The article is devoted to the historical uniqueness of the history of our country, the identity of its people, which is reflected in the concept of the “national idea”. The essence of this concept is the search for the spiritual meaning of the existence of the peoples of our country, the identification of the historical mission of Russian civilization, the meaning of the joint existence of its peoples under the leadership of the great Russian people. The “Russian idea” — the origins of which can be traced back to the religious and philosophical work created in Russia in the middle of the 11th century — “The Word on Law and Grace” by Metropolitan Hilarion — is not an issue of ideology or politics. It is primarily a spiritual and cultural problem expressing the originality and uniqueness of the Russian spiritual experience. The author analyzes in detail the genesis, meaning and differentiates between the concepts of the “Russian idea”, which was first introduced into scientific circulation by F.M. Dostoevsky, and the “idea of the nation”, which entered into verbal circulation thanks to N.Y. Danilevsky, according to whom the “idea of the nation” was the idea of unifying the people within the framework of a national state. The phenomenon of the “Russian idea” is based on the postulates that “Russia is a family of nations” under the auspices of the Russian people, who have proven their ability to organize a state and economic colonization, politically and economically uniting one sixth of the earth’s surface, having a special, spiritual and moral mission in world history.

The article examines current issues related to the formulation of the “Russian idea”, in which outstanding Russian social scientists N.M. Karamzin and A.S. Khomyakov played a significant role, as well as its development, an important contribution to which was made by representatives of Slavophilism. Thus, K.S. Aksakov conceptualized the concept of “Russian outlook” as “an independent outlook of the Russian people, to which the Russian people, like others, have every right”. Much attention is paid to the socio-philosophical substantiation of the “Russian idea” in the works of V.S. Solovyov, as well as other “Russian religious philosophers” — N.A. Berdyaev, E.N. Trubetskoy, S.L. Frank, V.V. Rozanov, L.P. Karsavin, N.O. Lossky and I.A. Ilyin. These thinkers generally denied the possibility of explaining social life on rational principles and criticized the desire of Western researchers to ignore its irrational aspects, comprehended social reality from the point of view of Christianity and, above all, Orthodoxy. At the same time, the main emphasis was placed on the priority of the spiritual side of social existence. The author notes that the religious and philosophical truth expressed by Russian thinkers through the “Russian idea” marks a turn of Russian society to its original national and historical origins, and this turn was repeated at the end of the first quarter of the 21st century. The Russian idea is a unique synthetic concept of the path of development of Russian civilization, defined by the Russian national character, the heart of the Russian person, formalized in culture, based on the concepts of conscience, justice, internal freedom of the individual, which allows us to conclude that the Russian worldview is based more on religious and moral than on economic, political or legal concepts. History has convincingly proven that the arbitrary transfer of liberal ideological constructions, alien to the national mentality, to Russian soil contradicts national traditions, contributes to the destabilization of social life, and, ultimately, contradicts the national and state interests of Russia.

The article explores the role of Orthodox spirituality as the foundation of Russian civilization, its traditions, and prospects in the modern world. The author emphasizes that Orthodoxy is not merely a historical tradition but a living force shaping national identity and addressing contemporary challenges. Key aspects of Orthodox spirituality, such as worship, monasticism, conciliarity, and the symphony of powers, are examined, along with their influence on Russian culture, art, and literature. Special attention is given to the challenges of the digital age, secularization, and globalization, which threaten the spiritual foundations of society. The article also discusses the role of monasteries and youth in preserving and transmitting Orthodox values. The author concludes that the future of Russia as a unique civilization is inextricably linked to the preservation of its spiritual identity, rooted in Orthodox faith.

This article is devoted to understanding the problem of the formation of a nationally oriented elite in the Russian Federation and the place of the heroes of the Special Military Operation in it. At the beginning of the article, the author describes the “mixed” form of exercising state power Polybius, as a traditional political system for Russia, in the return to which, in his opinion, lies in the future and the success of political transformations of V.V. Putin. After that, the author turns to the analysis and description of the elements from which nationally oriented forces and the elite are formed in a particular state: a national leader, a nationally oriented ruler, aristocracy and demos. The article also describes and analyzes the elements that form the backbone of anti-national (anti-system) forces and quasi-elites: the “fifth column”, anti-system, tyrant, oligarchies, crowd (masses). Then the features of the functioning of the modern Russian elite and the problems associated with the need for its urgent recovery and renewal are distinguished.

The author draws the attention of readers that for the further successful promotion of the policy of V.V. Putin to gain the Russian Federation full state sovereignty, the national leader and head of state need to receive support and support for a certain social layer. Such a layer is the heroes and veterans of the Special Military Operation as a kind of backbone, which has begun to form at present a new national-oriented elite — its future aristocracy and demos.

