Abstract: The mechanisms of media personalization and separation in network communication on the principle of like-mindedness stimulate the formation of "echo chambers" and "filter bubbles". The social network phenomenon indicated by these metaphors is the subject of research, and the concepts themselves are considered as close, but not identical. The purpose of the study is to identify factors affecting the effectiveness of filtering algorithms, the user's ability to make informed choices and self–organization in the process of information consumption. The analysis of the causes and consequences of selective strategies of online information consumption is carried out on the basis of the communicative - activity approach, the theory of virtual reality Zh. Baudrillard, concepts of digital media by K. Sunstein, E. Pariser and R. Fletcher. The results of foreign and domestic studies of communication practices on various social platforms are used as an empirical basis. The research approaches presented in the scientific literature allow us to focus on the technological and logical-semantic perspective of the analysis of stable forms of network communication. According to the authors, the interdependence of filtering algorithms and value dominants of information consumption leaves the user with a chance to independently choose a "consumer basket". The duality in obtaining personalized content is emphasized: on the one hand, it is convenience, saving effort, on the other - the one-dimensionality of the world picture in the information bubble. Based on this, freedom of choice is characterized as the right to active choice and the right not to choose, consciously delegating it to neural network filters. In conclusion, the authors identified internal and external network factors for reducing the effectiveness of filtering algorithms: the interpretation of user behavior by artificial intelligence; the functioning of rational confrontational communication; the opportunistic conceptualization of echo effects; the availability of means of conscious counteraction. Incentives for reasonable information consumption, technological and cognitive ways of protecting and rationalizing user behavior are highlighted.

Abstract: This article analyzes the phenomenon of utopia as a social alternative in the aspect of its praxeological specificity. Confidence in the idea of the utopian due and despair, justified by dissatisfying real, comprise the existential basis of protest state of mass consciousness. The ideological stimulus to social protest becomes the utopian project that produces a trend to practical development of ideal sociality. Systematic functionality of these praxeological elements of utopia substantiates the goal of determining the specificity of correlation between anti-system protest, socially-constructive project, and practice of social transformation. Anticipatory reflection of reality in utopia reveals the synergetic principle of determination by future, according to which the utopic constructs as trends already exists in the present. Their activation on the level of individual and public consciousness is common for the situation of social entropy and chaos; and socio-utopian ideal manifests as an attractor of protest movement. Faith in its realization is explained by the “Principle of Hope” of Ernest Bloch; while precaution for the risks of “social engineering” is reflected in the ideas of Karl Popper and Karl Mannheim. The conclusion is made on the dual nature of praxeological element of the utopia. The first aspect implies that utopia is an anti-system protest as the denial of real, and simultaneously, it is a socially-systemic project as creation of “better”. The second aspect of dualism means that utopia is a project that transforms public consciousness, and a practice that transforms social being. The presence of direct correlation between the intensity of development of utopian ideas and the level of sociopolitical self-organization is established. The reverse correlation is characteristic for the political ideology. Along with humanistic optimism of the utopia, the author determines the risk of “denying denial”: practical implementation of utopian project formed within the framework of social protest, denies the utopia itself.

Abstract:  
This article analyzes the peculiarities of implementation of the ideas of socialism in practice. Transformation of the philosophical-political and socioeconomic foundations of the state is revealed through the interdependent phenomena of economic “assumption” and freedom. Such subject angle of research is explained by the fact that any political regime strives for self-preservation, and any society assesses the efficiency of its functionality in accordance with the parameters of the quality of life, primarily the level of welfare and civic freedoms. Thus, the goal of the article is to examine the key directions of practical implementation of the fundamental ideas of freedom and property during the period of the establishment of socialism and after it. The peculiarities of civic self-fulfillment and economic “assumption” are analyzed with the help of dialectical method, systemic and comparative-historical approaches, using the statistical and sociological data. A conclusion is made on the differences in interpreting the concept of social property and individual freedom in the theory of Karl Marx, as well as practice of real socialism. The author determines a common feature in the processes of redistribution of property of the early and late XX century, which is the confluence of government and property, and thus the alienation of citizens not only from the results of their work, but also the sphere of public policy. The author concludes on prolongation of the period of “real utopianism” in development of the Russian society as a result of presence of the relevant dystopic tendencies. In political-administrative sphere – this is the fluctuations between the bureaucratic authoritarianism and authoritarian bureaucracy; while in economic sphere – the consolidation of the government-monopolistic, bureaucratic-speculative (pseudo) capitalism.