Man, culture and global problems of our time. Culture in the modern global world Character of culture and types of resistance

Cultural globalization is a process in which all countries and civilizations are involved not only as subjects, but as objects. First, the processes cultural globalization lead to the fact that public, macro-social relations of people go beyond the limits of national-state communities, acquire a transnational character. Cultural globalization weakens this identification, along with which the structure of the basic principles on which states and societies were based, representing territorial units separated from each other, is being destroyed, new power and competitive relations are being created, new conflicts and contradictions have appeared between national-state units and actors. , on the one hand, and transnational actors, identities, social spaces, situations and processes, on the other. Secondly, it is a crisis of institutions and the loss of one's own space in the public sphere, which is "privatized": personal life displaces the public and absorbs it (one of the manifestations of the process of individualization), resulting in increased uncertainty, ambivalence of consciousness and social identity of people. Thirdly, cultural identity destroys the processes taking place in the sphere of culture, which are interconnected with globalization, because the cultural identity of a person with a certain community is realized primarily through the internalization of norms, ideas, values, patterns of behavior, and creates its culture.

The globalization of cultural ties takes them beyond the limits of a certain cultural area, attracts them to the standards of other cultures. A particularly important role in this process is played by the significant intensity of the system of global communication and information. The spheres of consumption and mass culture acquire a homogeneous character, strengthening the Westernization of culture, its multifunctionality, polystructurality, and multiculturalism. National minorities involved in the process of cultural globalization, both elite and mass (for example, migrants), become carriers of not one, but two, or even more cultures.

At the same time, some anthropologists consider it possible to talk about the formation of a new global culture, or even global consciousness, meaning that the standards of culture are intensively spreading throughout the world, and the partial mixing of cultures makes it possible to form cultural families, indicates the transition to broader cultural areas.

Multiculturalism as one of the modern trends of the XXI century. to varying degrees is inherent in each country, which has arisen especially in our time in connection with the collapse of the Soviet Union, when countries Western Europe met with different realities as a result of the presence of minorities, brought to Western society national contradictions associated with linguistic, religious, ethno-cultural, ethnic differences. Recent and ongoing geopolitical changes today are testing a balance between nation, territory and state, a balance that is recognized and enforced primarily by national systems.

The analysis shows that cultural globalization is a process of accelerating and improving various international flows of goods and information in the general context of cultural development. Cultural globalization is associated with the change or transformation of human civilization, associates distant communities and leaves an imprint on the regions of the world and the continent. Cultural globalization is a multi-component process that includes the interpretation of identity and difference, universalism and particularism, the process of transforming the universal into the special and the special into the universal. It is the "clash of civilizations" that generates the fragmentation of the world through existing civilizational differences that take place in cultural differentiation, giving rise to the phenomenon of "McDonaldization" - the homogenization of cultures, takes place under the auspices of Westernization, Europeanization, Americanization, "hybridization" as a wide range of intercultural interaction, which leads to mutual enrichment, and to the emergence of cultural differences in the context of the socio-cultural dynamics of the individual. Under the influence of the exchange of goods, knowledge, and cultural values, a kind of common "megaspace of cultural globalization" was formed. This mega-space of multiculturalism develops according to its own laws; on the one hand, it is the result of the interaction of local national territories, and on the other hand, it determines the features of the development of the latter.

Cultural globalization is a contradictory process that develops simultaneously in interstate and transnational forms, contributes to the emergence of supranational and extranational organizations, institutions, and formations. According to scientists, almost all areas of activity are influenced by cultural globalization, which leads not only to a rethinking of the relationship between the global economy and nation states, but also to a reassessment of the links between the global economy and local civil societies, contributing to sociocultural dynamics. Cultural globalization means the attraction of a significant part of humanity into a single open system of socio-political, economic and cultural ties based on modern means of informatics and telecommunications. Cultural globalization is new stage integration processes in the world, its processes concern all spheres of society - from the economy and politics to culture and art. Cultural globalization is envisaged to become one of the most important factors that will determine the conditions for the development of the spiritual life of an ethnos and a nation in the 21st century.

Already now we are in the process leading to the formation of a planetary-integrated humanity. While we are at the beginning of this process and ethno-national formations retain their status of society, having lost their actual self-sufficiency, they will gain the potential of self-sufficiency. Cultural globalization is an objective process determined by the need for technical and economic optimization of modern society. Socio-historical ethno-national cultural organisms that exist next to each other mutually influence each other and are subject to influence, leading to significant changes in the structure of the latter.

As a result of these processes, the economization of the spiritual culture of the XXI century. comes down to:

Degradation of spiritual values;

Transformation of culture into a branch of the economy (mass culture);

Influences on the biological instincts of people;

Industrialization of the production process of masculu. The use of a radical change in the status of the cultural elite in the global

balization society is characterized by:

Nevitrebuvanistyu fundamental science, classical art and literature, the ideology of the former orientation;

Creation of targeted Western funds;

Providing grants, opportunities for scientific work, arts, literature, sports abroad

Offers targeted social orders.

The media are characterized by:

Market monopolization;

Dosage of information by officials.

Television and radio are characterized by:

Distraction of mass consciousness from the problems of the present;

The flow of information that contributes to the degradation of the individual;

Destruction of collectivist principles;

The displacement of other types of cultural development of the individual. So, cultural globalization is a process that fits into the global

the economic system in interaction with the natural and biological environment and gives this integrity a new cultural quality; a process that reproduces the transformation of ethno-national cultures and their structures; an integral geocultural space functions in accordance with its own laws; the output of any process to the general level. Geocultural limits - national ideas, strategic objectives, aspirations that are projected onto the geocultural atlas of the world include:

1) projection of areas of national cultures and transnational areas interacting in the global cultural space;

2) interpretation of the global space in a form suitable for the cultural self-realization of each nation. Multiculturalism is one of the main trends in the culturological context of cultural globalization.

Multiculturalism as a social phenomenon is characteristic of a multicultural society developing in the context of cultural globalization, a high level of migration processes, the development of cultural and information space, a new stage in the spread of the Internet in the context of globalization. The global world is indeed global in the understanding of the objective interdependence of peoples, the growth of common, cross-cutting, transnational dimensions and spaces, the interweaving of their histories, the growth of the influence of external (exogenous) factors on national and cultural development, the gradual formation of a multicultural space. Even E. Giddens noted that the emergence of signs of globalization and the development of this process is closely related to the development of modern society and models of nation-states, reflectively react to historical events. Multiculturalism is a multifaceted social phenomenon that covers all spheres of human life and society, human and nature, human and human. The processes of a multicultural society are developing at all levels: local, national, subnational, supranational, global.

The concept of multiculturalism as a complex social phenomenon is determined by the development of migration processes associated with the diversity of cultures, reflecting the process of dialogue between cultures and civilizations, the globalization of culture, is determined by information technology, linguistic, ethnocultural, regional pluralism, and the cultural diversity of a modern multicultural society. Multiculturalism is associated with various differences - ethno-cultural, ethnic, religious, linguistic, natural-historical, affecting various areas human existence. Multiculturalism as a social phenomenon manifests itself in cosmopolitanism and cultural diversity, the global dissemination of information, the consumption of mass products, the emergence of the phenomenon of "cultural citizenship", the formation of geo-polycultural areas.

Multiculturalism as a complex, richly differentiated social process affects the relationship between religions and ethnic groups, cultures and civilizations, traditional and modern values, various cultural and religious orientations, lifestyles and cultural ideals and traditions. Since culture has a visible expression, it is a collective construction, higher than individual preferences, capable of influencing human activity in a multicultural environment. After all, even T. Parsons, analyzing the process of globalization, came to the conclusion: if societies move along a common evolutionary path, then they become more and more similar to each other. At the basis of the formation of a single multicultural society, in which millions of Ukrainians live, cultural archetypes are formed, which manifest themselves in the form of cultural polarization, cultural assimilation, cultural isolation, cultural hybridization, in the context of which a person must adapt to the conditions of a globalizing world. The basis for the development of a multicultural society is the formation of a metaculture that develops in the context of large cultural areas based on new value orientations.

Metaculture is determined by the following features: 1) it has a transpersonal character; 2) combines cultures that are different, but similar in some common parameters. The similarity of cultures included in a single metaculture can be based on: a) the linguistic commonality of cultures, which determines the proximity of many other aspects of cultural life; b) commonality natural conditions; c) a religious community. History shows that religions play the most essential role in the formation of metacultures, acting as a link that connects cultures. Metacultures are civilizations in Huntington's sense, that is, cultural communities of a higher order.

A fundamentally different point of view of the culturological and sociological understanding of globalization is presented in the international discussion by the concepts of E. D. Smith and A. Appadurai. The phenomenon of global culture and the accompanying processes of globalization of cultures and cultural globalization are interpreted within the framework of this direction as ideological constructs that are generated by the conditions of the real functioning of the world economy and politics. The concept of global culture proposed by Anthony D. Smith is built through the methodological and substantive opposition of the scientific concept of "culture" to the image of "global culture", ideologically constructed as a reality of a global scale. The ascending methodological basis of the concepts of global culture is the acceptance of the term "culture" in its sociological context or cultural interpretation. E. D. Smith recognizes that in various concepts and interpretations of the concept of "culture" the definition of the "collective principle" is reproduced, the totality of beliefs, styles, values ​​and symbols "enshrined in the mental history of societies.

