Russian Law Journal

Advanced search

Law in the Age of the 4th Industrial Revolution: Between the Impersonal Technology and Shadow Orders

Full Text:


The time in which we live is not easy. On the one hand, the latest technological advances create an illusion of unprecedented progress. On the other hand, it appears that millions of people in the world are deprived from the opportunity to use these advances in their everyday lives. Moreover, it appears that these technological advances can cause more problems than they help to solve. This situation also applies to the legal sphere where the law is gradually turning into a neutral, depersonalized technique. Mostly restrictive, repressive and estranged from the will of individual social associations, such law (law as a mere technique) generates rather radical responses in the form of different "shadow" (unofficial) norms, institutions and practices. In this paper the problem of a possible clash of the official positive law with shadow social orders is analyzed. Trying to find the way out of the false dichotomy between the technologized official law and fundamentalist rules of some narrow communities, the author discusses the origins and weak spots of the contemporary legal order.

About the Author

Roman Rouvinsky
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation

Associate Professor, Department of History and Theory of State and Law, Nizhny Novgorod institute of Management

46 Gagarin Av., Nizhny Novgorod, 603950, Russia


1. Agamben G. State of Exception (Kevin attell trans., 2005).

2. Barnes C. & Hassan H. The Rise and Fall of Mogadishu's Islamic Courts, 1(2) J. East. afr. Stud. 151 (2007).

3. Berman H.J. Law and Revolution, II: The Impact of the Protestant Reformations on the Western Legal Tradition (2004).

4. Berman H.J. Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition (1983).

5. Bieler A. & Morton A.D. Global Capitalism, Global War, Global Crisis (2018).

6. Bowring B. The Degradation of the International Legal Order: The Rehabilitation of Law and the Possibility of Politics (2008).

7. Braidotti R. Posthuman Knowledge (2019).

8. Braidotti R. The Posthuman (2013).

9. Bues M.M. & matthaei E. LegalTech on the Rise: Technology Changes Legal Work Behaviours, But Does Not Replace its Profession in Liquid Legal: Transforming Legal in to a Business Savvy, Information Enabled and Performance Driven Industry 89 (Kai Jacob et al. eds., 2017).

10. Byman D. Understanding the Islamic State - A Review Essay, 40(4) int. Secur. 127 (2016).

11. Cohen R. & Deng F.M. Sovereignty as Responsibility: Building Block for R2P in The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect 74 (Alex J. Bellamy & tim Dunne eds., 2016).

12. Dai X. Enforcing Law and Norms for Good Citizens: One View of China's Social Credit System Project, 63(1) Development 38 (2020). 00244-2

13. Deckha M. Initiating a Non-Anthropocentric Jurisprudence: The Rule of Law and Animal Vulnerability Under a Property Paradigm, 50(4) Alta. L. Rev. 783 (2013).

14. Eckstein G. et al. Conferring Legal Personality on the World's Rivers: A Brief Intellectual Assessment, 44(6-7) Water int. 804 (2019).

15. ehrlich E. Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law (Walter L. MOII trans., 2001).

16. Farinha G. Legal Pluralism: Interactions Between Official and Unofficial Laws: The Case Study of a Multi-ethnic Community Farm, 5(5) Onati Socio-Leg. Ser. 1181 (2015).

17. Floridi L. The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere Is Reshaping Human Reality (2014).

18. Gros J.-G. Towards a Taxonomy of Failed States in the New World Order: Decaying Somalia, Liberia, Rwanda and Haiti, 17(3) Third World Q. 455 (1996). https://doi. org/10.1080/01436599615452

19. Gross O. & Ni Aolain F. Law in Times of Crisis: Emergency Powers in Theory and Practice (2006).

20. Grossi P A History of European Law (2010).

21. Harman G. The Quadruple Object (2011).

22. Hegel G.W.F. Philosophy of Right (1978).

23. Heidegger M. The Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics: World, Finitude, Solitude (William McNeill & Nicholas Walker trans., 2001).

24. Heidegger M. The Question Concerning Technology in Heidegger M. The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays (William Lovitt trans., 1977).

25. Hildebrandt M. Legal and Technological Normativity: More (and Less) than Twin Sisters, 12(3) Techne: Research in Philosophy and Technology 169 (2008).

26. Hildebrandt M. Smart Technologies and the End(s) of Law (2015).

27. Hudson A. Law as Capitalist Technique, 29(1) King's L.J. 58 (2018).

28. Huskey E. A Framework for the Analysis of Soviet Law, 50(1) Russ. Rev. 53 (1991).

29. Juenger F.G. The Failure of Technology: Perfection Without Purpose (F.D. Wieck trans., 1956).

30. Kalpokas i. Algorithmic Governance: Politics and Law in the Post-Human Era (2019).

31. Kelsen H. Legal Technique in International Law: A Textual Critique of the League Covenant (1939).

32. Kostka G. & Antoine L. Fostering Model Citizenship: Behavioral Responses to China's Emerging Social Credit Systems, 12(3) P&i 256 (2019).

