Standard

Потребности, интересы, безопасность и конфликт. / Strebkov, A.I.; Gazimagomedov, G.G.

In: Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология , Vol. 41, No. 3, 2025, p. 431-444.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Strebkov, AI & Gazimagomedov, GG 2025, 'Потребности, интересы, безопасность и конфликт', Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология , vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 431-444. <https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-105028027290&partnerID=40&md5=6fec8afee5f923ce8db932ced7b931b4>

APA

Strebkov, A. I., & Gazimagomedov, G. G. (2025). Потребности, интересы, безопасность и конфликт. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология , 41(3), 431-444. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-105028027290&partnerID=40&md5=6fec8afee5f923ce8db932ced7b931b4

Vancouver

Strebkov AI, Gazimagomedov GG. Потребности, интересы, безопасность и конфликт. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология . 2025;41(3):431-444.

Author

Strebkov, A.I. ; Gazimagomedov, G.G. / Потребности, интересы, безопасность и конфликт. In: Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология . 2025 ; Vol. 41, No. 3. pp. 431-444.

BibTeX

@article{a0bd0601545a454ea838924a9706357f,
title = "Потребности, интересы, безопасность и конфликт",
abstract = "In a society whose subjective basis is private interest, it is equally impossible to achieve the required security of society, the State and the individual. It is in itself at the same time a safety for some and a danger for others. Such a position in society can be occupied by a phenomenon resulting from a clash of private, common and universal interests. The greatest confusion in this matter is caused by legislators who think of security as protecting interests, and the latter, in turn, as vital needs. It is clear that, having brought it only to such a strong abstraction, one can see the similarity of the security of the individual, society and the state. This allows law-makers to put the security of individuals, society and the state on the same level, conceptually combine and include it in one “National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation.” But we are dealing with different interests and vital needs: private, common and universal interests, private, common and universal vital needs, opposite to each other, antagonistically opposed. This entails a form of conflict between the individual, society and the state. In modern society, security is a derivative of conflict and can only be understood as a conflict whose degree of strength does not allow the destruction of the dominant foundation of society — private property as a manifestation of the dominant private interest of the individual. And therefore, the protection of the private interest of the individual, common and universal interest is the protection of private property, the person himself, whether he is the personality of the bourgeois or the wage-worker, is defended, but not as individuals, but as subjects of property relations, as sellers and buyers, as laws inherent in capitalism, as abstractions, and not living people. {\textcopyright} А. И. Стребков, Г. Г. Газимагомедов , 2025",
keywords = "conflict, interest, needs, private interest, property, security",
author = "A.I. Strebkov and G.G. Gazimagomedov",
note = "Export Date: 19 February 2026; Cited By: 0",
year = "2025",
language = "русский",
volume = "41",
pages = "431--444",
journal = " Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология ",
issn = "2542-2278",
publisher = "Издательство Санкт-Петербургского университета",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Потребности, интересы, безопасность и конфликт

AU - Strebkov, A.I.

AU - Gazimagomedov, G.G.

N1 - Export Date: 19 February 2026; Cited By: 0

PY - 2025

Y1 - 2025

N2 - In a society whose subjective basis is private interest, it is equally impossible to achieve the required security of society, the State and the individual. It is in itself at the same time a safety for some and a danger for others. Such a position in society can be occupied by a phenomenon resulting from a clash of private, common and universal interests. The greatest confusion in this matter is caused by legislators who think of security as protecting interests, and the latter, in turn, as vital needs. It is clear that, having brought it only to such a strong abstraction, one can see the similarity of the security of the individual, society and the state. This allows law-makers to put the security of individuals, society and the state on the same level, conceptually combine and include it in one “National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation.” But we are dealing with different interests and vital needs: private, common and universal interests, private, common and universal vital needs, opposite to each other, antagonistically opposed. This entails a form of conflict between the individual, society and the state. In modern society, security is a derivative of conflict and can only be understood as a conflict whose degree of strength does not allow the destruction of the dominant foundation of society — private property as a manifestation of the dominant private interest of the individual. And therefore, the protection of the private interest of the individual, common and universal interest is the protection of private property, the person himself, whether he is the personality of the bourgeois or the wage-worker, is defended, but not as individuals, but as subjects of property relations, as sellers and buyers, as laws inherent in capitalism, as abstractions, and not living people. © А. И. Стребков, Г. Г. Газимагомедов , 2025

AB - In a society whose subjective basis is private interest, it is equally impossible to achieve the required security of society, the State and the individual. It is in itself at the same time a safety for some and a danger for others. Such a position in society can be occupied by a phenomenon resulting from a clash of private, common and universal interests. The greatest confusion in this matter is caused by legislators who think of security as protecting interests, and the latter, in turn, as vital needs. It is clear that, having brought it only to such a strong abstraction, one can see the similarity of the security of the individual, society and the state. This allows law-makers to put the security of individuals, society and the state on the same level, conceptually combine and include it in one “National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation.” But we are dealing with different interests and vital needs: private, common and universal interests, private, common and universal vital needs, opposite to each other, antagonistically opposed. This entails a form of conflict between the individual, society and the state. In modern society, security is a derivative of conflict and can only be understood as a conflict whose degree of strength does not allow the destruction of the dominant foundation of society — private property as a manifestation of the dominant private interest of the individual. And therefore, the protection of the private interest of the individual, common and universal interest is the protection of private property, the person himself, whether he is the personality of the bourgeois or the wage-worker, is defended, but not as individuals, but as subjects of property relations, as sellers and buyers, as laws inherent in capitalism, as abstractions, and not living people. © А. И. Стребков, Г. Г. Газимагомедов , 2025

KW - conflict

KW - interest

KW - needs

KW - private interest

KW - property

KW - security

M3 - статья

VL - 41

SP - 431

EP - 444

JO - Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология

JF - Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология

SN - 2542-2278

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 149264075