Further analysis showed that metacultures are civilizations in the Huntingtonian sense, that is, cultural communities of a higher order. The process of cultural globalization determines the emergence of new forms of cultural processes and new value orientations. The attributive feature of multiculturalism is its dispersion, discreteness, locality, lack of integrity, which contributes to cultural diversity, the emergence of a new phenomenon of "unity in diversity", the formation of various forms of cultural identification based on the combination of certain local cultures and architecture of openness. In the context of multiculturalism, such a type of culture as the Internet culture is distinguished, which, according to M. Castells, is characterized by a four-level structure, including a techno-meritocratic culture, a hacker culture, a culture of virtual communities and an entrepreneurial culture, which create the ideology of freedom, which is widespread in the world of the Internet. The culture of the Internet of a multicultural society is a culture built on a technocratic belief in the progress of mankind through information technology, asserted by hacker communities whose existence is determined by free and open technological creativity embodied in virtual networks aimed at creating a new multicultural society, materialized in the functioning of the new information economy and a new global culture. Culture, according to J. Baudrillard, has ceased to be tied to a specific place and, on the other hand, in each separate place it has ceased to represent a certain integrity.

The culture of a multicultural society has become fragmented, split into cultures of separate communities, a kind of cultural diasporas that differ in tastes, habits and beliefs, in which commercialization, irony, games are spreading, the entire format of the dominant elite culture is restructured, determined by the pluralistic sphere of identifying interests in the direction - from cultural imperialism to cultural pluralism - both locally and globally.

Having analyzed the attributive characteristics of cultural globalization, we can determine that the process of cultural globalization determines the emergence of precisely new forms of cultural processes and new value orientations. The attributive feature of multiculturalism is its dispersion, discreteness, locality, lack of integrity, which contributes to cultural diversity, the emergence of a new phenomenon of "unity in diversity", the formation of various forms of cultural identification based on the combination of certain local cultures and the architecture of openness. In the context of multiculturalism, such a type of culture as the Internet culture is distinguished, which, according to M. Castells, is characterized by a four-level structure, including a techno-meritocratic culture, a hacker culture, a culture of virtual communities and an entrepreneurial culture, which create the ideology of freedom, which is widespread in the world of the Internet. The culture of the Internet of a multicultural society is a culture built on a technocratic belief in the progress of mankind through information technology, asserted by hacker communities whose existence is determined by free and open technological creativity embodied in virtual networks aimed at creating a new multicultural society, materialized in the functioning of the new information economy and a new global culture.

Culture, according to J. Baudrillard, has ceased to be tied to a specific place and, on the other hand, in each separate place it has ceased to represent a certain integrity. The culture of a multicultural society has become fragmented, split into cultures of separate communities, a kind of cultural diasporas that differ in tastes, habits and beliefs, in which commercialization, irony, games are spreading, the entire format of the dominant elite culture is restructured, determined by the pluralistic sphere of identifying interests in the direction - from cultural imperialism to cultural pluralism - both locally and globally.

Thus, exploring the specifics of cultural globalization, we denote that cultural globalization opens up unprecedented opportunities to accelerate the process of unification and the spread of advanced technologies, the sustainable functioning of information networks, the development of creativity and innovation, economic growth based on intensification, the economic, scientific, cultural development of peoples, improving the mechanism for distributing resources, increasing the efficiency of their use based on development of global competition, improving the quality of life, improving the well-being of every citizen. It also includes expanding opportunities for choice and access to new ideas and knowledge, strengthening international coordination based on the formation of an economic environment based on unified principles and rules, reducing the threat of international conflicts, local wars, spreading the ideas of humanism, democracy, protection civil rights and fundamental human freedoms, uniting the efforts of mankind in solving global problems.

At the same time, cultural globalization gives rise to unprecedented threats and risks of technological differentiation, conservation of the technological and social backwardness of a number of countries due to their lack of competitiveness and weakness of their own resource base, global inequality of economic and social development, strengthening the stratification and disproportions of the world economy, deepening the gap between commodity and financial markets, increasing turbulence in international financial and cultural flows, the danger of global crises, the degradation of uncompetitive industries, the growth of unemployment caused by structural adjustment and new rules for the quality of the labor force Cultural globalization generates an aggravation social problems, weakening of national systems of social protection, aggravation of conflicts of various nature and scale, national and religious intolerance, creation of a global network of criminal business, international terrorism, loss of national identity, destruction of the traditional way of life, value orientations, standardization of national cultures, transnationalization of environmental, economic, technological , problems.

15. GLOBALIZATION OF CULTURE

15.1. The concept of "globalization"

In the socio-humanitarian discussion of recent decades, the central place is occupied by the comprehension of such categories of modern globalized reality as global, local, transnational. Scientific analysis problems of modern societies, thus, takes into account and brings to the fore the global social and political context - a variety of networks of social, political, economic communications covering the whole world, turning it into a "single social space". Previously separated, isolated from each other societies, cultures, people are now in constant and almost inevitable contact. The ever-increasing development of the global context of communication results in new socio-political and religious conflicts that had no precedent before, which arise, in particular, due to the clash of culturally different models at the local level of the nation-state. At the same time, the new global context weakens and even erases the rigid boundaries of sociocultural differences. Modern sociologists and culturologists, engaged in understanding the content and trends of the globalization process, pay more and more attention to the problem of how cultural and personal identity changes, how national, non-governmental organizations, social movements, tourism, migration, interethnic and intercultural contacts between societies lead to the establishment of new translocal, transsocietal identities.

The global social reality blurs the boundaries of national cultures, and hence the ethnic, national and religious traditions that make up them. In this regard, globalization theorists raise the question of the trend and intention of the globalization process in relation to specific cultures: will the progressive homogenization of cultures lead to their fusion in the cauldron of "global culture", or will specific cultures not disappear, but only the context of their existence will change. The answer to this question involves finding out what "global culture" is, what are its components and development trends.

Theorists of globalization, concentrating their attention on the social, cultural and ideological dimensions of this process, single out “imaginary communities” or “imaginary worlds” generated by global communication as one of the central units of analysis of such dimensions. New "imaginary communities" are multidimensional worlds created by social groups in global space.

In domestic and foreign science, a number of approaches to the analysis and interpretation of the processes of modernity, referred to as the processes of globalization, have developed. The definition of the conceptual apparatus of concepts aimed at analyzing the processes of globalization directly depends on which scientific discipline these theoretical and methodological approaches are formulated. To date, independent scientific theories and the concepts of globalization are created within disciplines such as political economy, political science, sociology and cultural studies. In the perspective of a cultural analysis of modern globalization processes, the most productive are those concepts and theories of globalization that were originally formulated at the intersection of sociology and cultural studies, and the phenomenon of global culture became the subject of conceptualization in them.

This section will consider the concepts of global culture and cultural globalization proposed in the works of R. Robertson, P. Berger, E. D. Smith, A. Appadurai. They represent two opposing strands of international scholarly discussion about the cultural fate of globalization. Within the framework of the first direction, initiated by Robertson, the phenomenon of global culture is defined as an organic consequence of the universal history of mankind, which entered the 15th century. in the era of globalization. Globalization is understood here as a process of shrinking the world, its transformation into a single socio-cultural integrity. This process has two main vectors of development - the global institutionalization of the life world and the localization of globality.

The second direction, represented by the concepts of Smith and Appadurai, interprets the phenomenon of global culture as an ahistorical, artificially created ideological construct, actively promoted and implemented through the efforts of the mass media and modern technologies. Global culture is a two-faced Janus, a product of the American and European vision of the universal future of the world economy, politics, religion, communication and sociality.

15.2. Sociocultural Dynamics of Globalization

So, in the context of the paradigm set by Robertson, globalization is comprehended as a series of empirically fixed changes, heterogeneous, but united by the logic of turning the world into a single socio-cultural space. The decisive role in the systematization of the global world is assigned to the global human consciousness. It should be noted that Robertson calls for abandoning the use of the concept of "culture", considering it to be empty in content and reflecting only the unsuccessful attempts of anthropologists to talk about primitive non-literate communities without involving sociological concepts and concepts. Robertson considers it necessary to raise the question of the socio-cultural components of the globalization process, of its historical and cultural dimension. As an answer, he offers his own "minimal phase model" of the sociocultural history of globalization.

An analysis of the universalist concept of the socio-cultural history of globalization proposed by Robertson shows that it is built according to the Eurocentric scheme of the "universal history of mankind", first proposed by the founders of social evolutionism, Turgot and Condorcet. The starting point of Robertson's construction of the world history of globalization is the postulation of the thesis about the real functioning of the "global human condition", the historical carriers of which are successively societies-nations, individuals, the international system of societies and, finally, all of humanity as a whole. These historical bearers of global human consciousness are formed in the socio-cultural continuum of world history, built by Robertson on the model of the history of European ideologies. The sociocultural history of globalization begins in this model with such a societal unit as the "national society" or the nation-state-society. And here Robertson reproduces the anachronisms of Western European social philosophy, the formation of the central ideas of which is usually linked with the ancient Greek conceptualization of the city-state (polis) phenomenon. It should be noted that the radical transformation of European socio-philosophical thought in the direction of its sociologization was carried out only in modern times and was marked by the introduction of the concept of “civil society” and the concept of “world universal history of mankind”.

