Modern processes of globalization cause a lot of socio-political forecasts and debates around them. Many researchers follow the path of generalizing the facts that have emerged in certain spheres of society, and this causes almost continuous discussions among scientists and the public. It is difficult to develop a consolidated point of view without deciding on fundamental ideas about the overall picture of the development of the situation in the world. It is proposed to discuss the question of what are the main contradictions in the interests of the largest social groups and segments of the world's population that determine the picture of the unfolding confrontation.

Analysis of the composition of the current forces, their interests, goals and objectives solved to achieve them, strengths and weaknesses that influence the choice of methods and methods of action is the canonical starting point in assessing any situation of social struggle. However, oddly enough, it is precisely this part of the study that is too often omitted in assessments offered to public opinion. Without being able to provide a full coverage of the listed issues in a short work, we will consider the main contradictions of the social struggle, which reflect the most important aspects of assessing the composition and interests of the current forces.

Ideas about globalization arose, first of all, in connection with the understanding of the growing global interconnectedness of the world. Before our eyes, international cooperation in the production sector, in the development and implementation of scientific and technical achievements, is rapidly developing. The intensification of activity in maritime spaces, in the air and space spheres, the influence of industrial production of individual countries on the ecology of vast regions of the world, require constant international cooperation and the formation of a unified strategy for managing these processes. Complex problems have arisen from the formation of a unified information environment. There are many other particular aspects occurring in different spheres of the processes of increasing interconnectedness of all countries of the world, the nature of which and mutual influence can be discussed endlessly. Understanding the overall picture of this is characterized by the highest generalization in terms of understanding the changes in the structure of social relations - a single world, a single social system of humanity is being formed. This is an objective result of its development, which cannot be changed due to the subjective interests of any social group or state, even the most powerful.

Social struggle at its highest level, at the level of humanity as a whole, is the subject of geopolitics. In the concepts of this science, the essence of what is happening is the transition from a bipolar world, from the confrontation between maritime and continental civilizations, to a monopolar world. The main contradictions at the global level arise precisely in connection with this transition to new conditions. A new paradigm of geopolitical struggle is emerging. This changes the role and place of all participants in the previous confrontation in the bipolar scheme. And not all of the strongest participants in the previous confrontation are ready to accept them.

It is possible to understand who and what is not satisfied with the direction of the situation’s development only by assessing the proposed scenarios for the formation of its outcome. To do this, it is necessary to discuss the positions of the most capable participants in global social processes and the contradictions arising in connection with this.

More than others, those who are now anticipating victory are those who were the first to accept the idea of ​​the existence of a monopolar world, ideologically and philosophically defined its essence, and for many centuries consistently acted towards the implementation of this as the moment of their triumph. The idea of ​​forming a single “Kingdom” on the planet is well known, the instrument for achieving which should be the power of the “Golden Calf”, that is, capitalism. One can argue about the structure of that very secretive force that implemented this idea, about the “Vltenev” bodies of its management and the composition of stable adherents. Some see the structures of Zionism behind this, others focus on the VlCommittee 300B,” others focus on Freemasonry. There are other interpretations. In the context of our question, the main thing is not this, but the fact that such a highly organized and capable movement exists, its consistent, ideologically shaped impact on world social processes has been successfully carried out for a long time. Since there is no established name, we will designate its core as Vlpharisaic center V»1 (FC).

This movement, clearly grasping the objective processes of human development, tried to “saddle up” their social base in order to direct them in the right direction and ensure their ultimate dominance. Therefore, his agents of influence were present in all leading, often irreconcilably opposing social forces. Acting simultaneously on both sides of the barricade, they provoked and directed many of the largest social clashes (wars and revolutions) with the goal of “grinding” everything unnecessary in them, which interferes with the movement towards the main goal - the “world kingdom” and their dominance in it.

