Resource-dynamic self-organization model of local communities

The problems of self-organization of modern local communities and the formation of spaces of their interested communication are analyzed. A model of self–organization implemented in the transit vector is proposed: resource — interest — self-organization — resource. In this regard, the possibilities of their capitalization and conversion are evaluated. Various resources and their political potencies are considered. Among the significant intangible resources, special attention is paid to specific social and symbolic resources. The author concludes that the dynamism of the model is associated with the realization of the resource potential of actors from individual to collective, from private to public, from functional to cross-functional and administrative. The platform of the current model of self-organization is largely the symbolic space of the market city and the priorities of the implementation of development strategies. On the one hand, abandoning them in harsh competitive conditions threatens the actor with the loss of all significant positions, the loss of his own political subjectivity. On the other hand, this model makes it possible to overcome competitive constraints, obtain preferences for the status of a political and administrative agent, and take advantage of systemic access to the creation and functioning of a political and administrative location regime with appropriate legitimate possibilities for disposing of an administrative resource (turbo-resource). Access to the turbo resource is of particular importance in the context of strengthening the unified system of public authority, reforming the existing system of local government, and personalized regional political regimes. In the context of considering the stages of political self–organization of communities, the features of the house of elites are considered — the unofficial basis of the political and administrative regime of the locality, represented by the elites of various functional spheres, united by the practices of beneficial exchanges and agreements and separated by a difference of interests. This field represents the core of the actual self-organization of communities and the formatting of the spaces of modern localities.