Robertson calls his own version of the socio-cultural history of globalization the “minimal phase model of globalization”, where “minimal” means that does not take into account either the leading economic, political and religious factors, or mechanisms, or driving forces the process under study. And here he, trying to construct some kind of world-historical model of the development of mankind, creates what has been appearing for centuries on the pages of textbooks on the history of philosophy as examples of social evolutionism of the 17th century. However, the founders of social evolutionism built their concepts of world history as the history of European thought, achievements in the field of economics, engineering and technology, and the history of geographical discoveries.

Robertson distinguishes five phases of the socio-cultural formation of globalization: the rudimentary, initial, take-off phase, the struggle for hegemony and the phase of uncertainty.

First, rudimentary, phase falls on the XV - the beginning of the XVIII century. and is characterized by the formation of European nation-states. It was during these centuries that the cultural emphasis was placed on the concepts of the individual and the humanistic, the heliocentric theory of the world was introduced, modern geography was developing, and the Gregorian chronology was spreading.

Second, initial, phase begins in the middle of the 18th century. and continued until the 1870s. It is marked by a shift in cultural emphasis towards homogenization and unitary statehood. At this time, the concepts of formalized international relations, the standardized "citizen-individual" and humanity are crystallizing. According to Robertson, this phase is characterized by the discussion of the problem of accepting non-European societies into an international society and the emergence of the theme of "nationalism/internationalism".

Third, phase takeoff,- since the 1870s. and until the mid-1920s. - includes the conceptualization of "national societies", the thematization of ideas of national and personal identities, the introduction of some non-European societies into an "international society", the international formalization of ideas about humanity. It is in this phase that an increase in the number and speed of global forms of communication is revealed, ecuminist movements appear, the international Olympic Games, Nobel laureates, the Gregorian chronology spreads.

Fourth, phase fight for hegemony begins in the 1920s. and completed by the mid-1960s. The content of this phase consists of international conflicts related to the way of life, during which the nature and prospects of humanism are indicated by the images of the Holocaust and the explosion of a nuclear bomb.

And finally, the fifth, phase uncertainty– since the 1960s and further, through the crisis trends of the 1990s, enriched the history of globalization with the growth of a certain global consciousness, gender, ethnic and racial nuances of the concept of individuality, and the active promotion of the doctrine of "human rights". The event outline of this phase is limited, according to Robertson, to the landing of American astronauts on the moon, the fall of the geopolitical system of the bipolar world, the growing interest in the world civil society and world citizen, and the consolidation of the global media system.

The crowning achievement of the sociocultural history of globalization is, as follows from Robertson's model, the phenomenon of the global human condition. The sociocultural dynamics of the further development of this phenomenon is represented by two directions, interdependent and complementary. The global human condition is evolving in the direction of homogenization and heterogenization of sociocultural patterns. Homogenization is the global institutionalization of the life world, understood by Robertson as the organization of local interactions with the direct participation and control of the global macrostructures of the economy, politics and mass media. The global life world is formed and propagated by the media as a doctrine of "common human values", which has a standardized symbolic expression and has a certain "repertoire" of aesthetic and behavioral models intended for individual use.

The second direction of development is heterogenesis- this is the localization of globality, i.e., the routinization of intercultural and interethnic interaction through the inclusion of other cultural, "exotic" in the texture of everyday life. In addition, the local development of global socio-cultural patterns of consumption, behavior, self-presentation is accompanied by a "banalization" of the constructs of the global living space.

Robertson introduces the concept of "glocalization" in order to fix these two main directions of the socio-cultural dynamics of the globalization process. In addition, he considers it necessary to speak about the tendencies of this process, that is, about the economic, political and cultural dimensions of globalization. And in this context, he calls cultural globalization the processes of global expansion of standard symbols, aesthetic and behavioral patterns produced by Western media and transnational corporations, as well as the institutionalization of world culture in the form of multicultural local lifestyles.

The above concept of the socio-cultural dynamics of the globalization process is, in fact, an attempt by an American sociologist to portray globalization as historical process organic for the development of the human species of mammals. The historicity of this process is substantiated through a very dubious interpretation of European socio-philosophical thought about man and society. The vagueness of the main provisions of this concept, the weak methodological elaboration of the central concepts, nevertheless, served as the emergence of a whole direction of discourse on global culture, aimed primarily at scientifically reliable substantiation of the ideologically biased version of globalization.

15.3. Cultural parameters of globalization

The concept of "cultural dynamics of globalization", proposed by P. Berger and S. Huntington, ranks second in terms of authority and frequency of citation in the international cultural and sociological discussion about the cultural fate of globalization. According to its creators, it is aimed at identifying the "cultural parameters of globalization". The modeling of these parameters is based on a methodological trick well developed by Berger and Huntington in their previous theorizing experience. The concept of "global culture" is built in accordance with scientifically fixed criteria for attributing a particular phenomenon public life to the category of facts of sociocultural reality. Thus, Berger and Huntington state that the very concept of “culture” is the starting point for their concept, defined in the generally accepted social and scientific sense of the word, i.e., as “the beliefs, values ​​and way of life of ordinary people in their daily existence.” And then the discourse unfolds according to the standard algorithm for cultural studies, cultural anthropology and sociology: the historical and cultural background of this culture, its elite and popular levels of functioning, its carriers, spatial and temporal characteristics, development dynamics are revealed. The methodological trick done by Berger and Huntington is that the development of the concept of global culture and the corresponding proof of its legitimacy are replaced by the definition of the concept of “culture” that has been established in the socio-humanitarian sciences, which has nothing to do with either the discourse on globalization or the phenomenon of globalization itself.

The hypnotic consequence of this illusionistic technique is manifested in the instant immersion of a professional reader into the abyss of political science essays and the quasi-definition of global culture. The real facts and events of our time, linked into a single whole by the distinct logic of the world economy and politics, are presented as representatives of global culture.

Global culture, argue Berger and Huntington, is the fruit of "the Hellenistic stage in the development of the Anglo-American civilization." Global culture is American in its genesis and content, but at the same time, in the paradoxical logic of the authors of the concept, it is in no way connected with the history of the United States. Moreover, Berger and Huntington insist that the phenomenon of global culture cannot be explained by the concept of "imperialism". The main factor of its origin and planetary spread should be considered the American English language - the world-historical stage of the Anglo-American civilization. This new koine, being the language of international communication (diplomatic, economic, scientific, touristic, international), broadcasts the "cultural layer of cognitive, normative and even emotional contents" of the new civilization.

The emerging global culture, like any other culture, reveals, according to the vision of Berger and Huntington, two levels of its functioning - elite and popular. Its elite level is represented by practices, identity, beliefs and symbols of international business and clubs of international intellectuals. The popular level is the culture of mass consumption.

The content of the elite level of global culture is "Davos culture" (Huntington's term) and the club culture of Western intellectuals. Its bearers are "communities of aspiring young people in business and other activities" whose life goal is to be invited to Davos (the Swiss international mountain resort where top-level economic consultations are held annually). In the "elite sector" of global culture, Berger and Huntington also include the "Western intelligentsia", which creates the ideology of global culture, embodied in the doctrine of human rights, the concepts of feminism, environmental protection and multiculturalism. The ideological constructions produced by the Western intelligentsia are interpreted by Berger and Huntington as normative rules of conduct and generally accepted ideas of global culture, inevitably subject to assimilation by all those who want to succeed "in the field of elite intellectual culture."

anticipating possible questions non-Western intellectuals, Berger and Huntington repeatedly emphasize that the main carriers of the emerging global culture are the Americans, and not some “cosmopolitans with narrow local interests” (the concept of J. Hunter, who sharply criticized the term “global intellectual”). All others, non-American businessmen and intellectuals, must for the time being only hope to become involved in global culture.

The people's popular level of global culture is the mass culture promoted by Western commercial enterprises, predominantly shopping, food and entertainment. (Adidas, McDonald, McDonald's Disney, MTV etc.). carriers mass culture Berger and Huntington consider the "grassroots" consumers. Berger proposes to rank the carriers of mass culture in accordance with the criterion of "involved and non-involved consumption". This criterion, according to Berger's deep conviction, helps to reveal the chosenness of some and the complete innocence of others, since "communion consumption" in its interpretation is "a sign of invisible grace." Thus, involvement in the consumption of values, symbols, beliefs and other Western mass culture is presented in this concept as a sign of God's chosen people. Non-participatory consumption implies the "banalization" of consumption, the malicious neglect of reflection on its deep symbolic sense. According to Berger, consumption devoid of divine grace is the use of mass culture products for their intended purpose, when eating hamburgers and wearing jeans becomes common and loses its original meaning of joining the lifestyle of the elect, to some kind of grace.