When moving to the final phase of implementing their idea, the participants in this movement must abandon many of their strategic, even historical allies, since they built this “World Kingdom” precisely for themselves, and not for anyone else. The fruits of victory are always less than they are required by the ambitions of the winners and there should be no competitors in their use. And this is the most dangerous part of the scenario for them. They will not be able to exist sustainably as the dominant, but at the same time, an insignificant minority of humanity. For their prosperity, it is necessary to destroy the absolute majority of the planet's population, forming a group of enslaved people comparable in size to them. The idea of ​​the “World Kingdom” implies an elite group of “Lords” and only the necessary group of “Servants”, which can always be pacified and not be feared as a major force of Pressure from below. Then, in conditions of high labor productivity ensured by scientific and technological progress, the remaining natural resources of the planet will be enough for the long-term prosperity of a small population. During this time, new opportunities for reproducing resources and attracting new ones can be found.

No matter how cruel and unfair the well-known idea of ​​the “Golden Billion” may seem to us in relation to the majority of humanity, it may in fact turn out to be only a demagogic cover for a much more terrible idea. In fact, it may turn out to be “a hundred million dollar gold”, or even less.

Much more numerous forces are those who formed the basis of the social base of the opposing civilizations in the bipolar scheme.

The USSR was the center of continental civilization. His closest allies in the socialist camp took full advantage of the guarantees of a geopolitical center of power. Allies from third countries also had guarantees of their position in the face of confrontation between geopolitical centers of power. With the destruction of the USSR, the situation of the population of all these countries changed fundamentally. To understand the basis of their current social position, the mechanism of influence on different segments of the population in the process of destruction of continental civilization is important.

During the existence of the USSR and its allies in the continental bloc, a system of reliable social guarantees was created for the entire population of these countries and the high stability of the existence of power structures was ensured. This, on the one hand, developed a fairly high level of public confidence in the socio-political elite that formed the government and the policies it implements, and in the fact that all vital needs for any citizen would be provided. On the other hand, this created for the main mass of people the idea of ​​the futility of opposing a very stable government (from this main mass only those who were under the influence of the “shadow structures” and knew more about their plans than others fell out). This situation sharply dulled the majority of people’s sense of “social self-preservation”, giving rise to “social apathy” in conditions when the destruction of the foundations of the people’s livelihood was openly manifested. The idea that everything given to them will always be guaranteed by the state has become firmly established in the mass consciousness. The strategy of the opposing forces was largely based on this feature of social psychology. This is described especially colorfully in the well-known Plan by Allen Dulles.” The corruption of a layer of the state elite allowed, ultimately, to lead to its massive betrayal, and a betrayal that was in many ways meaningful, with the hope of receiving a significant part of the national property under one’s personal control and becoming part of the new world elite.” But the people as a whole were passive, still believing in the inviolability of state guarantees and not believing that they were being deprived of too much forever. “Sweeten” this was helped by the lack of control provided for a certain period, the opportunity for everyone “to grab something poorly lying” from the public domain.

In the new conditions, when signs of ultimate goals in the activities of the FC began to appear in reality, both social categories found themselves in a hopeless situation. The mass of the population appreciated the importance of the spiritual values ​​they had devoted to, on the basis of which social relations were built. Or rather, this assessment has latently matured, but it is so harsh that people, psychologically protecting themselves from self-criticism, still retain the remnants of empty hopes for a compromise, for a “third force”, that the requirement of their responsibility to society, which guarantees them a decent survival, is compatible with the opportunities given to them for irresponsibility. This category of people, after the immediate confirmation of their destined role as extinct people fighting for the right to live as slaves of new masters, or upon acquiring an organizational structure of spiritual leadership, will begin an acute social struggle. These incentives are also needed due to the fact that she is still embarrassed by the lack of means of struggle, the need to start it with bare hands and with an empty belly.

The consciously betrayed social elite found itself faced with the fact that its existence had no prospects (behind a negligible minority of personal representatives of the FC). She has considerable means to fight in her hands. But he has no idea for which these means can be used. This is where their throwing from side to side comes from.” To repent before the people and admit the realities of TAU means to give everything and have no guarantees that you will be forgiven or left in the category of a capable social elite. To recognize the justice of what was done with her active participation by TAU means to continue to follow the same path to one’s own destruction. “The third way”, many find movement towards “Strengthening statehood” with the preservation of the liberal democratic values ​​of capitalism. Logically, this is an absurd path, an attempt to combine an instrument of destruction of the state with its strengthening. Although, when there is a lot of money, it is possible to ensure the promotion of this ideological topic in society for a fairly noticeable period of time before it is discredited in practice. Strengthening the statehood of individual countries and globalization, which erases state sovereignties, are ideological antagonists. Attempts to find a Third Way are one of the forms of the anti-globalist movement, the desire to stop the natural course of history.

