Балинт Мадлович - Посткоммунистические режимы. Концептуальная структура. Том 1

Magyar B. Parallel System Narratives: Polish and Hungarian Regime Formations Compared // Stubborn Structures: Reconceptualizing Post-Communist Regimes. Budapest; New York: CEU Press, 2019. P. 611–655.

Collier D., Levitsky S. Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research // World Politics. 1997. Vol. 49. № 3. P. 430–451.

Пример метаанализа см.: Bogaards M. How to Classify Hybrid Regimes? Defective Democracy and Electoral Authoritarianism // Democratization. 2009. Vol. 16. № 2. P. 399–423.

Diamond L. Thinking About Hybrid Regimes.

Croissant A. From Transition to Defective Democracy: Mapping Asian Democratization // Democratization. 2004. Vol. 11. № 5. P. 156–178.

Bozóki A. Beyond «Illiberal Democracy»: The Case of Hungary // New Politics of Decisionism. Hague: Eleven International Publishing, 2019. P. 94–98.

Bozóki A., Hegedűs D. Democracy, Dictatorship and Hybrid Regimes.

Wigell M. Mapping «Hybrid Regimes»: Regime Types and Concepts in Comparative Politics // Democratization. 2008. Vol. 15. № 2. P. 230–250.

Gilbert L., Mohseni P. Beyond Authoritarianism: The Conceptualization of Hybrid Regimes // Studies in Comparative International Development. 2011. Vol. 46. № 3. P. 270.

Kornai J. The System Paradigm Revisited: Clarification and Additions in the Light Of Experiences in the Post-Communist Region // Stubborn Structures: Reconceptualizing Post-Communist Regimes. P. 21–74.

Ср.: Armony A., Schamis H. Babel in Democratization Studies // Journal of Democracy. 2005. Vol. 16. № 4. P. 113–128.

Dobson W. The Dictator’ s Learning Curve: Inside the Global Battle for Democrac y . New York: Anchor, 2013.

Слово «общинный», выбранное для перевода третьего из типов социального действия, который в оригинале обозначается как communal , следует понимать в широком смысле – как относящийся к тесно связанному сообществу людей, разделяющих некий набор ценностей, культуру или идентичность. Нам хотелось бы избежать коннотаций, отсылающих к ограниченному числу конкретных инкарнаций общинных отношений, получивших название «община», таких, например, как крестьянская община. В понимании авторов социальное действие внутри семьи или дружеского круга также будет являться общинным ( прим. пер. ).

Offe C. Political Corruption: Conceptual and Practical Issues // Building a Trustworthy State in Post-Socialist Transition. Political Evolution and Institutional Change. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. P. 78.

North D., Wallis J., Weingas B. Violence and Social Orders: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Hale H. Patronal Politics: Eurasian Regime Dynamics in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Hale H. Patronal Politics. P. 61–94.

Ibid.

Мадьяр Б. Анатомия посткоммунистического мафиозного государства: На примере Венгрии. М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 2016.

Hanson P., Teague E. Russian Political Capitalism and Its Environment // Varieties of Capitalism in Post-Communist Countries. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2007. P. 149–164.

Magyar B., Madlovics B. From petty corruption to criminal state: A critique of the corruption perceptions index as applied to the post-communist region. Intersections // East European Journal of Society and Politics. 2019. Vol. 5. № 2. P. 103–129.

Stefes C. H. Understanding Post-Soviet Transitions: Corruption, Collusion and Clientelism. New York: Springer, 2006; Klíma M. Informal Politics in Post-Communist Europe: Political Parties, Clientelism and State Capture. Milton: Routledge, 2019.

Bokros L. Hanyatlás [Упадок] // Élet És Irodalom. 2015. Vol. 59. № 1–2.

Snyder T. The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America. New York: Tim Duggan Books, 2018; Motyl A. Putin’ s Russia as a Fascist Political System // Communist and Post-Communist Studies. 2016. Vol. 49. № 1. P. 25–36; Ungváry R. A láthatatlan valóság: A fasisztoid mutáció a mai Magyarországon [Невидимая реальность: Фашизоидная мутация в современной Венгрии]. Pozsony: Kalligram, 2014.

Inozemtsev V. Neo-Feudalism Explained // The American Interest. 01.03.2011. URL: https://www.the-american-interest.com/2011/03/01/neo-feudalism-explained/; Heller Á. Hungary: How Liberty Can Be Lost // Social Research: An International Quarterly. 2019. Vol. 86. № 1. P. 1–22; Shlapentokh V., Woods J. Contemporary Russia as a Feudal Society: A New Perspective on the Post-Soviet Era. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

См.: Szelényi I., Mihályi P. Rent-Seekers, Profits, Wages and Inequality: The Top 20 %. Cham: Palgrave Pivot, 2019; Roniger L. Political Clientelism, Democracy and Market Economy // Comparative Politics. 2004. Vol. 36. № 3. P. 353–375; Åslund A. Russia’ s Crony Capitalism: The Path from Market Economy to Kleptocracy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2019; Dawisha K. Putin’ s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014.

См. пример метаанализа: Guliyev F. Personal Rule, Neopatrimonialism, and Regime Typologies: Integrating Dahlian and Weberian Approaches to Regime Studies // Democratization. 2011. Vol. 18. № 3. P. 575–601.

В анализе режимов, сделанном в рамках теории Вебера, об этом различи забывают. См.: Körösényi A, Illés G., Gyulai A. The Orbán Regime: Plebiscitary Leader Democracy in the Making. London: Routledge, 2020. Ср.: Szelényi I., Mihályi P. Varieties of Post-Communist Capitalism: A Comparative Analysis of Russia, Eastern Europe and China. Studies in Critical Social Sciences. Leiden; Boston: Brill Academic Pub, 2019.

Sartori G. Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics // The American Political Science Review. 1970. Vol. 64. № 4. P. 1033–1053.