions, though none solve the problem because it is based on a paradox: only those issues that are fundamentally undecidable can be decided. At the same time, each new decision is not only a response to the challenges of the surrounding world, but is contingently determined by a series of previous decisions. Therefore, one can say that the decision-making process is based on the paradox that constitutes the organization and determines its specificity and identity. The article demonstrates that the liberal-democratic model is based on the paradox of politics and administration. The Soviet-Chinese model is based on the paradox of party and state.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43314,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-75-94\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-75-94","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Paradoxes of the Soviet-Chinese and Liberal-Democratic Models of Government
The article focuses on two models of political and state formations, those of liberal-democratic and Soviet-Chinese. The use of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of decision in analyzing their systemic foundations opens a new perspective on both these models and the contemporary political process. A brief overview of the discussion on the topic of decision-making in organizations was offered, and the heuristic value of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of decision was substantiated. One of his key definitions of decision is that decision-making can be described as the transformation of uncertainty into risk. In this view, decision is seen as a function and element of the organization or organizational systems. An organization continuously makes decisions, though none solve the problem because it is based on a paradox: only those issues that are fundamentally undecidable can be decided. At the same time, each new decision is not only a response to the challenges of the surrounding world, but is contingently determined by a series of previous decisions. Therefore, one can say that the decision-making process is based on the paradox that constitutes the organization and determines its specificity and identity. The article demonstrates that the liberal-democratic model is based on the paradox of politics and administration. The Soviet-Chinese model is based on the paradox of party and state.
期刊介绍:
Russian Sociological Review is an academic peer-reviewed journal of theoretical, empirical and historical research in social sciences. Russian Sociological Review publishes four issues per year. Each issue includes original research papers, review articles and translations of contemporary and classical works in sociology, political theory and social philosophy. Russian Sociological Review invites scholars from all the social scientific disciplines to submit papers which address the fundamental issues of social sciences from various conceptual and methodological perspectives. Understood broadly the fundamental issues include but not limited to: social action and agency, social order, narrative, space and time, mobilities, power, etc. Russian Sociological Review covers the following domains of scholarship: -Contemporary and classical social theory -Theories of social order and social action -Social methodology -History of sociology -Russian social theory -Sociology of space -Sociology of mobilities -Social interaction -Frame analysis -Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis -Cultural sociology -Political sociology, philosophy and theory -Narrative theory and analysis -Human geography and urban studies