Mass culture, according to Berger and Huntington, is introduced and spread by the efforts of mass movements of the different type: movements of feminists, environmentalists, fighters for human rights. A special mission is assigned here to evangelical Protestantism, since "conversion to this religion changes people's attitude to the family, sexual behavior, raising children and, most importantly, to work and the economy in general." At this point of reasoning, Berger, using his international reputation as a professional sociologist of religion with a high citation index, is, in fact, trying to impose on researchers the idea that evangelical Protestantism is a religion of the elect, a religion of a global culture designed to radically change the image of the world and the identity of mankind.

It is evangelical Protestantism in the concept of Berger and Huntington that embodies the “spirit” of a global culture aimed at cultivating in the masses the ideals of personal self-expression, gender equality and the ability to create voluntary organizations. According to Berger and Huntington, the ideology of global culture should be considered individualism, which helps to destroy the dominance of tradition and the spirit of collectivism, to realize the ultimate value of global culture - personal freedom.

In the concept of Berger and Huntington, global culture is not only historical as a Hellenistic stage of Anglo-American culture, but is also clearly fixed in space. It has centers and peripheries, represented respectively by metropolises and regions dependent on them. Berger and Huntington do not consider it necessary to go into a detailed explanation of the thesis about the territorial attachment of global culture. They limit themselves to just clarifying that the metropolis is a space for the consolidation of an elite global culture, and its business sector is located both in Western and Asian giant cities, and its intellectual sector is based only in the capital centers of America. Spatial characteristics of folk global culture Berger and Huntington leave without comment, because it is destined to capture the whole world.

And finally, the final conceptual component of this theorizing is the dynamics of the development of global culture. And here Berger and Huntington consider it necessary to reinterpret the concept of "glocalization", which is basic for the first direction of interpretations of the sociocultural dynamics of globalization. Unlike most of their colleagues in the ideologically biased construction of globalization, Berger and Huntington prefer to talk about "hybridization", "alternative globalization" and "sub-globalization". The combination of these three trends in the development of globalization forms the socio-cultural dynamics of globalization in their concept.

The first trend of hybridization is understood as a deliberate synthesis of Western and local cultural characteristics in business, economic practices, religious beliefs and symbols. This interpretation of the processes of introducing ideologemes and practices of global culture into the texture of national traditions is based on the gradation of cultures into “strong” and “weak”, proposed by Huntington. Huntington calls strong cultures all those that are capable of "creative cultural adaptation, that is, of reworking samples of American culture on the basis of their own cultural tradition." He classifies the cultures of East and South Asia, Japan, China and India as strong, while African cultures and some cultures of European countries are weak. At this point in their reasoning, Berger and Huntington openly demonstrate the political and ideological bias of the concept they put forward. The term "hybridization" is ideological in its essence, it refers to non-discursive, axiological postulates about the chosenness of some cultures and the complete worthlessness of others. Behind this interpretation is the chosenness of peoples, preached by Berger, and the inability of cultures to be creative, defined by Huntington. Hybridization is not a trend, but a well-thought-out geopolitical survival game project.

The second trend in the dynamics of the development of global culture is alternative globalization, defined as global cultural movements that arise outside the West and have a strong influence on it. This trend indicates, according to Berger and Huntington, that modernization, which gave rise to the Western model of globalization, is an obligatory stage in the historical development of all countries, cultures and peoples. Alternative globalization is thus historical phenomenon non-Western civilizations that have reached the stage of modernity in their development. Berger and Huntington believe that these other models of globalization, like the Anglo-American global culture, have elitist and popular levels of functioning. It was in the midst of the non-Western elite that the secular and religious movements of alternative globalization arose. However, only those that promote modernity, alternative to national cultural traditions, democratic modernity and devoted to Catholic religious and moral values, can have a practical impact on the way of life of the global culture dominating the world.

From the above characteristics of the second trend in the dynamics of the development of global culture, it clearly follows that it is called “alternative” only because it runs counter to national historical and cultural traditions, opposing them with all the same American values ​​of modern Western society. Culturally surprising are the examples Berger and Huntington have chosen to illustrate the non-Western cultural movements of alternative globalization. Among the prominent representatives of non-Western global culture, they included the Catholic organization Opus Dei, originating in Spain, the Indian religious movements of Sai Baba, Hare Krishna, the Japanese religious movement of the Soka Gakkai, the Islamic movements of Turkey and the New Age cultural movements. It should be noted that these movements are heterogeneous in their genesis and preach completely different religious and cultural patterns. However, in the interpretation of Berger and Huntington, they appear as a united front of fighters for a consistent synthesis of the values ​​of Western liberalism and certain elements traditional cultures. Even a superficial scientifically motivated examination of the examples of “alternative globalization” proposed by Berger and Huntington shows that all of them in reality represent a radical counterexample to the theses stated in their concept.

The third tendency of "sub-globalization" is defined as "movements having a regional scope" and contributing to the rapprochement of societies. The illustrations of sub-globalization proposed by Berger and Huntington are as follows: the "Europeanization" of the post-Soviet countries, Asian media modeled after Western media, men's "colorful shirts with African motifs" ("Mandela shirts"). Berger and Huntington do not consider it necessary to reveal the historical genesis of this trend, to consider its content, since they believe that the listed elements of subglobalization are not part of global culture, but only act as "mediators between it and local cultures."

The concept of "cultural dimensions of globalization" proposed by Berger and Huntington is a prime example methodology of ideological modeling of the phenomenon of globalization. This concept, declared as scientific and developed by authoritative American scientists, is, in fact, the imposition of geopolitical programming on cultural discourse that is not characteristic of it, an attempt to pass off an ideological model as a scientific discovery.

15.4. Global culture and cultural "expansion"

A fundamentally different direction of cultural and sociological understanding of globalization is represented in the international discussion by the concepts of E. D. Smith and A. Appadurai. The phenomenon of global culture and the accompanying processes of globalization of cultures and cultural globalization are interpreted in this direction as ideological constructs derived from the real functioning of the world economy and politics. At the same time, the authors of these concepts make an attempt to comprehend the historical background and ontological foundations for the introduction of this ideological construction into the texture of everyday life.

The concept of global culture proposed by Anthony D. Smith is built through the methodological and substantive opposition of the scientifically based concept of "culture" to the image of "global culture", ideologically constructed and promoted by the media as a global reality. Unlike Robertson, the founder of the discourse on globalization, Smith does not at all call on the thinking scientific world to abandon the concept of culture in connection with the need to construct a sociological or cultural interpretation of the processes of globalization. Moreover, the initial methodological thesis of his concept is the postulation of the fact that the socio-humanitarian sciences have a completely clear definition of the concept of "culture", conventionally accepted in the discourse and not subject to doubt. Smith points out that in the variety of concepts and interpretations of culture, its definition as "a collective way of life, a repertoire of beliefs, styles, values ​​and symbols" fixed in the history of societies is invariably reproduced. The concept of "culture" is conventional in the scientific sense of the word, since in historical reality we can only talk about cultures that are organic to social time and space, the territory of residence of a particular ethnic community, nation, people. In the context of such a methodological thesis, the very idea of ​​a “global culture” seems to Smith absurd, since it already refers the scientist to some kind of interplanetary comparison.

Smith emphasizes that even if we try, following Robertson, to think of global culture as a kind of artificial environment for the human species of mammals, then in this case we will find striking differences in the lifestyles and beliefs of segments of humanity. In contrast to the supporters of the interpretation of the process of globalization as a historically natural, culminating in the emergence of the phenomenon of global culture, Smith believes that from a scientific point of view, it is more justified to talk about ideological constructs and concepts that are organic for European societies. Such ideological constructions are the concepts of "national states", "transnational cultures", "global culture". It was these concepts that were generated by Western European thought in its aspirations to build a certain universal model of the history of human development.

Smith contrasts Robertson's model of the socio-cultural history of globalization with a very laconic overview of the main stages in the formation of the European-American ideologeme of the transnationality of human culture. In his conceptual review, he clearly demonstrates that the ontological foundation of this ideologeme is the cultural imperialism of Europe and the United States, which is an organic consequence of truly global economic and political claims of these countries to universal domination.

The sociocultural dynamics of the formation of the image of global culture is interpreted by Smith as the history of the formation of the ideological paradigm of cultural imperialism. And in this history, he singles out only two periods, marked respectively by the emergence of the very phenomenon of cultural imperialism and its transformation into a new cultural imperialism. By cultural imperialism, Smith means the expansion of ethnic and national "sentiments and ideologies - French, British, Russian, etc." to universal scales, imposing them as universal values ​​and achievements of world history.

Reviewing the concepts developed in the paradigm of the original cultural imperialism, Smith begins by pointing out the fact that before 1945 it was still possible to believe that the "nation-state" is the normative social organization of modern society, designed to embody the humanistic idea of ​​national culture. . However, the Second World War put an end to the perception of this ideologeme as a universal humanistic ideal, demonstrating to the world the large-scale destructive capabilities of the ideologies of "supernations" and dividing it into winners and losers. The post-war world put an end to the ideals of the nation-state and nationalism, replacing them with the new cultural imperialism of "Soviet communism, American capitalism and new Europeanism." Thus, the time frame of the original cultural imperialism in Smith's concept is the history of European thought from antiquity to modern times.