The article is devoted to the historical origins of Russophobia in Europe, which began to form in the 15th century. The article examines the complexity of the processes of the emergence of Russophobic sentiments, reveals their roots in long-term historical contacts between Russia and Western Europe, changes in the political and religious spheres. The article reveals the specifics of Russophobia, which was formed in different Western countries. After the Mongol invasion and the period of the Horde yoke, Russia lost its ties with Western Europe, which during the “rediscovery” Russia has contributed to the formation of negative stereotypes about Russians. In addition, attention is focused on the consequences of political events such as the Union of Kreva and the relationship between Moscow and Lithuania (and later Poland), which deepened the gap between Russia and Western Europe. The complex dynastic and religious policies of Lithuania and Poland led to additional conflicts with Russia, which shaped the views of Western authors on Russia through the prism of the existential Russian-Polish confrontation. With the arrival of European travelers to Russia, negative myths about Russians began to arise, such as rudeness, drunkenness and the “slave nature” of the people. These myths were often based on the foreigners’ superficial perception of Russian culture and customs.

The number of legal marriages in Russia is decreasing. Most marriages end in divorce. Most divorced women either do not remarry, or these remarriages also break up. Many unmarried couples live together but do not register their marriage. They are afraid of losing their houses, apartments, and other valuable property in the event of a divorce. Because of these doubts, they refuse to register their marriage and have children with their partner if the woman already has a child from her ex-husband or partner. But and married couples often limit themselves to one child due to uncertainty about the strength of the marriage. The average number of children in cohabiting couples is significantly fewer than that of legal spouses. Divorces and cohabitations have become socially acceptable phenomena in Russian society. This has a negative effect on the birth rate. The demographic policy in Russia somewhat improves the conditions for the birth of children in families that already exist. However, this has little effect on the creation of new families and the preservation of existing families, that is, on stimulating entry into registered marriage, and on the prevention of divorces. To solve these problems, serious changes are needed both in family laws and in the attitude of Russian society towards marriage, divorce and cohabitation.

The article highlights the topic of excessive alcohol consumption in our country, which has seen both positive and negative trends. On the one hand, “Russians are drinking less” — the proportion of non–drinkers has doubled over the past 20 years to 48%. On the other hand, it remains beyond explanation that the number of drinking establishments in Russia has increased by almost a quarter over the past year, as many new pubs, bars and cocktail lounges have opened. Russians still see the main motive for alcohol abuse as a desire to relieve stress and tension (38% in 2024 and 2004, respectively). More than a quarter of respondents consider lack of willpower to be the reason for their addiction (27%, 2004 — 29%), and one in five speaks of the need for people to “fill in” grief or trouble (20%, 2004 — 17%). As the author notes, drunkenness and alcoholism always remain a lifestyle, holistic phenomena that need a comprehensive study. A significant place in the article is given to the differentiation of the concepts of alcoholism and drunkenness, the signs of alcohol dependence syndrome are systematized and the relevance of this disease among young people is shown. The article presents data from a sociological survey using a methodology developed and tested by the staff of the Faculty of Sociology of Moscow State University in 2023 as part of the work on the grant “Social design of youth health in the context of digitalization”. And, despite the fact that a number of the results of the author’s research on alcohol consumption are ambiguous, some trends have been identified. For example, young people who do not drink alcohol rate their health level lower (59,6%) as good or excellent; half of the older age groups (50%) rate this level. At the same time, those who do not drink alcohol are much more likely to turn to sources that highlight health-related issues. For example, they turn to a source of information, such as scientific literature, more than twice as often as those who drink (23,08% compared to 9,62%).

However, those who do not drink alcohol are much more likely to have no bad habits (85,4%), although some of them (26,8%) smoke. They mostly explain their refusal to drink alcohol by the practices adopted in their family, which are of great importance to most of them (88,5%). Among those who consume alcoholic beverages, there are significantly fewer of them — 24,5%. The author also provides a classification of students depending on the frequency of their alcohol consumption, justified by other researchers, identifies the causes that cause a further tendency to drunkenness and alcoholism, and shows promising areas of research.

This article focuses on the study of the pluralistic model of lobbying using the example of the United States of America. The relevance of this issue is can be explained by the fact that Russia has largely found itself on the sidelines of an important dispute between supporters of pluralism and corporatism as two models of lobbying and, more broadly, representation of public interests. This discussion is important from the point of view of understanding which system of interest representation best suits Russia’s national, cultural and political specifics, and how to approach the issue of lobbying institutionalization. For a long time, Russian experts and politicians considered lobbying exclusively in a pluralistic key, taking the American experience of its institutionalization and regulation as a starting point. However, the question of the extent to which the American experience is applicable to Russia remains open. Therefore, it is necessary to examine in detail the pros and cons of these models. This article opens a series of articles by the author on the nature of pluralism and corporatism in modern realities and is devoted to the pluralistic model. The author attempts to analyze its dynamics and current state using the example of the United States of America. The analysis of this example is important not only for identifying general patterns inherent in the development of the lobbying phenomenon in pluralistic systems, but also for showing how much the lobbying phenomenon depends on the political and institutional environment, cultural and social norms. The author concludes that the development of lobbying in the United States faces major problems, such as the increasing gap between the ability of interest groups to influence the political process, as well as the primacy of private (special) interests over public ones.

