The text published is the conceptual document which defines the nature and character of Russia’s development in the post-capitalist epoch. Sure, the question is not only the analysis of the current situation; rather it is the question of the analysis of the future. The author clearly defines the paradigmatic characteristics that the new Russia has to comply with as it has chosen its own historical path of development. The USSR’s collapse is the global historical drama played out «with no war» and no ultimate defeat. The contemporary Russia as the legal successor to the USSR has a chance to perform a gigantic historical spurt at whatever cost, has strengths including intellectual and social ones for such movement to the future. Now it is important to understand why Russia did not fully accept the western Modern’s path, which was successfully employed and still employs Asia. The point is that the Modern remains to be the paradigm of the West. Asia accepts the paradigm unconditionally since, despite all Asia’s uniqueness and distinctive character, in this instance Asia does not pretend to invention of its own peculiar path. In the early new history Russia clearly saw its assignment. The barbarian pseudo-capitalism did not naturalized in Russia and the counter-Modern facilitates its complete destruction. The only way to rescue Russia is to emerge in a new capacity, mobilize efforts for the path of Russia’s own project establishment.

The author tracks the development of conceptual basis of the Russian empire’s political parties study. Over the past 15 years an impressive progress in study of the Russian political parties has been achieved: full scale serial publication is going on, monographs dedicated to individual parties have been written, and several general works that allow characterize the system of political parties have been published. However understanding of enormous volume of accumulated material is impeded by an inadequate attention to methodological issues. On one hand, historians and specialists in history of parties perform their studies in insulation from each other. Interdisciplinary studies are the pressing need. On the other hand, conceptual results produced by the Russian scientists and political figures of the early 20th century are left behind though these results deserve attention and scrutiny.

The article is devoted to one of the Bolshevik leaders, prominent economist, theorist of the Left opposition within the All-Russian Communist Party of Bolsheviks in the 1920s Evgeni Alekseevich Preobrazhenski (1886−1937). Virtually forgotten in the present day Russia Preobrazhenski is widely known in the West as the person who co-authored «The ABC of Communism» with N.I.Bukharin, creator of «the original Socialist accumulation» concept and of a number of innovative works («The New Economics», «The theory of the falling currency», «The sunset of the capitalism» and others). E.A.Preobrazhenski is considered as the «ideal type» of the Russian revolutionary of the clerical ancestry (according to L. Heimson's typology). The author investigates reasons, motives, and main stages of an Orthodox priest’s son conversion in a revolutionary Bolshevik and some aspects of the Orthodox Christianity and Marxism problem. The article is a magazine variant of the preface and the first chapter of the monograph on E.A.Preobrazhenski's social and political activities and proceedings (at the present time the author is still working on the monograph, which is dedicated to the 125th anniversary of Preobrazhenski' birth).

The paper explores attempts to instrumentalize such factors as ethnicity and faith within the framework of russian captivity in 1914−1919. Captivity realities, as the author demonstrates, were such that manipulations with national and religious sentiments of foreign captives realized through various practices produced — besides sought-for results — a lot of side effects which altered the scenarios of events that their creators deemed the only possible. In large measure this reflected the fact that policy and economy, the generals and civil officialdom, the centre and the periphery affected the captivity patterns according to their interests and aims which conventionality could hardly be taken for granted.

The article analyzes the monograph ‘The Russian Paradigm' by Professor Dula Svak. The authors examine the originality of his research and the peculiarities of the Russian studies undertaken by Dula Svak within the broad theoretical and methodological framework of the search for formulae of Russian history in contemporary foreign historiography of the Russian history.

On the basis of broad archive materials the author examines one of the Stalinism history particular episodes — the conflict of an Yaroslavl enterprise workers and the top party chiefs of the city. The author focuses his attention on the figure of V.I.Lyulin, the popular leader who dared to challenge the party chiefs. The workers rallied and supported him. The conflict provides the vivid example of the workers' confrontation with the authorities on the eve of «the great break» and the Stalinist repressions of the 1930s. The study is carried on along the lines of so widely known approach as micro-history. The essence of this scientific method consists in demonstration how an epoch’s trends, its universal, systemic principles are reflected in minor, particular collisions. The approach enables the author to come to a hypothesis that Stalinism was not so much the expression of the barbarian Asiatic mode of governance over the masses as one of manifestations of the all-European crisis which started in the 20th century, in the epoch when the Modern society entered the period of decisive trials.

After a brief survey of certain achievements the author examines the process of difficulties built-up and subsequent crisis which hit the Communist movement in the 2nd half of the 20th century. As the author demonstrates, the crisis wad caused by the external, objective factors that bore on the movement (abrupt change of the situation in the world and within countries, the diverse anti-Communism (as well as subjective reasons related to the major errors in the parties' activities and activities of the Communist movement as a whole. Among causes of the crisis one has to mention inadequate attention of the parties to changes of the situation, wavering between dogmatism and denial of principles, inability or unwillingness to overcome theoretical and political disagreements that arose among parties etc. The author offers a concise characterization of the Communist movement at the beginning of the 21st century and possible perspectives of the Left movements' development are outlined.