The next ideological-discursive stage of cultural imperialism is, according to Smith, "the era of post-industrial society." Its historical realities were economic giants and superpowers, multinationality and military blocs, superconductive communication networks and an international division of labor. The ideological orientation of the paradigm of cultural imperialism of “late capitalism, or post-industrialism” implied a complete and unconditional rejection of the concepts of small communities, ethnic communities with their right to sovereignty, etc. The humanistic ideal in this paradigm of understanding socio-cultural reality is cultural imperialism, based on economic, political and communicative technologies and institutions.

The fundamental characteristic of the new cultural imperialism was the desire to create a positive alternative to the "national culture", the organizational basis of which was the nation-state. In this context, the concept of "transnational cultures" was born, depoliticized and not limited by the historical continuum of specific societies. The new global imperialism, which has economic, political, ideological and cultural dimensions, offered the world an artificially created construct of global culture.

According to Smith, global culture is eclectic, universal, timeless and technical - it is a "constructed culture". It is deliberately constructed to legitimize the globalizing reality of economies, politics and media communications. Its ideologists are countries that promote cultural imperialism as a kind of universal humanistic ideal. Smith points out that attempts to prove the historicity of global culture through an appeal to the fashionable in the modern concept of "constructed communities" (or "imagined") do not stand up to scrutiny.

Indeed, the ideas of the ethno-community about itself, the symbols, beliefs and practices that express its identity are ideological constructions. However, these constructions are enshrined in the memory of generations, in the cultural traditions of specific historical communities. Cultural traditions as historical repositories of identity constructs create themselves, organically fixing themselves in space and time. These traditions are called cultural because they contain constructs of collective cultural identity - those feelings and values ​​that symbolize the duration of a common memory and image. common destiny specific people. Unlike the ideologemes of global culture, they are not sent down from above by some globalist elite and cannot be written or erased from tabula rasa(lat. - blank slate) of a certain humanity. And in this sense, the attempt of globalization apologists to legitimize the ideologeme of global culture in the status of a historical construct of modern reality is absolutely fruitless.

Historical cultures are always national, particular, organic to a specific time and space; the eclecticism allowed in them is strictly determined and limited. Global culture is ahistorical, does not have its own sacred territory, does not reflect any identity, does not reproduce any common memory of generations, does not contain prospects for the future. The global culture has no historical carriers, but there is a creator - a new cultural imperialism of global scope. This imperialism, like any other - economic, political, ideological - is elitist and technical, does not have any popular level of functioning. It was created by those in power and is imposed on the "simple" without any connection with those folk cultural traditions, which these "simple" are the bearers of.

The concept discussed above is aimed primarily at debunking the authoritative scientific myth of our time about the historicity of the phenomenon of global culture, the organic nature of its structure and functions. Smith consistently proves that global culture is not a construct of cultural identity, it does not have a popular level of functioning that is characteristic of any culture, and it does not have elite carriers. The levels of functioning of global culture are represented by an abundance of standardized goods, a jumble of denationalized ethnic and folk motifs, a series of generalized "human values ​​and interests", a homogeneous emasculated scientific discourse about meaning, interdependencies of communication systems that serve as the basis for all its levels and components. Global culture is a reproduction of cultural imperialism on a universal scale, it is indifferent to specific cultural identities and their historical memory. The main ontological obstacle to the construction of a global identity, and consequently, a global culture, Smith concludes, is historically fixed national cultures. No common collective memory can be found in the history of mankind, and the memory of the experience of colonialism and the tragedies of world wars is a history of evidence of the split and tragedies of the ideals of humanism.

The theoretical and methodological approach proposed by A. Appadurai is formulated taking into account the disciplinary framework of sociology and anthropology of culture and on the basis of sociological concepts of globalization. A. Appadurai characterizes his theoretical approach as the first attempt at a socio-anthropological analysis of the phenomenon of "global culture". He believes that the introduction of the concept of "global cultural economy" or "global culture" is necessary to analyze the changes that have taken place in the world in the last two decades of the 20th century. Appadurai emphasizes that these concepts are theoretical constructs, a kind of methodological metaphor for the processes that give rise to a new image of the modern world within the boundaries of the globe. The conceptual scheme proposed by him, therefore, claims, first of all, to be used to identify and analyze the meaning-forming components of reality, which is designated by modern sociologists and anthropologists as a "single social world".

The central factors of changes that have swept the whole world are, in his opinion, electronic communications and migration. It is these two components of the modern world that turn it into a single space of communication over state, cultural, ethnic, national and ideological boundaries and regardless of them. Electronic means of communication and constant flows of migrations of various kinds of social communities, cultural images and ideas, political doctrines and ideologies deprive the world of historical extension, placing it in the mode of a permanent present. It is through the media and electronic communications that the connection of various images and ideas, ideologies and political doctrines is carried out into a new reality, devoid of the historical dimension of specific cultures and societies. Thus, the world in its global dimension appears as a combination of flows of ethnic cultures, images and socio-cultural scenarios, technologies, finances, ideologies and political doctrines.

The phenomenon of global culture, according to Appadurai, can be investigated only if it is understood how it exists in time and space. In terms of the unfolding of global culture in time, it is a synchronization of the past, present and future of various local cultures. The merging of the three modes of time into a single extended present of global culture becomes real only in the dimension of the modernity of the world, which is developing according to the model of civil society and modernization. In the context of the global modernization project, the present of developed countries (primarily America) is interpreted as the future of developing countries, thereby placing their present in the past that has not yet taken place in reality.

Speaking about the space of functioning of global culture, Appadurai points out that it consists of elements, “fragments of reality”, connected through electronic means of communication and mass media into a single constructed world, designated by him by the term “scape”. The term "scape" is introduced by him to indicate the fact that the global reality under discussion is not given in objective terms of international interactions of societies and nation states, ethnic communities, political and religious movements. It is “imagined”, constructed as that common “cultural field” that does not know state borders, is not tied to any of the territories, is not limited to the historical framework of the past, present or future. The elusive, constantly moving, unstable space of identities, combined cultural images, ideologies without time and territorial boundaries - this is the "scape".

Global culture is seen by Appadurai as consisting of five constructed spaces. It is a constantly changing combination of the interactions of these spaces. So, global culture appears, Appadurai believes, in the following five dimensions: ethnic, technological, financial, electronic and ideological. Terminologically, they are designated as ethnoscape, technoscape, financialscape, mediascape and ideoscape.

The first and fundamental component of global culture– ethnoscape is a constructed identity of different kinds of migrating communities. Migrating flows of social groups and ethnic communities are tourists, immigrants, refugees, emigrants, foreign workers. It is they who form the space of the "imaginary" identity of the global culture. The common characteristic of these migrating people and social groups is a permanent movement in two dimensions. They move in the real space of the world of territories with state borders. The starting point of such a movement is a specific locus - a country, a city, a village - designated as "homeland", and the final destination is always temporary, conditional, impermanent. The problem of establishing the final point, locus, territory of these communities is due to the fact that the return to their homeland is at the limit of their activity. The second dimension of their permanent movement is the movement from culture to culture.

The second component of global culture– technoscape is a flow of outdated and modern, mechanical and information technologies, forming a bizarre configuration of the technical space of global culture.

Third component- financialscape is an uncontrollable flow of capital, or a constructed space of money markets, national exchange rates and goods that exist in motion without boundaries in time and space.

The connection between these three components of global culture functioning in isolation from each other is mediated by the unfolding of the space of images and ideas (mediascape) produced by the mass media and legitimized through the space of constructed ideologies and political doctrines (ideoscape).

The fourth component of global culture The mediascape is the vast and complex repertoire of images, narratives, and "imaginary identities" generated by the media. The constructed space of a combination of real and imaginary, mixed reality can be addressed to any audience in the world.

Fifth component- ideoscape - a space created by political images associated with the ideology of states. This space is made up of such "fragments" of ideas, images and concepts of the Enlightenment as freedom, prosperity, human rights, sovereignty, representation, democracy. Appadurai notes that one of the elements of this space of political narratives - the concept of "diaspora" - has lost its internal meaningful concreteness. The definition of what a diaspora is is purely contextual and varies from one political doctrine to another.

Appadurai believes that one of the most important reasons for the globalization of culture in the modern world is "deterritorialization". "Deterritorialization" leads to the emergence of the first and most important dimension of "global culture" - the ethnoscape, i.e. tourists, immigrants, refugees, emigrants and foreign workers. Deterritorialization is the cause of the emergence of new identities, global religious fundamentalism, etc.

The concepts of "global culture", "constructed ethnic communities", "transnational", "local" introduced in the framework of the discussion of sociologists and anthropologists on globalization served as a conceptual scheme for a number of studies on a new global identity. In the context of this discussion, the problem of studying ethnic minorities, religious minorities that arose only at the end of the 20th century, and their role in the process of constructing the image of global culture, can be posed in a completely new way. In addition, the concept proposed by Appadurai provides grounds for a scientific study of the problem of a new global institutionalization of world religions.

Globalization is an objective process characteristic of the current stage of development of human Civilization. The very process of civilization began with the so-called. agrarian (agricultural) revolution - the transition of many tribes from hunting and gathering to a culture of settled agriculture about 10 thousand years ago. Human culture, thus, has risen to a new level and the process of its intensive development has begun within the framework of the new opportunities that the first and subsequent civilizations gave. We will understand culture here as information that is transmitted from person to person (from individual to individual) directly or through various information carriers, but not biologically (not genetically).