In the countries that formerly formed the basis of the continental bloc, as well as in the countries of the Third World, the situation is even more complex. It should be described separately. Main characteristic features are that their population is ideologically disoriented. The imposed ideas contradict the spiritual foundations of the existence of these peoples and deprive them of a historical perspective. They do not have their own ideas that could become the basis for an effective strategy for their actions, with an outcome acceptable to them in the event of successful implementation of the actions. In essence, these ideas come down to adaptation to changing current conditions in the world, but even from a short historical perspective they are untenable. At the same time, the spiritual foundations of the life of peoples, as a very inertial thing, although they suffer damage from destructive influences, remain a powerful social factor.

The situation in Vlstan of maritime civilization is no less complicated.” It would seem that the victorious civilization, all the states that were its support, should strengthen their unity in connection with the success of the previous stage of action. In reality, everything is different.

In the new conditions, first of all, the role of the United States changes. In the bipolar scheme of confrontation, the United States was the leader of the Atlantic bloc of states and maritime civilization. Through its actions, the FC ensured their existence in this capacity: it supported their ideological, political, economic, and military potential. All this required considerable effort and expense on the part of those who directed the processes of development of social relations in the world. For the social sustainability of the United States, as well as to ensure the attractiveness of its ideological and propaganda positions, it maintained the world's highest standard of living and social guarantees for the bulk of the population. For this, it was necessary to form and maintain a system of brutal exploitation of most countries of the world. However, not the entire bulk of the US population is included in the “New World Elite,” which should prosper in the new world order, in the new “World State.” For a "world state" the USA is not needed as a separate, special state. Therefore, the situation in relation to the FC towards the USA begins to change in different directions:

TAU in spiritual terms. There is no longer any need to maintain the ideological narrative that the American way of life provides prosperity for all members of society. This is all the more difficult when many decades of “living in debt” based on the construction of a “financial pyramid” of dollars have exhausted the possibilities of constantly “throwing in” funds collected all over the world. It is also difficult to maintain the forceful subordination of the overwhelming majority of the world for this purpose. The mobilization of the forces and means of the countries of the Atlantic bloc for this under the influence of threats of geopolitical confrontation is also becoming difficult, even meaningless, since the confrontation between the geopolitical centers of power has ceased. The time is approaching when the "list of privileged" must be radically revised, with the exclusion of many, and, first of all, the majority of US citizens, as the most "expensive" and ambitious in their social needs. Previously, they were the necessary ballast that ensured stability in intercivilizational confrontation. In the new conditions, they turned into an unnecessary additional burden for those who were close to realizing their dream of the World Ruler, for those who actually spent their strength and resources on achieving this goal, and not at all on ensuring the well-being of American citizens;

TAU in military terms. The forces and means of confrontation in the context of a clash between the two dominant geopolitical and civilizational centers in the world differ significantly from those that are needed as the police forces of a world state. In a world state, there are no external threats, but they are all internal. The massive use of forces and means to fight over vast areas in the sea, in the air, in space, with the consolidation of strategic success by an equally broad offensive on land, is a thing of the past. The role of local police action has increased significantly, of course, along with the increase in the scale of required police operations. This gives rise to new criteria for assessing the military potential of individual countries and the need to rebuild them in accordance with new priority tasks. And here the problem arises not only technically. In police operations, the human factor plays a significantly different role.” And in this sense, the US armed forces turn out to be poorly adapted to new conditions. Despite the highest military-technical power today, oriented in many respects to the previous conditions of struggle, they are distinguished by particularly low combat and moral stability. In this situation, transforming the US armed forces to meet new requirements may turn out to be much more complex and expensive than developing the security forces of some other countries in the right directions;