The article examines the main trends in the development of the sociology of communication and its problem field. The authors postulate the widespread use of the optics of the sociology of communication as a metatheory of communication in general. Various aspects of this science, frontier disciplines, its architecture and structuring are revealed. Metamorphoses in the modern sociocultural space and the transformation of communicative practices are explored.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the formation of strategic planning as a new form of public administration and its impact on socio-economic dynamics. The article reveals the features of modern indicative planning in the Russian Federation, its differences from state planning in terms of public and private ownership of the means of production. The functions of government bodies in the process of strategic planning are defined, and the special managerial status of national projects is shown. Goal-setting algorithms and prioritization for long-term planning based on regulatory and resource approaches are presented. The article raises the problems of risks of forecasting and implementing long-term indicators in conditions of socio-economic uncertainty and the problematic nature of determining a number of performance indicators and mechanisms for achieving them. Social goals, indicators of their achievement, and national draft strategies up to 2036 are structured.

The article considers and analyzes the results of the strategy of innovative development of the Russian Federation and studies the social problems of innovation activity management. Based on the analysis of successful experience of foreign countries, under-taken to improve the efficiency of innovation management, the key social institutions that play an important role and contribute to the effective implementation of innovative development are identified.

The aim of the article is to study the main social problems and barriers that hinder the development of innovation activity at the macro and micro levels. These problems are considered in the field of sociological science, trends and prospects for further research on innovation activity for sociology are identified.

The article presents the results of the authors’ research conducted in 2019–2022, conducted within the framework of phenomenological and positivist approaches, on the problems of studying the barriers to innovation activity of enterprises, as well as the quality of Russian education, uses secondary analysis of the results of other studies in the field of sociology of management, management of innovation activity, social management, social philosophy and sociology.

The results of modern research on the management of innovation activity in foreign countries are analyzed, the key directions and features of innovation development of leading countries are identified.

The results can be used to set new actual tasks for the study of innovation activity and innovation policy within the framework of sociology, to obtain the results necessary for the formation of the national innovation system of Russia. The results can also be used in the development of training courses “Innovation Management”.

Scientific novelty consists in generalizing the experience of research of social problems of innovation activity in sociological science in Russia.

This article substantiates a promising approach to the concept of development, which allows us to form a clear understanding of those factors that have a long-term impact on the dynamics of socio-economic development and can help explain various patterns of development, such as the accumulation of factors of production, the effectiveness of their use, technological changes, external political and economic influences, historical factors, as well as institutional structures such as the institute of land ownership, institutes of law and property, and public administration, financial institutions, especially the stock market. The author notes that sociological science has its own approach to the problem of development, from the point of view of which development should not be considered only from the point of view of economics, but should pay attention to such processes as changes in family structures, relationships and mentality, cultural, demographic, political changes, the transformation of rural communities and the process of urbanization. At the end of the twentieth century, the discussion of development was implicitly based on a number of ideals or values of modernization, while the concept of development itself embodies these values, since it inevitably implies a change in society as a whole in the direction of modernization ideals, including rationality, development planning, improving living standards, reducing social and economic inequality, more effective social institutions and relationships, etc. And despite the fact that at the end of the 20th century the term “modernization” became less applicable, the list of modernization ideals seems to be very relevant. The debate about the role and responsibility of business in society related to modernization gave rise to various theories, an important place among which was occupied by the theory of M. Friedman, analyzed in detail in the article. The author turns to a theory that deals with the transition to a new capitalist model, called “stakeholder capitalism”, which was formulated in 1984 by Professor Edward Freeman in his book Strategic Management: the Concept of Stakeholders. According to his definition, the company’s stakeholders include “any individuals, groups or organizations that significantly influence the decisions made by the company and/or are influenced by these decisions”. According to the author, the transition to a model of stakeholder capitalism, despite the fact that it provides a number of advantages, generates a certain social effect that slows down the development of the national economy. The article also analyzes in detail the models of “conscious capitalism” and the “model of corporate social responsibility”.

Corporate social responsibility is a self-regulating business model that helps a company be socially accountable to itself, its stakeholders, and the public. By practicing corporate social responsibility, also called corporate citizenship, companies can realize the impact they have on all aspects of society, including economic, social, and environmental. This model is valuable for both society and business. Applied from a corporate point of view is the implementation of the ESG strategy (Environment, Social, Management), which is a subset of the Sustainable Development Goals and defines specific parameters for their achievement by an individual company across the entire spectrum of environmental, social and management issues.