I was wondering if I would see "hybrid regime" and I was not disappointed. Kudos. Jokes aside, I would argue that the current Russian regime is just another iteration of the same (maybe even unique) regime that has been in place since the end of the Mongol Yoke, with its main characteristics, per historian Andrei Fursov (yes, I know), being 1)supralegality and 2) existence of a single political subject that would actively oppose emergence of other independent political subjects.
Yes, but at that level of abstraction, it doesn't tell us much more then that there is a generic through-line across Russian history. Which is fine but not tremendously useful when analyzing across a ~30 year stretch.
Oh, yes, you are absolutely right, although it is still useful to situate a more concrete analysis within a larger historical and theoretical framework. For all its worth, yours is one of the better analysis of modern Russia, for my money at least. Just the mention that many ethnonationalists are (or were in many cases, 2014 muddled a lot of things) against the regime makes this analysis head and shoulders above what can usually be read on the issue.
I appreciate the kinds words! And yes, absolutely valid to note the longue duree elements of Russian 'political culture' or state-society organization (or whatever one might like to put that under). For my more granular purposes, it's often more implied than stated outright. Still, the point is welcome!
I was wondering if I would see "hybrid regime" and I was not disappointed. Kudos. Jokes aside, I would argue that the current Russian regime is just another iteration of the same (maybe even unique) regime that has been in place since the end of the Mongol Yoke, with its main characteristics, per historian Andrei Fursov (yes, I know), being 1)supralegality and 2) existence of a single political subject that would actively oppose emergence of other independent political subjects.
Yes, but at that level of abstraction, it doesn't tell us much more then that there is a generic through-line across Russian history. Which is fine but not tremendously useful when analyzing across a ~30 year stretch.
Oh, yes, you are absolutely right, although it is still useful to situate a more concrete analysis within a larger historical and theoretical framework. For all its worth, yours is one of the better analysis of modern Russia, for my money at least. Just the mention that many ethnonationalists are (or were in many cases, 2014 muddled a lot of things) against the regime makes this analysis head and shoulders above what can usually be read on the issue.
I appreciate the kinds words! And yes, absolutely valid to note the longue duree elements of Russian 'political culture' or state-society organization (or whatever one might like to put that under). For my more granular purposes, it's often more implied than stated outright. Still, the point is welcome!