TAU in material and production terms. Problems of human production activity at the global level have led to the emergence of major threats in the environmental and natural resource aspects. These threats exist for all people together, including the world’s elite.” The level of these threats can be reduced only in two ways: by rationalizing production in environmental and resource-saving terms, or by radically reducing it, along with consumption and the number of consumers. Attempts to move in the first direction have shown that this is a very knowledge-intensive, costly and long-term path. And it is not at all clear whether, given the rate at which the situation is worsening, it is possible to achieve success in moving along it. At the same time, it is the American way of life that generates the greatest consumption of energy and other natural resources, and also generates about 50% of harmful emissions on the planet from only 5% of its population. And we are talking, neither more nor less, about the historically close prospect of preserving the conditions for the survival of people on the planet. Thus, real success in a relatively short time requires a “reduction” of the American way of life, the destruction of the USA as a special society. Let us emphasize precisely the destruction, since the US population will never give up the achieved level and comfortable lifestyle.

Thus, the United States in the new conditions turns out to be a very inconvenient structure for the FC, which gives rise to many more problems than it provides for their effective solution. In other words, for the new global elite, a significant part of which is concentrated in the United States, it is much easier to change some of its bases than to solve the totality of problems generated by the existence of the United States in its current capacity. Moreover, attributing historical responsibility, “socio-political sins” specifically to the United States, will allow these forces to present themselves to world public opinion in a positive way, thereby facilitating their establishment as the new world elite.” Apparently, an understanding of this is being formed within the FC.

In addition, to an increasing extent, representatives of the national capital of different countries are beginning to realize that they also will not find a worthy place among the Elected Ones.” Those labor resources that participate in the activities of small and medium-sized capital ensure production and themselves, basically, form demand and consumption of what is produced, are not needed by VleliteV.” This means that it does not need the owners of small and medium capital themselves. In the conditions of rapid scientific and technological progress, growth of labor productivity in many areas, a relatively small number of labor can serve the needs of Vlelita. The remaining TAUs only pollute the environment in conditions of resource depletion.

One can even say that capitalism as an idea of ​​free enterprise has historically exhausted itself. It was needed in the previous conditions as an instrument of the struggle for dominance in the world state.” "Shadow" power, which was provided by capital, was an alternative to state power, formed on the basis of public awareness of the interests of the people's existence. It created other opportunities for coming to power in the world state, since the scheme of globalization embedded in the ideas of the FC has nothing to do with the interests of the vast majority of the world's population and contradicts its most important vital interests. In the new conditions, a special type of slave system is being recreated: a circle of “VlgospodV” is formed, in which the required number of “VlgospodV” is left and their enslavement is ensured by a powerful police system. The remaining TAUs are simply not needed either as competitors or as the mass of the population that previously ensured state power in interstate confrontation. When only one world state remains, the very factor of interstate confrontation disappears. When its elite has formed in this only state on the planet, it does not need an independently emerging competing force, and the “Shadow” mechanisms of power are not needed as a means of possible struggle against the elite. This means that the power of the “Golden Calf” has exhausted itself and will be replaced by the power of the “Golden Fist”.

It is also important to note that not only the idea of ​​capitalism, as an integral part of the spiritual foundations of maritime civilization, loses its meaning in the conditions of the “World State”, built according to the ideology of the FC. At the end of the confrontation in the bipolar scheme, the significance of the entire ideological basis of their existence, in particular, the liberal democratic ideology, is lost. Therefore, the departure from its norms of many figures, who were recently recognized as its “Pillars”, becomes a completely natural process.2 Taking into account the above about the spirituality of continental civilization, we can draw a general conclusion: the establishment of a system of the “World State” according to the FC scheme requires the destruction of the spiritual values ​​of the vast majority of humanity. And we see activities in this direction not only in our own country, but also in others, including those formally perceived as “victorious”. The cultural, moral, and spiritual degradation in general of the population of the most developed countries of the world is proceeding quite steadily.

