Political technologies: structural and functional indifference

The problem field of understanding the essence of political technologies has been defined in the article. The nature of political technologies has been analysed. Semantic components of political technologies have been studied. The place and meaning of the adjective “political” in the semantic content of political technologies have been determined, the conditions for the acquisition of political functions by social technologies have been indicated. Numerical uncertainty in relation to political technologies has been removed. The peculiarity of adopting political technologies in their activities and other social subjects that differ from political actors has been shown. The author’s vision of the essence of the content of political technologies has been proposed.

The structure of political technologies in the context of its political indifference has been studied. Various authors’ approaches of scientists to determining the structure of political technologies have been analysed. The author’s vision of the structure of political technologies from the point of view of their political indifference has been offered. We refered to components of the structure of political technologies: the goal setting, the conceptual component, the content component, the procedural component, the performance-evaluation component. A brief description of the components of the structure of political technologies has been given.

The functions of political technologies from the point of view of their political indifference have been explored. The methodological bases, that served as the basis for determining these functions are political interests which are the political driver that encourages political actors to use a particular political technology or a combination of them have been offered.. The most significant, in our opinion, functions of political technologies have been highlighted. Examples of individual political technologies that most clearly characterize the selected political functions have been given. These examples show the functional indifference of political technologies.

The functional indifference of political technologies has been shown: in terms of their content, structure and functions, political technologies are "indifferent" to the political process, to the person who uses them.

1. Bol’shoi tolkovyi slovar’ russkogo yazyka [ The large explanatory dictionary of the Russian language], gl. red. S.A. Kuznetsov, St. Petersburg, Norit, 2006, 1536 p.

2. Butrin S. M. Politicheskie tekhnologii protivodeistviya terror-izmu [Political technologies for countering terrorism], Avtoref. dis. ... kand. polit. nauk: 23.00.02, Moscow, 2006, 22 p.

3. Vilkov A. A., Timofeev E. I. Politicheskaya tekhnologiya brendirovaniya regiona kak vozmozhnost’ formirovaniya ego polozhitel’nogo imidzha i povysheniya investitsionnoi privlekatel’nosti [Political technology of branding of the region as an opportunity to form its positive image and increase of investment attractiveness], Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Seriya: Sotsiologiya. Politologiya [Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Sociology. Politol-ogy], 2019, vol. 19, no.3, pp. 304—311.

4. Volodenkov S. V. Politicheskii menedzhment i upravlenie sovremennymi politicheskimi kampaniyami [Political management and managing contemporary political campaigns], Moscow, RG-Press, 2019, 584 p.

5. Greenfield A. Radikal’nye tekhnologii: ustroistvo povsed-nevnoi zhizni [Radical technologies: design of everyday life], per. I. Kushnarevoi, Moscow, Izd. dom “Delo” RANKhiGS, 2018, 421 p.

6. Egorova Yu. A. Rol’ tselepolaganiya v sisteme upravleniya [The role of goal setting in the management system], Mezhdu-narodnyi zhurnal prikladnykh i fundamental’nykh issledo-vanii, 2010, no. 9, pp. 91—92.

7. Zabuzov O. N. Gosudarstvennyi perevorot: dikhotomiya smysla [State Coup: a dichotomy of meaning], GosReg: go-sudarstvennoe regulirovanie obshchestvennykh otnoshenii, 2015, no. 2 (12), pp. 18.

8. Kak vyigryvayut vybory v SShA, Velikobritanii i Evrosoyuze: Analiz politicheskikh tekhnologii [How elections in the USA, Great Britain and the European Union win: Analysis of political technologies], Moscow, OOO “Pablis”, 2015, 480 p.

9. Lepeshkina A. B. Ponyatie, sushchnost’, struktura, klassi-fikatsiya i rol’ pedagogicheskoi tekhnologii v obrazovatel’nom protsesse [Concept, essence, structure, classification and the role of pedagogical technology in the educational process], Mezh-dunarodnyi nauchnyi zhurnal “Simvol nauki”, 2017, no. 021, pp. 155-157.

10. Mann M. Istochniki sotsial’noi vlasti: v 4 t. T. 1. Istoriya vlasti ot istokov do 1760 goda n.e. [Sources of social power: A history ofpower from its origins until 1760 CE], Moscow, Izdatel’skii dom “Delo” RANKhiGS, 2018, 760 p.

11. Minchenko E. N. Universal’nye izbiratel’nye tekhnologii i stranovaya spetsifika: opyt rossiiskikh politicheskikh kon-sul’tantov [ Universal electoral technologies and country specifics: the experience of Russian political consultants]. Available at: www.minchenko.ru/netcat_files/pdf/universalqnye_stranovye_tehnologii.pdf (accessed 22.04.2020).

12. Nagaichuk A. F. Struktura i mekhanizm sotsial’no-politich-eskikh tekhnologii regulirovaniya konflikta [Structure and mechanism of socio-political conflict management technologies], Konfliktologiya [Konfliktologia], 2017, no. 12 (4), pp. 76-92.

13. Naim M. Konets vlasti. Ot zalov zasedanii do polei srazhenii, ot tserkvi do gosudarstva. Pochemu upravlyat’ segodnya nuzhno inache [ The end of power. From boardrooms to battlefields, from church to state. Why do you need to manage today differently], Moscow, AST, 2016, 512 p.

14. Nay S. Joseph (mladshii). Budushchee vlasti [The future ofpower], Moscow, AST, 2014, 480 p.

15. Ozhegov S. I. Slovar’ russkogo yazyka [Dictionary of the Russian language], Moscow, Rus. yaz., 1986, 797 p.

16. Solov’ev A. I. Politologiya: Politicheskaya teoriya, politich-eskie tekhnologii: Uchebnik dlya studentov vuzov [Political Science: Political theory, political technologies: Textbook for University students], Moscow, Aspekt Press, 2003, 559 p.

17. Starkova E. V. Struktura i soderzhanie modul’noi tekhnologii razvitiya dvigatel’no-koordinatsionnykh kachestv u studentok pedagogicheskikh vuzov [Structure and content of modular technology for the development of motor coordination qualities among female students of pedagogical universities] , Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoi kul’tury [ Theory and Practice of Physical Culture], 2009, no. 5, pp. 31-36.

18. Wise D., Ross T. Nevidimoe pravitel’stvo [Invisible government], Moscow, Voenizdat, 1965, 304 p.

19. Shabrov O.F. Politicheskie tekhnologii [Political Technologies], Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie [Knowledge. Understanding. Skill], 2012, no. 4, pp. 328-330.

20. Shmitt K. Ponyatie politicheskogo [The concept of political], Voprosy sotsiologii, 1992, no. 1, pp. 35-67.

21. Shcherbina V. V. Sotsial’nye tekhnologii: istoriya poyavleniya termina, transformatsiya soderzhaniya, sovremennoe sostoyanie [Social technologies: the history of the term, the transformation of content, the current state], Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [SociologicalStudies], 2014. no. 7, pp. 113-124.

22. Kurnosova E. Sotsial’nye seti v tsifrakh [Social networks in numbers]. Available at: https://ict.moscow/static/18apr-rif19-8-1230-kurnosova.pdf (accessed 22.04.2020).