Culture is not only a human phenomenon, but it is also characteristic of many other species (especially from the classes of mammals and birds). But it is only in man that culture is so great in scope and so dynamic in development. It was important to define culture and designate the concept of Civilization, because The process of globalization is largely connected and consists in the universalization of human culture and the creation of a global human Civilization - the only one known to us today. Perhaps the initial factor contributing to globalization was the development of trade between peoples. An additional incentive arose as a result of scientific and technological progress and the spread and borrowing of technologies by peoples, incl. social.

All these elements are elements of cultural exchange. Both the economic and scientific and technological components of the process are important parts of human culture. But, in addition to economic and scientific and technological factors, the causes of globalization, they also distinguish cultural factor globalization, when culture is interpreted in a narrower sense. The last factor can also include the spread of such social technologies as politics, the legal system, democracy, liberalism, etc. For example, liberal democracy - appeared in the European cultural development, but as an effective social technology, it is today a universal property, having spread throughout the planet. The same thing happens with other social and other technologies. Arising in some separate community of people, thanks to the development of modern communications, they can quickly be perceived by all of humanity.

Here it is advisable to single out separately the new information technologies and communications, without which it is difficult to imagine a single global human Civilization, they, in many respects, made its creation possible and even predetermined (determined) its appearance, made it inevitable. Of course, a particularly important place here is occupied by the global information network - the Internet (originally - the military development of the US military-industrial complex, later, which became the public domain). Some futurologists tend to see the Internet as one of the possible options for implementing V. I. Vernadsky's idea of ​​the Noosphere. One way or another, but the Internet has connected and in in a certain sense"compressed" the spaces separating people, partly leveled the spatial barriers. Facilitated the process of information exchange, incl. ideas, which leads to the acceleration of the socio-cultural development of mankind - i.e. to the increase and constant increase in the pace of development of global Civilization. Global politics has also appeared - as a potential way to control humanity further development- for example, the direction of evolution, especially cultural evolution, in the direction desired by mankind. Taking under your conscious control the process of the Human's own self-development.

All these new perspectives have been opened up by the process of globalization. But many rightly point out some negative side effects globalization process. Despite the fact that globalization opens up new economic opportunities, such as the influx of foreign investment into the country, many also note the socio-economic costs of the globalization process. This is mainly the fact that not all nation-states can equally enjoy the benefits of globalization. The country must be prepared in a certain way in order to feel the pluses, and not the minuses of globalization, which also really exist. And the point is not only and not so much in the level of economic development, but the benefits of globalization for an individual country increase depending on the degree of socio-political development of a given people, the degree of openness of its society. Although, of course, the level of economic and political development is in significant correlation. If the economy is developed, then the political system of society is usually represented by liberal democracy or, at least, is in a transitional state, when other powerful factors influence the society, its political system.

Such a complicating factor may be the possession of significant mineral resources (oil and gas, for example), which in the long term hinders intensive socio-economic development - if such possession is not accompanied by an adequate policy of redistribution of funds in the field of non-raw material development of the economy, alternative high-tech points are not created growth. This is the problem with many countries in the "Greater Middle East". This problem is often called "resource curse" in the English-language economic literature. Another powerful complicating factor in socio-economic and political development, the slowness of cultural evolution, may be the problem of excessive severity of the climate and huge, loosely connected spaces.

This is the most important problem for Russia. The costs of cold and the possession of vast spaces are reflected in a decrease in the efficiency of the economic and socio-political development of society. But even despite these problems, the above-mentioned groups of countries can benefit from globalization and even reduce the negative consequences of their problems, but for this, the ruling elites (not the people, because in such countries the people do not participate in governance) need to pursue a policy of integration into world community, which meets the long-term interests of these countries (their peoples), although it may be contrary to the interests of the currently ruling elites, oligarchic power groups. The latter circumstance may contribute to the preservation of such suboptimal, often archaic, systems and states. In this case, globalization can really harm these systems, up to their complete collapse. In many ways, therefore, an argument against globalization has been put into circulation (by the interested elites), that they say globalization negatively affects local, national cultures, replacing them with a universal one.

Here it can be objected that the best and most important elements of any national culture become common to all mankind thanks to globalization, are included in the world universal human culture. But the goal of these critics is mainly not to protect national cultures, as they say, but to protect their power and, as a result, personal fortunes that are inadequate to the state of the country's economy, which they may lose as a result of the spread of such social technology as legal liberal democracy. . These opponents of globalization are most afraid of the democratization of their societies - the establishment of democracy as the most effective technology for managing and developing society, and, accordingly, the loss of their position as a result of this process. Of course, globalization is a challenge to humanity and it is important to adequately respond to this challenge. Then the advantages of globalization will greatly outweigh its disadvantages.

An adequate policy can minimize and/or eliminate them, at least some of them. The process of globalization is closely connected with the transition of societies to the post-industrial stage of development, to the information society, where intellectual property and information begin to play the most important role. The globalization of the world economy also causes an accompanying process - the trend of personification of international relations. Economic entities, organizations and individuals can become independent actors in the world, regardless of the countries from which they come. In the limit, this trend makes people one nation, and each individual person - a citizen of the world, a subject of international law. This phenomenon is referred to as political globalization. The globalization of the world economy, as many believe, is preceded by regionalization. Regionalization also means the growing interdependence of countries and the expansion of the interests of economic entities, organizations and people beyond national borders - but these trends are limited to regional frameworks. Regionalization, as well as globalization, of which this process seems to be a part, is an objective process human development at its present stage.

This fully applies to "open regionalism." Open regionalism means economic development and integration interaction of the countries of a given region in the context of the development of the world economy, is in line with economic globalization. It is a prerequisite, a stage in the globalization of the world economy. Examples are the European Union (EU) and the North America Free Trade Association (NAFTA). so-called. "closed regionalism" is supposed to oppose globalization. It aims to protect only this region from the negative consequences of globalization. But it seems that in the long term, this process is still in line with globalization processes, only postponing the manifestations of globalization and actually preparing the ground for its deeper onset, which demonstrates the example of the existence and decline of the "socialist camp".

Globalization relies on the regional integration of economies and states. In addition to the examples given (EU and NAFTA), it is also necessary to note APEC - the organization of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. It is also important to note that economic integration is accompanied by socio-political integration and cultural interaction (including in the field of science and technology), which ultimately contributes to the development of global Civilization and benefits for all mankind, through an increase in the level and quality of life of all people, not oligarchic groups, within nation-states. This is a global trend, development trends, and it is better to try to bring it into the framework desired by mankind, which is what adequate national governments should do, pursuing an appropriate policy that prepares the country for the challenges of globalization.

 1

The article is devoted to the study of the stabilizing role of national traditions in the context of globalization, which can neither be stopped nor reversed. The problem of preserving national traditions and civilizational identity in the process of universalization of economic and cultural life is considered. It is emphasized that sustainable development society is impossible without the preservation of social continuity, which manifests itself in the preservation of a certain connection between generations. Traditions are a special mechanism of social inheritance in order to ensure effective reproduction and development. The study of the phenomenon of tradition in the socio-practical aspect allows us to identify a number of its functions that ensure the continuity and continuity of social life. The functions of regulation and socialization indicate the most effective, time-tested ways of communication and activity, and also ensure the functioning of social institutions. The functions of upbringing and value orientation realize the transfer of the most significant value orientations from generation to generation.

transformation of traditional values.

social regulation

identity

social stability

sustainable development

globalization

tradition

1. Averyanov V.V. Tradition and traditionalism in the scientific and social thought of Russia (60–90s of the XX century) / V.V. Averyanov // Social sciences and modernity. - 2000. - No. 1. - P. 72.

2. Berger P. Social construction of reality / P. Berger, T. Lukman. - M., 1995. - S. 276.

3. Markov B.V. Man and globalization of the world / B.V. Markov // Alienation of Man in the Perspective of Globalization of the World. - St. Petersburg, 2001. - Issue. 1. - S. 117.

4. Stovba A.V. Dialectics of interaction between traditions and innovations / A.V. Stovba // Interdisciplinary research in science and education. - 2012. - No. 1. - URL: www.es.rae.ru/mino/157-757 (accessed 04.07.2015).

5. Tushunina N.V. Modern globalization processes: challenge, reflections, strategies / N.V. Tushinina // Globalization and culture: an analytical approach. - St. Petersburg, 2003. - S. 5-24.

A feature of modern society, which is being formed in the process of globalization, is that the cultural identity of individual countries and peoples is being lost. The processes of globalization may entail the disappearance of traditional ties, which poses a threat to individual national communities. The processes of deformation of moral values ​​require an appeal to the stabilizing role of traditions. Obviously, traditions are an essential factor in social reproduction. Historical practice shows that the sustainable development of society is impossible without the preservation of social continuity, which is manifested in the preservation of certain traditions.

The processes of globalization inevitably run into national traditions as an obstacle to their natural development, as the most important element that preserves the most established ideas of various social communities about themselves. At the same time, numerous conflicts can be observed, the outcome of which depends on the specifics of the established national traditions, their susceptibility or immunity to innovations, their ability to adapt without losing historical continuity, which ensures the stable development of society.