These reasons give rise to contradictions within the Atlantic bloc and Western civilization as a whole. Differences in the historical perspectives of the existence of its constituent countries emerged. First of all, there is a growing opposition between the interests of the United States and especially associated Israel and Great Britain with the interests of other countries, which is especially important in the EU countries as well. Anti-American sentiment and anti-Semitism are growing in the world. The anti-globalist movement is showing its potential, which is materially and organizationally supported, first of all, by the medium and small national capital of many countries. On the other hand, unexpectedly for many, the strengthening of relations between the power elites of the former leading countries of geopolitical blocs, primarily the USA and Russia, is beginning to appear. This is based on the understanding of the loss of their role in general, along with the passing of confrontation into the past in the bipolar scheme, on the understanding that they are allocated too few places in the “circle of the elect” in the new “World State”. With the loss of their geopolitical role, both were left without an ideological basis for their existence, and therefore without an effective strategy.

An analysis of the largest contradictions that give rise to sustainable processes of social struggle in the world and the corresponding interests of social groups in it shows that two phenomena dominate:

tAU is the growth of opposition between the interests of a narrow circle of the world’s elite (in whose interests the FC conducted its long-term work) and the interests of the overwhelming majority of the planet’s population. Moreover, the inability of the majority of humanity to effectively organize in their own interests is ensured by the ongoing spiritual defeat and de-ideologization;

“the division and opposition of those who until recently formed the core of Western civilization, fought under common ideological flags,” among whom many did not realize the realities of the outcome of this struggle, the lack of a worthy place for them in the “ranks of winners.”

It is worth giving a short note on the classification of forces on spiritual grounds, since it is this aspect that is now acquiring special significance. In the “Worldwide State”, resources for conducting confrontation do not have state ownership, regardless of the particular signs of rights to it. It makes no sense to oppose them as resources that determine the potential of opposing states or their blocs. Participants in the confrontation are divided along spiritual and ideological lines that reflect their social interests. How they will be able to use various means of struggle and resources is a matter of appropriate strategy. In a single world state, all means of struggle and resources are fundamentally available for use by any forces. That is why the spiritual aspect of the confrontation becomes the leading one in assessing possible options for the outcome of the struggle. Classification of the spiritual foundations of the current forces, understanding their relationship with the ending inter-civilizational confrontation according to the bipolar scheme, provides the basis for predicting the processes of formation of the composition of allies and opponents at the new stage of social struggle.

The role of ideological systems is, first of all, to organize the collective activities of people and ensure the appropriate management of their actions.

How are ideas about managing society reflected in ideological systems and in the social worldview of people? They are expressed in ideas about a fair social order and system of social relations, enshrined in religious dogmas and ideological guidelines. Their perfection for practical application, internal consistency, are assessed according to the criteria of unity and integrity of the system of views.

In order to build a unified and consistent system of views on the world as a whole, on nature and society, it is necessary to start from a single beginning. In religious form, a single principle is expressed in monotheism. In secular science, a single principle is expressed in the ideological concept of the unity of science, the formation of knowledge on the basis of a single highest generalization. Now the solution to the fundamental question of philosophy is recognized as such.

The main ideological positions that exist on the basis of a single principle (monotheism or a single science) correspond to fundamental methods of management that ensure the self-organization of society to move towards a certain goal. They underlie the social worldview. There are three such methods:

TAU direct formal management of TAU due to the governing bodies formally established by the government system;

TAU direct informal management of TAU at the expense of independently formed governing bodies that are not established in the formal state management system;

TAU is indirect control of TAU due to the influence on the state of elements of the social system (citizens, their social groups), and through this TAU influences the motivation of the actions of all governing bodies and objects of social management.

For the first time, consistent supporters of each of these methods of government united in three Hebrew sects that arose around 150 BC. This was a natural consequence of the acceptance of monotheism, the affirmation of a single principle in the system of views on the world. The formation of unified ideas about managing society as a whole naturally led to the identification of fundamental ways of doing this in a fairly pure form. According to the order of the listed methods of government, their supporters were called Sadducees, Pharisees and Essenes.

In society there is always management of each of these ways. In world history one can find many examples of their combined application in the theory and practice of state building. However, in all cases, this happened by giving priority to one of the methods, extending it also to those areas where it is ineffective. This reflected the interests of individual social groups, classes, and gave rise to disharmony in social relations and social conflicts. A harmonious combination, consistent complementarity of these methods of management corresponds to an integral Idea, an integral spirituality. But humanity has not yet mastered integral spirituality, and there was not yet a state in which it would triumph. The movement towards this is the essence of a major stage in the development of human society, the essence of our era.