33. Lenin V.i. The State and Revolution (Robert Service trans., 2009).

34. Leoni B. Freedom and the Law (1972).

35. Lessig L. Code: Version 2.0 (2006).

36. Ludwikowski R.R. Socialist Legal Theory in the Post-Pashukanis Era, 10(2) B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. rev. 323 (1987).

37. Markfort R. Legal Advisor-Service Provider-Business Partner: Shifting the Mindset of Corporate Lawyers in Liquid Legal: Transforming Legal into a Business Savvy, Information Enabled and Performance Driven Industry 47 (Kai Jacob et al. eds., 2017).

38. Markovic M. Rise of the Robot Lawyers?, 61(2) Ariz. L. rev. 325 (2019). marx K. & Engels F. The Communist Manifesto (2008).

39. Marx K. 1 Capital: A Critique of Political Economy (1992).

40. Mitten M.J. & opie H. "Sports Law": Implications for the Development oflnternational, Comparative, and National Law and Global Dispute Resolution in Lex Sportiva: What Is Sports Law? 173 (robert C.R. Siekmann & Janwillem Soek eds., 2012).

41. Modreanu S. The Post-Truth Era?, 6(3) Human and Social Studies 7 (2017).

42. Moiny J.-P. Cloud Based Social Network Sites: Under Whose Control? in Investigating Cyber Law and Cyber Ethics: Issues, Impacts and Practices 147 (alfreda Dudley et al. eds., 2012).

43. Mustasaari S. & al-Sharmani M. Between "Official" and "Unofficial": Discourses and Practices of Muslim Marriage Conclusion in Finland, 7(3) oxford J. Law relig. 455 (2018).

44. Parker R. Legal Positivism, 32(1) Notre dame L. rev. 31 (1956).

45. Pashukanis E.B. The General Theory of Law and Marxism (Barbara einhorn trans., 2003).

46. Peltonen H. Sovereignty as Responsibility, Responsibility to Protect and International Order: On Responsibility, Communal Crime Prevention and International Law, 7(28) Uluslararasi ilijkiler 59 (2011).

47. Philippopoulos-mihalopoulos A. Spatial Justice: Body, Lawscape, Atmosphere (2014).

48. Prodi P. Una storia della giustizia: dal pluralismo dei fori al moderno dualismo tra coscienza e diritto (2000).

49. Radbruch G. Rechtsphilosophie:Studienausgabe (2003).

50. Romano S. The Legal Order (mariano Croce trans., 2017).

51. Rotberg R.I. The Failure and Collapse of Nation-States: Breakdown, Prevention and Repair in When States Fail: Causes and Consequences 1 (Robert i. Rotberg ed., 2004).

52. Sandkuhler H.J. Nach dem Unrecht:Pladoyer fureinen neuen Rechtspositivismus (2015).

53. Schirmer J.-E. Artificial Intelligence and Legal Personality: Introducing "Teilrechtsfahigkeit": A Partial Legal Status Made in Germany in Regulating Artificial Intelligence 123 (Thomas Wischmeyer & Timo Rademacher eds., 2020).

54. Schmitt C. On the Three Types of Juristic Thought (Joseph W. Bendersky trans., 2004).

55. Schmitt C. The Plight of European Jurisprudence, 83 Telos 35 (1990).

56. Schwab K. The Fourth Industrial Revolution (2006).

57. Sergeyev Yu.D. & Erofeev S.v. Forensic Medicine and Medical Law in Modern Russia in Legal and Forensic Medicine 553 (Roy G. Beran ed., 2013). 3-642-32338-6_161

58. Shelton D. Nature as a Legal Person, 22 VertigO - la revue electronique en sciences de l'environnement (2015).

59. Simshaw D. Ethical Issues in Robo-Lawyering: The Need for Guidance on Developing and Using Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law, 70(1) Hastings L.J. 173 (2018).

60. Svantesson D.J.B. Private International Law and the Internet (3rd ed. 2016).

61. Tranter K. Nomology, Ontology, and Phenomenology of Law and Technology, 8(2) Minn. J.L. Sci. & Tech. 449 (2007).

62. Valera L. Posthumanism: Beyond Humanism?, XXV(3®) Cuadernos de Bioetica 481 (2014).

63. Van Hoecke M. Law as Communication (2002).

64. Vincent A. Marx and Law, 20(4) J.L. & Soc. 371 (1993).

65. von Blomberg M. The Social Credit System and China's Rule of Law, 2 Mapping China J. 77 (2018).

66. von Jhering R. 2 Geist des romischen Rechts auf den verschiedenen Stufen seiner Entwicklung (1858).

67. Wallerstein i. World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction (2004).

68. Watkins E.B. The Drama of Preaching: Participating with God in the History of Redemption (2016).

69. Westbrook R. Introduction: The Character of Ancient Near Eastern Law in 1 A History of Ancient Near Eastern Law 1 (Raymond Westbrook ed., 2003).

70. 2izek S. The Sublime Object of Ideology (1989).

71. Zuboff S. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power (2019).

For citation:

Rouvinsky R. Law in the Age of the 4th Industrial Revolution: Between the Impersonal Technology and Shadow Orders. Russian Law Journal. 2021;9(1):4-33.

Views: 550

ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)