Anti-Soft Power in Political Theory and Practice

The article deals with the study of the anti-soft power. The concept of soft power took over the modern political discourse. The opportunities to counteract such power have not been considered properly so far. The proponents of liberal paradigm, trapped in ideology of its exclusiveness, failed to study this issue. Thus, the present article aims at answering the question whether there exists an anti-soft power, both as ideology and practice, which could be efficient enough for the state to protect itself from the impact of external informational and cultural influence. The theory of soft power is based on the idea that its object accepts normative subordination. Consequently, such object should not pursue major political ambitions, should be ready to collaborate within the established world order and, above all, agree with superiority of the world leaders and the rules they impose. Anti-soft power is different. The core idea is that its holder is not willing to comply with the opponent’s superiority as well as its rules of the game. The subject of anti-soft power is politically ambitious and never recognizes its dependence or inferiority. Regardless of being strong or weak, it will not admit its junior or secondary position in a community. We saw a few such subjects during the era of globalization. However, the globalization crisis may change the situation and thus give rise to a new political trend, that is the resurgence of anti-soft power. The article states that anti-soft power has repeatedly blocked the attempts of one country to influence another country. In the course of history, we can single out three main types of policy: 1) the policy based on supremacism, or chauvinism; 2) the policy based on ideological alternatives; 3) the policy based on segment restrictions of the opponent’s soft power. Each of these, though, can bring its subjects both political benefits and unwanted costs.

1. (2018). Kodeks Busido. Khagakure. Sokrytoe v listve [Bushido Code. Hagakure. Hidden by the Leaves]. Moscow: Eksmo. 188 p.

2. Akopyan L. (2010). Muzyka XX veka: entsiklopedicheskij slovar' [Music of the XX century: an encyclopedic dictionary]. Moscow: Praktika. 855 p.

3. Alekseeva T. (2016). “Myagkaya sila” v teorii i praktike mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij ["Soft power" in the theory and practice of international relations]. Politicheskoe prostranstvo i social'noe vremya. Identichnost' i povsednevnost' v strukture zhiznennogo mira. XXX Harakskij forum. Yalta. P. 5–21.

4. Allenov S. (2003). “Konservativnaya revolyutsiya” v Germanii 1920-kh – nachala 1930-kh godov (Problemy interpretatsii) [The “Conservative Revolution” in Germany in the 1920s and early 1930s (Problems of Interpretation)]. Polis. No 4. P. 94–207.

5. Almond G. (1950). The American People and Foreign Policy. New York: Praeger. 269 p.

6. Almond G. (1956). Comparative Political Systems. Journal of Politics. Vol. 18. No. 3. P. 396–397.

7. Almond G., Verba S. (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 562 p.

8. Angell N. (1910). The Great Illusion: A Study of the Relation of Military Power in Nations to their Economic and Social Advantage. New York: G.P. Putnam's & Sons. 388 p.

9. Bajkov A. (2014). «Myagkaya moshch'» Evropejskogo Soyuza v global'nom silovom ravnovesii: evrorossijskij trek [The EU Soft Power in the Global Equilibrium] // Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta. 2014. No. 2 (35). P. 36–46.

10. Berdyaev N. (2007). Sud'ba Rossii. [The Fate of Russia]. Moscow: Eksmo. 640 p.

11. Bogaturov A. (2004). Istoki amerikanskogo povedeniya [The sources of American conduct]. Rossiya v global'noj politike. No. 6. P. 80–97.

12. Buchner B. (2013). Wagners Welttheater. Die Geschichte der Bayreuther Festspiele zwischen Kunst und Politik. [Wagner's world theater. The history of the Bayreuth Festival between art and politics]. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

13. Burlinova N. (2014). Publichnaya diplomatiya Rossii: praktika i problemy stanovleniya [Russian public diplomacy: practice and problems of formation]. Vestnik analitiki. Vol. 57. No. 3. P. 28–35.

14. Chickering R. (1984). We Men Who Feel Most German: Cultural Study of the Pan-German League, 1886–1914. London: Harper Collins Publishers. 267 p.