Let us characterize the above three fundamental positions of the social worldview:

1. The Sadducean position is the worldview of administrative omnipotence, omnipotence of official state bodies. This is the priority of direct control by official, legally approved leaders of the entire society. They are the ones who have the main initiative in determining management goals and ways to achieve these goals. This worldview is reflected in various forms and to varying degrees in Catholic, Confucian, fascist, absolutist, autocratic, Christian socialist views, the ideology of Caesarism, in any other forms of administrative nomenklatura ideology, in early Freemasonry.

These views presuppose collectivism, ensuring common interests, since without the existence of a state that unites the actions of the people in the interests of survival, it cannot exist. administrative system, administrative elite. But the administrative elite, with such a system of views, is undoubtedly the dominant social group, occupying a special position. Therefore, she also has private, elite interests and views corresponding to them. The priorities of general and private interests coexist here in a complex interweaving.

2. Pharisaic position - the worldview of the omnipotence of informal (Shadow, clan) leaders and self-created governing bodies. Clan leaders have the main initiative in determining management goals and ways to achieve them. These are those who have concentrated in their hands the most effective means of influencing society and its official leaders. This is direct control. The structures of TAU that emerged independently are financial and political groupings, parties, unions, clans and secret societies, and other public associations. The Pharisaic worldview is reflected in Jewish, Protestant, Zionist, liberal democratic and Christian democratic views, in Trotskyist ideology, in clan, including criminal clan, mafia ideology, as well as in the ideology of most modern Freemasonry. Here the idea of ​​​​the inviolability of the main mechanism of informal, "shadow" power in society - the power of money, the priority of the economic method of managing society, the triumph of corruption - was established. And hence the inviolability of the right of private ownership of the means of production and financial assets, the right to transfer them on a patrimonial basis, by inheritance.

Here priority is given to private interests over general ones, to individualism.

3. Essene position - the worldview of the priority of nationwide indirect control of all formal and informal structures of direct control. The choice of goals of public administration is subordinated to the national, and not to individual, social group interests. The activities of all formal (official, state) and informal (VltenevV, amateur) government bodies are subject to this. This worldview is reflected in orthodox Christian and Orthodox views, in Muslim views, in Essene-Gnostic views, which became the forerunner of Orthodox-communist (as opposed to Trotskyist-communist) views. Here, the right to acquire management functions is affirmed for any representative of the people only on the basis of the firmness of Essene convictions and moral qualities (generally reflected in the 10 commandments of the Law of God, and similar in content to the Communist Moral Code), talent and knowledge, life experience and personal achievements, hard work and courage in the fight.

Here there is a priority of common interests over private ones, collectivism.

On the listed spiritual foundations, the largest social communities of people gradually formed, right up to civilizations that found themselves in geopolitical confrontation according to a bipolar scheme. Let us characterize the relationship between geopolitical and spiritual confrontation.

The interconnectedness of the world gradually developed, including trade exchange, production cooperation, transport, communications and much more. The reasons for the confrontation between people in the process of unifying the world through numerous connections rose from simple, from specific to increasingly larger, complex, general. In the end, the most important problems reflecting the essence of the functioning of society as a whole turned out to be at the center of the contradictions. From the point of view of the practice of carrying out the vital functions of society, such a basic contradiction is the contradiction between the production system and the distribution system of everything produced3.

This contradiction has found its expression at the global level. The higher, universal nature of the contradiction and the global nature of the processes of its resolution, in the acute phase that has come, determine the totality of its influence on all aspects of people’s daily lives.

The essence of the differences between maritime and continental civilizations is quite simple. In maritime civilization, those who are in the sphere of distribution of goods, raw materials, knowledge and scientific achievements, cultural and other values, and those who trade them, dominate. In a merchant civilization, the main thing is money, this is the power of capital, the power of the Golden Calf.” Hence their spirituality, their morality, and a society where everything is bought and sold, without conscience or honor.

