Столетний юбилей Февральской и Октябрьской революций в этом году дает повод вновь обратиться к анализу тех уже далеких, но по-прежнему крайне важных событий. Центральная тема настоящей работы – анализ соотношения революции и модернизации, тех взаимосвя-зей, опасностей и ловушек, которые возникают вследствие ускоренного развития общества и могут вести к революциям. Начиная с Нового времени в основе революций в большинстве случаев лежат серьезные диспропорции в развитии общества, которые появились в результате уско-ренной модернизации. Эти диспропорции усиливаются быстрым ростом населения, особенно городского. В статье показано, почему революции происходят в период после некоторого (порой длительного) повышения уровня жизни населения, а также почему они возможны именно в эконо-мически успешных обществах, каким была предреволюционная Россия. Делается вывод, что революции на том или ином этапе модернизации – скорее закономерность, чем случайность. В статье показан механизм, в результате которого общество попадает в особого рода – модерниза-ционные – ловушки. Если мальтузианская ловушка связана с отставанием производительных сил от темпов роста населения и в целом недостаточным динамизмом изменений, то модернизационная ловушка, напротив, – с чрезмерно быстрыми изменениями, за которыми трансформация ряда важнейших отношений и институтов общества не успевает. В России сложился особый тип модернизационной ловушки – мальтузи-анско-марксова ловушка. Таким образом, автор анализирует Русскую революцию в связи с тенденциями всемирно-исторического процесса, вы-деляет некоторые общие причины революций и показывает, как эти причины преломились в нашей истории. Он обращает внимание как на сход-ства Русской революции с другими крупными революциями, так и на не-которые ее особенности. Это дает возможность ответить на вопросы, была ли Русская революция неизбежной; можно ли было избежать столь радикальных социальных преобразований, которые имели место в первый период советской истории. The centenary of the February and October 1917 Russian revolutions gives reason to once again analyze those distant in the past but remaining important events. The topic of the present article is the analysis of the interrelations, threats and traps which result from an accelerated society’s development and may lead to revolutions. Starting from the New Age revolutions were mostly caused by serious disproportions in societal development which emerged as a result of accelerated modernization. Theses disproportions are reinforced by a rapid increase of population especially of its urban part. The article shows why revolutions occur in the periods after a certain (sometimes long lasting) improvement of the quality of life as well as why they are possible right in the economically successful societies to which the pre-revolutionary Russia could be attributed. The conclusion made is that a revolution at a certain stage of modernization is regularity rather than a random event. The article also reveals the mechanism of state’s getting into a trap of a certain type – the modernization trap. While the Malthusian trap is associated with the gap between the productive forces and the population growth rates and generally insufficient dynamics of changes, the modernization trap is on the contrary connected with too rapid changes which leave behind the transformations of a number of important links and institutions within a society. In Russia a peculiar type of modernization trap was observed, namely, the Maltjusian-Marxian one. Thus, the author analyzes the Russian revolution in terms of the trends in the world historical process and defines some general causes of revolutions showing how those causes were manifested in the history of Russia. He pays attention both to the similarities between the Russian revolution and other great revolutions and to its peculiarities. This gives an opportunity to answer the question whether the Russian revolution was inevitable and whether it was possible to avoid those radical social transformations that occurred in the first period of the Soviet history. Подробнее https://www.socionauki.ru/journal/articles/1313670/

Рассмотрены структурно-демографические факторы, оказавшие влияние на политическую стабильность во второй половине ХХ – начале ХХI века в Иране в целом и в некоторых его регионах с наибольшим риском политических потрясений. Приводится сравнение с частично сходными ситуациями в Косово. Особое внимание уделено динамике чис-ленности городской молодежи и доле молодежи 20–29 лет во взрослом населении. The factors of demographic structure are considered that have generally influenced the political stability in the late 20th – early 21st centuries in Iran and in some of its regions running the risk of political shock. The situation is compared to similar situations in Kosovo. A special consideration is given to the dynamics of the urban youth number and the share of 20–29 years old people in the total population.

On the basis of factors such as ideology, the degree of populism, political leadership and form of the government a complex comparative
analysis of the formation and development of the party system in Lithuania and Russia in the post-communist period was
carried out. Summing up, it should be noted that both Russian and Lithuanian party parliamentarism are being progressively consolidated.
At the same time they continue to suffer from many shortcomings owing to negative historical heritage, characterized by
authoritarian single-party system, cult of the leader, ideological populism and undeveloped civil society, and also because of the
prolonged transition period of young democracies. Speaking about the prospects of the development of the party systems of two
countries, it can be assumed that in the medium term the current situation should not change dramatically.
Igor Ivanov, Vadim Volovoj Comparative Analysis of the Party Systems Development in Russia and Lithuania // The Russian Academic Journal, Vol. 28, Issue 2, 2014, pp. 0-0

On the basis of factors such as ideology, the degree of populism, political leadership and form of the government a complex comparative analysis of the formation and development of the party system in Lithuania and Russia in the post-communist period was carried out. Summing up, it should be noted that both Russian and Lithuanian party parliamentarism are being progressively consolidated. At the same time they continue to suffer from many shortcomings owing to negative historical heritage, characterized by authoritarian single-party system, cult of the leader, ideological populism and undeveloped civil society, and also because of the prolonged transition period of young democracies. Speaking about the prospects of the development of the party systems of two countries, it can be assumed that in the medium term the current situation should not change dramatically.