15. Cooper A., Hocking B., Maley W. (eds). (2008). Global Governance and Diplomacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 330 p.

16. Deroy L. (1980). L’emprunt linguistique. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. 485 p.

17. Eliseeff V., Eliseeff D. (2006). Yaponskaya tsivilizatsiya [Japanese civilization]. Yekaterinburg: U-Factoria. 528 p.

18. Ferguson N. (2004). Colossus: The Price of America's Empire. New York: Penguin Press. 400 p.

19. Fihte I. G. (1993) Sochineniya v 2-h tomah. Sankt-Peterburg.: Mifril. 1485 s.

20. Gatov V. (2015). Postjornalist: Zhurnalistika posle “tsifrovogo perekhoda” [Postjornalist: Journalism after the “Digital Transition”]. Moscow: Izdat. resheniya. 299 p.

21. Gila-Novickaya T. (1990). Kul’t imperatora v Yaponii: mify, istoriya, doktriny, politika. [The cult of the Emperor in Japan: myths, history, doctrines, politics]. Moscow: Nauka. 206 p.

22. Goodrick-Clarke N. (1985). The Occult Roots of Nazism: The Ariosophists of Austria and Germany, 1890–1935. Wellingborough: The Aquarian Press. 296 p.

23. Gramsci A. (1959). Izbrannye proizvedeniya. T.3 Tyuremnye tetradi. [Selected works. Prison notebooks]. Moscow: Izdatelstvo inostrannoj literatury. 565 p.

24. Gregorovius F. (1900). Istoriya goroda Afin v srednie veka. [History of the city of Athens in the Middle Ages]. Saint Petersburg. 392 p.

25. Hegel G. (1993). Lekcii po filosofii istorii. [Lectures on the philosophy of history]. Sankt-Petersburg: Nauka. 350 p.

26. Holik G. (2011). Paper Tiger? Chinese Soft power in East Asia. Political Science Quarterly. Vol. 126. No 2. P. 223–254.

27. Gelmolt G. (ed.) (1896). Istoriya chelovechestva. Vsemirnaya istoriya. [History of mankind. World history]. Vol. 5. Saint Petersburg: Prosveshchenie.

28. Kann R. (1980). A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1526–1918. Berkeley: University of California Press. 662 p.

29. Kitahara M. (1989). Children of the Sun: the Japanese and the Outside World. Sandgate: Paul Norbury Publications. 160 p.

30. Kosachev K. (2013). Myagkaya sila i zhyostkaya sila – ne summa, no proizvedenie [Soft power and hard power are not the sum, but the product]. Indeks Bezopasnosti. Vol. 19. No. 4. P. 11–18.

31. Kosolapov N.A. (2004). Svoboda i nesvoboda v global'nom miroporyadke [Freedom and Non-Freedom in the Global Order] // Mezhdunarodnye processy. 2004. T 2. № 3 (6). S. 4–17.

32. Krupyanko M., Areshidze L. (2010). Yaponiya: ideologiya natsionalizma [Japan: ideology of nationalism]. Istoriya i sovremennost’. No. 2. P. 185–215.

33. Kubyshkin A., Cvetkova N. (2013). Publichnaya diplomatiya SShA. [Public diplomacy of the USA]. Moscow: Aspekt Press. 271 p.

34. Kupchinskij F. (1911). Novaya Yaponiya [New Japan]. Saint-Petersburg: Posev. 264 p. Leonard M., Stead C., Smewing C. (2002). Public Diplomacy. London: Foreign Policy Centre.

35. Liven A. (2015). Anatomiya amerikanskogo natsionalizma. [Anatomy of American nationalism]. Moscow: E. 512 p.

36. Lobanova D. (2017). Kontseptual'nye podkhody k opredeleniyu ponyatiya sily v mezhdunarodnyh otnosheniyakh [Conceptual approaches to Definition of Power in IR Theory]. Mezhdunarodnye processy. Vol. 15. No. 2. P. 77– 88.