Globalization and the transformation of traditional values

Most modern states are moving towards the formation of a global value system, which is a certain form of consumer culture that dominates the United States and Western Europe. There is a gradual displacement of national identity through the transition from the dominance of any one traditional value system to the simultaneous coexistence of countless value orientations that form their own individual identification settings. P. Berger and T. Lukman note that in modern society identity is increasingly acquiring the features of self-identification, losing identity with external institutions, and it is thanks to this that modern man gets the opportunity to construct his own “I” with his own hands. This raises the problem of the “openness” of identity, its flexibility and independence from existing national traditions. This problem allows B.V. Markov to characterize modernity as the loss of human dependence on "soil and blood", as globalization, which acquires a transnational character and is no longer regulated by the existing mechanisms of tradition. In practice, such "openness" and a multitude of social attitudes can lead to the "dissolution" of national traditions, which will inevitably affect the ability of society to sustainable development.

Globalization necessarily causes the universalization of value orientations, by demonstrating the advantages, first of all, of the Western system of values ​​(individual freedom, democratic mechanisms of power, market economy, civil society, etc.). With the help of the global media, the image of “progressive states” is being actively formed, which consistently adopted classical Western values, demonstrating success in various spheres of society. This means that many of the traditional values ​​followed by, for example, China and Russia, namely the authoritarian system of governance, collectivism, state paternalism, planning of economic life, etc., are called into question in the context of globalization. At the same time, it remains far from clear whether Western values ​​will “work” in the conditions of the coming post-economic era. It is quite possible that non-Western values ​​will be more in demand in this era. So Russia, China and other countries should not rush and abandon their traditional values, which, perhaps in the near future, will provide them with higher competitiveness in global world.

Thus, the consequences of globalization for individual national communities are very contradictory. It must be recognized that globalization creates new, previously unseen opportunities for the development and prosperity of individual countries, through the implementation of a relatively free movement of financial resources, technologies, etc. The consequences of the free movement of financial resources can be : the growth of incomes of various segments of the population, the emergence of broad opportunities for the implementation of creative activity, etc. At the same time, liberalization and universalization create new, extremely dangerous challenges and threats. Globalization, making the borders between states transparent, promotes the natural integration of various ethnic communities, increases the need to determine their civilizational identity. These processes are indicated by N.V. Tushunina: “Together with globalization, the problem of identity, national and individual, arises, and at the same time the problem of multiculturalism arises in its correlation with multiculturalism.” Increasing interaction between states and peoples leads to an increase in civilizational self-awareness, to a clearer understanding of the differences between civilizations.

By themselves, the processes of globalization are neither positive nor negative phenomena. This is a system of objective processes that do not depend on the will of individuals and the population as a whole. The global processes of democratization, liberalization and standardization can be used in the interests of an individual state, if at the same time the historical connection between generations is preserved. Separate social communities, using the products of the global economy, should not forget about their cultural, religious, ethnic and linguistic identity. By maintaining a balance between the processes of globalization and the foundations of civilizational identity, individual ethnic communities will be able to preserve their traditions, which ensure historical continuity. For Russia, which has unique geopolitical characteristics and at the same time has global interests in the world space, all possible consequences of globalization are especially important.

Tradition Functions Ensuring the Stability of Social Reproduction

The formation and change of traditions at different historical stages is associated with the development of social needs and interests. And this, in turn, suggests that each of the functions of tradition receives its special development in historically specific conditions. Let us focus only on the main functions of tradition, which ensure the stable reproduction of society: social regulation, value orientation, socialization, education.

The function of social regulation is based on certain established social norms corresponding to any historical era. The regulatory function of tradition includes norms, methods of communication, the status of subjects, etc. Norms indicate the most effective, time-tested methods of communication and activity, and also actively participate in the reproduction and functioning of social institutions. Traditions, along with legal norms, regulate relations between people and are aimed at harmonizing the processes occurring within any social system. Traditions require a person to choose a method of activity that is most acceptable for moral, ideological and other value considerations common in a given society. Traditions contribute to the consolidation of value attitudes, acting as the most important means of personality formation. In addition, social norms and attitudes unite and separate various social communities in society, determine their specificity. The regulatory function also determines the way the subject uses the values ​​transferred to him in the process of socialization.

The axiological function usually interacts with the function of social regulation and ensures the transfer of the most significant value attitudes from generation to generation. Tradition, as a set of patterns that must be followed, is the object of the most significant values, which are guided by the vast majority of members of society. In the process of historical development, traditions inevitably transform into an increasingly specific spiritual value, passed down from generation to generation in the form of a time-tested experience. Such values, as a rule, exist as an object of ideological evaluation and are selected from all the positive experience accumulated by mankind.

The function of socialization implements the adaptation and formation of personality in specific historical conditions. Directly thanks to tradition, the formation of personal qualities of individual representatives of any social community takes place. The individual learns experience, acquiring the necessary skills, joining in social activities performs a number of social functions. Traditions are a direct mechanism for the socialization of individuals, their inclusion in the system of social relations and mastering the experience of previous generations. As A.V. Stovba, "the essence of tradition is the transmission and reproduction of the accumulated social historical heritage, transmitted from generation to generation in order to ensure the continuity and continuity of social life" . An individual only in the process of socialization becomes an active subject of social reproduction, able to effectively interact with other members of society.

The educational function integrates the system of social relations contained in traditions and focuses on the moral and aesthetic education of the individual. have a high educational potential family traditions and customs, which are an essential factor in the realization of social ideals. It should be noted that the educational function has a class character, since each social stratum adopts and uses traditions in its public interests. In any case, tradition, as a system of values, becomes the basis for the content of the moral education of the new generation, which, in the process of socialization, is attached to national values. Consequently, without mastering the achievements of previous generations, a person cannot become a full-fledged personality that ensures the progressive development of society. The personality assimilates the character of the social life of previous eras, thereby realizing the historical continuity of generations.

Thus, modern social processes testify that the transformation of value orientations taking place in individual national communities in the process of globalization does not mean the complete destruction of established traditions, only a partial change in the hierarchy of value attitudes is observed. Traditions determined the development of society for most of the history of mankind and are a necessary attribute of social stability and sustainability. Thanks to the presence of traditions, a person assimilates the social experience of generations, and the system of traditional values ​​contributes to mutual understanding of people of different social statuses, reflecting the integrity and unity of society as a system. At the same time, it must be remembered that society cannot develop and function without certain updates, it is impossible to limit ourselves to traditions, much in the social sphere has to be borrowed or transformed, therefore, established traditions are not static material, but a dynamically updated social phenomenon. As noted by V.V. Averyanov, "today's current tradition, in order to establish itself, had to act necessarily in tandem with innovation, making compromises with the modernist system" . The simultaneous existence of traditional and modern forms of social relations is a natural process, since traditions and innovations exist as complementary aspects of social development.

Conclusion

The modern world is increasingly reminiscent of a system that does not have a linear, as in the past, but a network structure, representing a combination of many different traditions and cultures coexisting within a global society that develops and functions according to common rules. The plurality of cultures of the global society is an illusion used, as a rule, for ideological and political purposes: after all, the majority of citizens living in the developed countries of the West, one way or another, are guided by approximately similar values ​​and norms of behavior, are the bearer of a common global culture of consumption. The differences between individual peoples in the way of life today are in any case much smaller than a century ago, and it is this blurring of the boundaries that exist between national communities that is a direct result of globalization.

One of the most dangerous factors is the processes that entail the disappearance of traditional ties, which poses a threat to the system of reproduction and development of any social community. As historical practice testifies, the physical survival and stable development of modern society is impossible without maintaining the necessary connection between the new and the old by maintaining social continuity. The essence of continuity is the preservation of certain traditions during the transition to a new stage in the development of society. Traditions connect the past with the present, thanks to which social systems can function and reproduce effectively. Tradition is formed by a set of views and values ​​that have existed for a long time and perform, among other things, a stabilizing function. Tradition is a necessary element of the social system, one of the main conditions for the existence in it of a stable connection between the past, present and future. Without tradition, progressive changes in complex social systems are impossible.

The destructive nature of globalization for national identity can be minimized if we strive not to borrow "global" values ​​and guidelines, but to combine the accumulated experience, both in the process of globalization and in the process of historical development. It is necessary to maintain a balance between the processes of globalization and the processes of preserving national traditions, which is expressed in a certain transformation of the system of values ​​and guidelines.

Reviewers:

Istamgalin R.S., Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department of Philosophy, Political Science and Law, Ufa State University of Economics and Service, Ufa.

Vildanov Kh.S., Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department " National cultures» Ufa State University of Economics and Service, Ufa.

Bibliographic link

Derkach V.V. THE ROLE OF TRADITIONS IN THE CONDITIONS OF GLOBALIZATION // Modern problems of science and education. - 2015. - No. 2-1 .;
URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=20759 (accessed 11/25/2019). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"

Human activity to transform nature and society has long been considered as something localized either within a given geographical space (village, city, country), or within the Earth. It was believed that the transformations here carry only a positive charge, as they contribute to a more comfortable life for people on our planet. However, it quickly became clear that this is not so, that a person, society are part of more general systems, and therefore interference in the structural connections of these systems is fraught, among other things, with negative consequences in relation to a person and humanity as a whole.

