In the way of the process of legalization of politology and its “development” by multiple socio-political sciences.

Abstract

The content of the article permeates the dialectical idea of Descartes — Hegel:every new quality is born in the depths of the old state .... This conceptual and memoir prism presents the main “products” of the author’s scientific creativity in the context of the interformational political era of 1985–1995 — the tragic and heroic time of the USSR dying and the birth of sovereign Ukraine. Three sectoral sociopolitical sciences — “political ethnology”, “sociopolitical spherology”, and “political kratology”, which are still sister companions of the bottomless world political science, seem to be the same creative “products” of this time. It is necessary to point out only some of the “questioning” faces of the phenomena “Soviet restructuring as a retrospective stage” and “Ukrainian transition stage” (partly stretching to this day). Here they are, those comparative faces: the ruling political teams 1) then and now did not attach due importance to the ”role and place of minority ethnic groups in the political life of multinational societies” (this prompted me to think about the need to justify a new branch science “political ethnology”); 2) in the USSR and in present-day Ukraine, political elites flirt a little with the concepts of “sphere of social life” and “branch of social activity” (which prompted me to create science “social-political sphere-logic”); 3) in the recent past and in the present, where with intent, and where through ignorance, the large and medium-sized researchers of elites do not distinguish between the notions of “separation of political powers” and “empowerment of political powers”, often concealing the intention of “replacing” yourself “new versions of the constitution. Constructive
task is the creation, if possible, of a new science — “political kratology”. In the contextual collisions of the above, theoretical concepts were developed
(1) of the “Scientology square”, (2) of the “political-ethnological square”, (3) of the “political-cratological square” and (4) of the “partological square”, and based on their understanding four new research method. Created more than twenty and thirty years ago, the scientific meanings and orientations mentioned here are still relevant today.