Communities, discursive practices and behavioral patterns of digital vigilantism in Russia: Politico-axiological approach

Abstract

This article studies vigilantism, a specific form of civic activity whose history can be traced back to the nineteenth century and which in the era of digitalization has acquired new characteristics. Digital vigilantism, as a well-established social phenomenon not only in world practice, but also in Russia, needs an analysis of its structure, goals, motivations, and interests and values of members of various communities to determine trends and changes in civil society in the context of digital transformations. Digital vigilantes seeking to regulate ideas about the “normality” of behavior, using interactions in social networks that are aggressive and even bordering on extremist, claim to be a significant actor for public policy. Legitimizing an alternative system for identifying violators, criminals, victims and punishments (by increasing the number of likes), they not only seek to co-opt the initiative to form public values, but often ignore and replace governmental structures. At the same time, they increasingly turn out to be not nameless avengers, but rather individuals seeking to declare themselves and achieve through creating the conflict not only their own goals, but also a certain popularity or “network power”, which is well monetized. The authors analyze behavioral patterns of the most famous communities — “Lev Protiv” (Lion Against), “StopHam” (StopBoor), “Hrushi protiv” (Piggies Against), and “AntiDealer” — and their activities in the VKontakte social network and on YouTube to typologize Russian vigilantism. The possibility of interaction with such movements (both online and offline formats) is not excluded for the system of public power, if a framework (procedures, rules) can be established for them that determines their auxiliary functions (notification, informing, propaganda). The proliferation of vigilante movements and their demonstration of direct violence is a significant indicator of the inefficiency of the public administration system, a decrease in the level of legitimacy and support for its institutions, and indicates an increased risk of loss of state governability.