One of the first who drew attention to this problem in detail was our compatriot V.I. Vernadsky. First of all, he began to consider the phenomenon of life on Earth not as a set of biological processes torn off from everything, but as a special living substance, which is an organic part of all nature. He introduces the concept of the biosphere and states that “every living organism in the biosphere - a natural object - is a living natural body. The living substance of the biosphere is the totality of living organisms living in it.

Thus, living matter as an element of the “biosphere” system is, in turn, a special subsystem that performs certain biospheric functions. Ego is a kind of “living shell” of the planet, which participates in interchange with its other substructures by transferring energy, information, etc. Thus, life is not accidental, but is a special property of the planet at a certain stage and under certain conditions of its evolution. Living matter covers the entire biosphere, creates and changes it, but in terms of weight and volume it makes up a small part of it.Inert, inanimate matter sharply predominates, gases dominate in volume in a large rarefaction, solid rocks in weight and, to a lesser extent, liquid sea water of the World Ocean... But geologically it is the greatest force in the biosphere and determines... all the processes going on in it and develops a huge free energy, creating the main geologically manifested force in the biosphere... perhaps exceeds all other geological manifestations in the biosphere." That is, life is not something accidental, but the result of the objective development of nature, the manifestation of a certain stage of its evolution, which then itself affects the development of the planet.

In turn, within the biosphere as a complex highly organized system, the processes of evolution of living matter intensify, which leads to the formation of man and society. The evolution of society inevitably leads to the formation of scientific and technical forms of exploration of nature, which in themselves begin to act as the most powerful factor in evolution that has an impact on nature. Thus, the biosphere "passes into a new evolutionary state - the noosphere, is processed by the scientific thought of social humanity."

There is a further strengthening of the influence of mankind on the biosphere. and through it - to the whole planet as a whole. But since man is a thinking, rational being, the noosphere acts as a special “kingdom of the mind” (Vernadsky) inside the biosphere. Thus, the Mind becomes a truly planetary force that exerts (through science, technology, etc.) Cosmos We seem to be returning to ancient notions and in concrete scientific ways we substantiate the idea of ​​“the rationality of the world Cosmos”, Science, “scientific thought is a part of the structure - organization - of the biosphere in its manifestations in it, its creation in the evolutionary process of life is the most important event in the history of the biosphere, in the history of the planet” Science arises as a kind of intermediate link between man and the biosphere, allowing him to know not only directly through feelings and sensations, but also through the Mind, which creates devices, builds hypotheses and concepts for which there is no limit, and it can already go even beyond the biosphere .

Thus, man has become a factor influencing the evolution of the biosphere, coordinating and modifying its natural (natural) development. The emergence of the noosphere should make people realize the value and significance of their existence in nature, their own ability to influence it. Mankind, as a manifestation of nature's rationality property, “should exclude wars that are impossible without self-destruction when possessing powerful energies. As a result, the noosphere must ensure the autotrophy of humanity, that is, free it from the need to receive energy from the flora and fauna of the Earth.”

However, the awareness of humanity as a planetary factor occurs, unfortunately, not only due to the positive aspects of its influence on the world, its planet, but also through a whole range of negative consequences of the technological development path that humanity is following. The current stage of cultural development is characterized by the fact that society is aware of this situation and begins to think more and more about solving such global problems in order to exclude or at least downplay their negative impact on the prospects for the development of the world. Moreover, the global nature of such problems does not allow them to be solved regionally (on the scale of one or several states). If, for example, a river is polluted that flows through several countries, then it would be almost pointless to try to clean it up in one of these countries. All countries must act together. If a certain disease arises that is capable of spreading to other parts of the Earth, for example AIDS, then it is clear that the fight against it should be carried out by the entire scientific community of the world, and so on. All this leads to an awareness of the responsibility of both an individual, individual countries, and humanity as a whole for the future of the world and to the formation of a special global type of thinking that cannot be based only on traditional cultural values, based primarily on local ethnic principles. Thus, it is possible to determine global problems as those that, by their scale, can affect the development of all mankind as a whole and the solution of which, in turn, also requires the participation of all the reasonable potential of mankind.

Global problems primarily include environmental problems that are associated with an assessment of the prospects for the development of mankind in the context of global environmental pollution, overpopulation, the deterioration of the genetic fund of mankind (the increase in a number of hereditary diseases such as Down syndrome, etc.), the threat of a nuclear catastrophe or chemical poisoning both as a result of possible wars and as a result of accidents at nuclear power plants or chemical plants. This also includes problems associated with the deterioration of land quality (soil erosion, deforestation, drying up of large water basins), problems associated with urbanization and urban growth. Thus, before mankind in all growth there is a real problem of a survival. Moreover, since this whole complex of problems is of a global nature, the mechanism for their development has already been launched. That's why we are talking about not just about unhurried theoretical disputes and the development of various concepts, so to speak, in “laboratory conditions”, but about their solution in a crisis situation, under conditions of relatively limited time and scientific and technical means. An analogy can be drawn with people’s attempts to prevent an impending accident, for example , trains, being inside this train.Time is limited, funds are scarce, and it is necessary in these conditions to work out optimal solutions from saving everyone and preventing accidents (as an ideal case) to partially solving the problem and saving at least some of the people.

The peculiarity of this situation also lies in the fact that only criticism of scientific and technological progress, which, according to its results, really leads to some negative consequences at the level of use of its achievements by society, is deeply erroneous and dangerous, since the problems that have arisen can be solved only with the help of science. Therefore, another feature of the modern stage of cultural development arises - this is the development of integral (based on the values ​​of scientific, philosophical, religious, etc.) approaches to assessing the achievements of science and the development of restrictions on the use of its results, up to their prohibition (recall at least a number of legislative decisions in a number of countries about the ban on the use of the cloning method in relation to humans).

Not being able to list in detail all the global problems and the proposed solutions, we will refer to one of the most famous authorities in this field, a management specialist who headed the famous Club of Rome (which developed scenarios for the development of mankind and ways to solve global problems), Aurelio Peccei , who tried to highlight the general strategy of human action in these conditions.

He wrote that “the said problems or goals, by their very nature, will reinforce the consciousness that only a global approach ... can provide a way to solve the problems facing humanity. For they, intertwined and interconnected by countless threads, form something like a single system embracing and entangling the whole world. The solution of these global problems will inevitably require the creation of a special “general headquarters of mankind”, which should determine the strategies for using knowledge to prevent global catastrophes. Accordingly, it is possible to determine the six most important goals for adjusting the development of mankind.

9) It is necessary to establish control over the “outer limits” of human growth. This means stopping the predatory exploitation of the Earth, which, like any material entity, has spatial, temporal, energy limitations and its resources are not infinite. Human intervention leads to global consequences that are already affecting the climate Earth, change in its position in the Cosmos as a result of the use of powerful energies, etc.

10) It is necessary to proceed from an understanding of the “internal limits” of growth. That is, we are talking about the fact that the actual human characteristics of an individual (physical, psychological, genetic) are not unlimited. For example, today a person experiences colossal stress overloads associated with an increase in the volume of information, which leads to various kinds of diseases. species more and more, it fights diseases artificially, which means that it makes itself dependent on the production and consumption of medicines, vitamins, etc., which destroys its adaptive (related to biological survival) capabilities. In this regard, we must know our internal mental, physical and biological reserves and methods for their improvement in order to withstand tension and stress.

The most important task is also the preservation of cultures. Under the influence of developed industrial states, humanity faces the threat of losing the national identity of less industrially developed countries. Entire cultures have already disappeared and continue to disappear before our eyes. Therefore, it is necessary to develop legal measures to protect the cultures and cultural heritage of mankind, to take under international control the most important products of human culture.

11) The trend of the times, which once again confirms the current creation of a united Europe, is the task of creating a world community as a special integrity, which will allow monitoring the more even development of all countries. Only within the framework of the world community will real coordination of human efforts and prevention of local and global crises, wars and catastrophes become possible.

12) Mankind must optimize its environment. This means, first of all, taking into account population growth on a planetary scale, and primarily at the expense of underdeveloped countries, which will inevitably require a conscious redistribution of products. This also includes the problem of large masses of people moving to other countries as a result of wars, the political situation or other reasons. For a number of countries, such as Germany, the USA, Russia (at the expense of refugees from the CIS countries), this has already become a pressing problem.

13) And finally, the next task is the optimization of the production system, which should ensure a relatively “crisis-free” economic development of countries. In this regard, a scientific solution to the budget problem is needed. different countries, in particular the combination of the allocated share for armaments, culture and education, social sphere etc.

Thus, summing up, we can conclude that at present there is a sharp increase in the importance of the human factor in culture, and of all mankind as a planetary factor in the development of the Earth and Space. The ego gradually leads to the awareness of the rationality factor of the structure of being and the conscious use of this rationality.

Plato. Op. in 3 volumes. T. 2. M., 1970. S. 221.

Plato. Dialogues. M., 1986. S. 126.

Sokolov V.V. Philosophy in a historical perspective // ​​Questions of Philosophy. 1998. No. 2. S. 137.