37. Manheim K. (1994). Diagnoz nashego vremeni (sbornik) [Diagnosis of our time (Edited Volume)]. Moscow: Yurist. 700 p.

38. Meshcheryakov A. (2009). Otkrytie Yaponii i reforma yaponskogo tela (vtoraya polovina XIX – nachalo XX vv.) [The discovery of Japan and the reform of the Japanese body (second half of the 19th – early 20th centuries)]. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. No. 100. P. 246–265.

39. Moskovichi S. (1996). Vek tolp. Istoricheskij traktat po psihologii mass. [The age of crowds. Historical treatise on mass psychology]. Moscow. 478 p.

40. Nolte E. (2006). Die Weimarer Republik: Demokratie zwischen Lenin und Hitler. Munchen: Herbig. 432 p.

41. Nye J. (2006). Think Again: Soft Power. Foreign Policy. 2006. URL: https://foreignpolicy.com/2006/02/23/think-again-soft-power/

42. Nye J. (2004). Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs. 191 p.

43. Parshin P. (2014). Dva ponimaniya “myagkoj sily”: Predposylki, korrelyaty i sledstviya [Two Understandings of Soft Power: Preconditions, Correlations and Consequences]. Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta. No. 2. P. 14–21.

44. Parsons T. (1951). The Social System. New York: The Free Press. 575 p.

45. Pateman C. (1971). Political Culture, Political Structure and Political Change. British Journal of Political Science. Vol. 1. No. 3. P. 291–305.

46. Pechatnov V. (2006). “Lyubov'-gorech'” k Amerike [Bitter love for America]. Mezhdunarodnye processy. Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 30–40.

47. Petzet M., Bunz A. (1995). Gebaute Träume: Die Schlösser Ludwigs II. von Bayern. Munchen: Hirmer. 305 p.

48. Pochepcov G. (2003). Informatsionno-politicheskie tekhnologii [Information and political technologies]. Moscow: Centr, 2003. 381 p.

49. Ratgen K. (1903). Vozrozhdenie Yaponii [The Revival Of Japan]. Saint Petersburg: A.V.Orlov press. 24 p.

50. Shlesinger A. (1992). Tsikly amerikanskoj istorii [Cycles of American history]. Moscow: Progress. 688 p.

51. Sorkin G. (1961). Pervyj s"ezd narodov Vostoka. [First Congress of the peoples of the East]. Moscow : Izdatelstvo vostochnoy literatury. 80 p.

52. Spengler O. (1993) Zakat Evropy. Ocherki morfologii mirovoj istorii. [The Decline of the West.Essays on the morphology of world history]. Vol. I. Moscow.: Mysl’. 672 p.

53. Sims R. (2001). Japanese Political History since the Meiji Revolution, 1868–2000. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 395 p.

54. Strohm H. (1997). Die Gnosis und der Nationalsozialismus. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. 292 p.

55. Stunz H. (2007). Hitler und die „Gleichschaltung“ der Bayreuther Festspiele. Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte. Vol. 55. No. 2. P. 237–268.

56. Svas’yan K. (1993). Osval'd Shpengler i ego rekviem po Zapadu [Osvald Spengler and his Requiem for the West]. In: Shpengler O. Zakat Evropy. Ocherki morfologii mirovoj istorii. Vol. I. M.: Mysl’. P. 3–151.

57. Vasil’eva V.(2002). Problemy kul’turnoj identifikatsii yaponcev v epokhu Mejdzi (1868–1912) glazami evropejtsev [Problems of cultural identification of the Japanese in the Meiji era (1868–1912) through the eyes of Europeans]. Izvestiya Vostochnogo instituta. No. 4. P. 49–63.

58. Vickers M. (1985). The Thunderbolt of Zeus: Yet More Fragments of the Pergamon Altar in the Arundel Collection. American Journal of Archaeology. Vol. 89. No. 3. P. 516–519.

59. Vojnovich V. (2002). Antisovetskij Sovetskij Soyuz [Anti-Soviet Soviet Union]. Moscow: Masterik. 209 p.

60. Walker C., Ludwig J. (2017). Sharp Power: Rising Authoritarian Influence in the Democratic World.

61. Washington D.C.: National Endowment for Democracy: International Forum for Democratic Studies. 124 p.

62. Weber M. (1978). Selections in Translation, Cambridge University Press. 410 p.