Political Hologram: Technology Analysis and Scenarios for the Development of the Digital Phenomenon
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to identify the technology of political holograms, as well as an attempt to comprehend possible scenarios for the development of this little-studied phenomenon. The main methodological techniques were the principles of comparative and content analysis. The article defines political holograms, holographic policies, and periodizes the evolution of political hologram technologies. The results of the study show that the introduction of holographic technologies in politics is so far more widespread among political leaders than among mass civil movements and parties. The author gives an explanation of this phenomenon. It is revealed that the hologram in politics is embodied not only in limited technologies, but also acquires much more diverse practical functions. Moreover, the paper gives three scenarios for the further development of a political hologram: radical, authoritarian and deliberative. Finally, author’s considerations are given regarding the risks and opportunities of political holograms for the development of communication and democracy.
About the Author
S. N. Fedorchenko
Moscow Region State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergei N. Fedorchenko
PhD in Politics, Professor of the Department of Political Science and Law
141014, Vera Voloshina St., 24, Mytishchi, Russian Federation
References
1. Alekseev R.A. (2019) Testing Blockchain Technology in the Elections to the Moscow City Duma in 2019: Results and Application Prospects for the Federal Electoral Process. Zhurnal politicheskikh issledovanij, vol. 3, no 4, pp. 12–23. Available at: https://naukaru.ru/ru/storage/viewWindow/44073, accessed 20.05.2020 (in Russian).
2. Aslanidis P. (2016) Is Populism an Ideology? A Refutation and a New Perspective. Political Studies, vol. 64, no 1, pp. 88–104. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9248.12224
3. Baudrillard J. (2018) Simulacra and Simulations, Moscow: POSTUM (in Russian).
4. Bodrunova S. (2010) Mediacracy or Mediademocracy? On Some Conceptual Approaches to the Interaction of Journalism and Politics in Established Democ- racies. CGES Working Paper Series. WP 2010–07, Bielefeld – St. Petersburg.
5. Bodrunova S.S. (2012) Mediacracy: Modern Approaches to the Definition of the Term. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg State University, no 3, p. 203–215. Available at: https://www.elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_18036953_39596841.pdf, accessed 20.05.2020 (in Russian).
6. Brown N., Gershon S.A. (2017) Body Politics. Politics, Groups, and Identities, vol. 5, no 1, pp. 1–3. DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2016.1276022
7. Denisyuk Yu.N. (1980) Holography and Its Prospects. Zhurnal prikladnoj spektroskopii, vol. 33, no 3, pp. 397–414 (in Russian).
8. Gagnon J.-P., Beausoleil E., Son K.-M., Arguelles C., Chalaye P., Johnston C.N. (2018) What Is Populism? Who Is the Populist? Democratic Theory, vol. 5, no 2, pp. vi–xxvi. DOI: 10.3167/dt.2018.050201
9. Habermas J. (2008) Involving Another. Essays on Political Theory, Saint Petersburg: Nauka (in Russian).
10. Habermas J. (2010) The Problem of Legitimation of Late Capitalism, Moscow: Praxis (in Russian).
11. Jung J. (2015) Politics of Holograms and the Human Body in William Gibson’s Neuromancer. The Journal of Literature and Film, vol. 16, no 3, pp. 561–584. Available at: http://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE06589954&nodeId=NODE06589954&language=ko_KR, accessed 20.05.2020.
12. Kaltwasser C.R., Taggart P.A., Espejo P.O., Ostiguy P. (eds.) (2017) The Oxford Handbook of Populism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Kasulis Th.P. (2002) Intimacy or Integrity: Philosophy and Cultural Difference, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
14. López A.E. (2016) Invisible Participation: The Hologram Protest in Spain. Afterimage: The Journal of Media Arts and Cultural Criticism, vol. 43, no 4, pp. 8–11. DOI: 10.1525/aft.2016.43.4.8
15. Manovich L. (2017) Theories of Soft Culture, Nizhnij Novgorod: Krasnaya lastochka (in Russian).
16. Meyer T. (2001) Mediokratie: Die Kolonisierung der Politik durch die Medien, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
17. Sheean J. (2018) A (New) Specter Haunts Europe: The Political Legibility of Spain’s Hologram Protests. Journal of Spanish Cultural Studies, vol. 19, no 4, pp. 465–480. DOI: 10.1080/14636204.2018.1524995
18. Volodenkov S.V. (2014) Cybersimulacra as an Instrument of Virtualization of Modern Mass Political Communication. Informatsionnye vojny, no 4(32), pp. 18–21. Available at: http://pstmprint.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/INFW-4-2014-3.pdf, accessed 20.05.2020 (in Russian).
19. Volodenkov S.V. (2018) Mass Communication and Public Consciousness in the Conditions of Modern Technological Transformations. Zhurnal politicheskikh issledovanij, vol. 2, no 3, pp. 1–8. Available at: https://naukaru.ru/ru/storage/viewWindow/25624, accessed 20.05.2020 (in Russian).
20. Witt M.T., Haven-Smith L. de (2008) Conjuring the Holographic State: Scripting Security Doctrine for a (New) World of Disorder. Administration & Society, vol. 40, no 6, pp. 547–585. DOI: 10.1177/0095399708321682
21. Witt M.T., Kouzmin A. (2010) Sense Making Under “Holographic” Conditions: Framing SCAD Research. American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 53, no 6, pp. 921–939. DOI: 10.1177/0002764209353272
22. Zain A. (2019) Rise of Modi’s Techpopulism in India. Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 6, no 1, pp. 199–208. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ali_Zain15/publication/334114323_RISE_OF_MODI’S_TECH-POPULISM_IN_INDIA/links/5d17abf6458515c11c02b5da/RISEOF-MODIS-TECH-POPULISM-IN-INDIA.pdf, accessed 20.05.2020.
Review
For citations:
Fedorchenko S.N. Political Hologram: Technology Analysis and Scenarios for the Development of the Digital Phenomenon. Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law. 2020;13(2):212-228. (In Russ.)
Views:
1302
Email this article 