Those who dominate in such a society do not produce anything themselves, and dominance gives them lack of control. Therefore, the existence of this civilization is inextricably linked with internal and international robbery, when there are unscrupulously robbed citizens, social groups and strata, entire nations, and on the other hand, the masters of Money Taking.” Maritime civilization received its name because at one time maritime transport was the main thing in ensuring global exchange, in the formation of global routes for the distribution of goods and achievements in different areas, much of what was produced by all of humanity. Control of the sea meant control of international distribution. Therefore, it would be more accurate to call the maritime civilization “a civilization of distribution,” but in reality it turned out differently.

If maritime civilization is a civilization of distribution, then continental civilization is a civilization of creation. Creative processes in various spheres of tau in industrial and agricultural production, science, culture and so on are mainly concentrated on land. This is where the name of continental civilization historically comes from. Any creative process requires the unification of people into teams that act in the interests of achieving common goals. And the higher the development of society, the higher, more versatile collectivism it needs.

Let us emphasize that in any civilization there is production and distribution. We are talking here only about priorities, about what is most important, what creates the basis for the existence of civilization, what gives rise to a system of relations in it.

The United States is the center of maritime civilization. The center of continental civilization is Russia. For many reasons, thoroughly studied by geopolitical scientists, she cannot transfer this role to anyone. Victory or defeat here will be of decisive importance for the destinies of all peoples of the world, since this will determine the system of social relations that will exist on the planet. This will determine on what spiritual basis - individualism or collectivism - social relations will be built.

The given initial ideas are recognized by almost all geopolitical scientists, including in Russia and the West. It is also recognized that the resolution of intercivilizational confrontation will occur through the destruction of one of the civilizations and through the absorption of its remains by another. The contradictions between them are irremovable, and no “consensus” is possible here. We are talking only about possible scenarios of globalization, about its outcome, and not about preventing it itself.

International

They look at it together.

Along with positive changes, globalization is also revealing more and more of its negative features over time. The influence of globalization processes on the sphere of spiritual culture is often sharply criticized. One can often hear warnings about the danger of “McDonaldization,” which depersonalizes the unification of national cultures.

The fruits of globalization in the cultural sphere are indeed quite diverse. For example, thanks to the development of communications and television broadcasting networks, today millions of people in different parts of the world can see the opening of the Olympic Games, listen to or watch a fashionable theater production, the premiere of an opera or ballet performance, or take part in a virtual tour of the Hermitage or Louvre. At the same time, the same technical means deliver completely different examples of “culture” to a large audience: unpretentious video clips, action films tailored according to the same patterns, intrusive advertising. The point is not that such products do not demonstrate high quality. Its main danger is that it has a unifying influence, imposing certain behavior patterns and lifestyles that often do not correspond to or even contradict the values ​​existing in a particular society.

However, the greatest concern, as a rule, is the question of the unevenness of the globalization process. The paradox of the global economy is that it does not cover all economic processes on the planet, does not include all territories and all humanity in the work of its well-functioning economic and financial mechanisms. While its influence extends to the entire planet, its actual functioning and corresponding global structures relate only to segments of economic industries, to individual countries and regions of the world on a scale directly dependent on the specific position of the country, region (or industry) in the international division of labor . As a result, within the framework of the global economy, the differentiation of countries by level of development is maintained and even deepened, and the fundamental asymmetry between countries is reproduced in terms of the degree of their integration into world economy and competitive potential.

The fruits of globalization can be fully benefited mainly by developed Western countries. Thus, against the background of the active expansion of international trade, the share of developing countries in the value of world exports fell from 31.1% in 1950 to 21.2% in 1990 and continues to trend downwards. As the famous Spanish-American sociologist Manuel Castells noted in this regard: “The global economy is characterized by the presence of a fundamental asymmetry between countries in terms of their level of integration, competitive potential and the share of benefits from economic growth. This differentiation extends to regions within each country. The consequence of this concentration of resources, dynamism and wealth in certain territories is the segmentation of the world population... ultimately leading to a global increase in inequality." The emerging global economic system is simultaneously highly dynamic, selective, and highly unstable.

On a global scale, new fault lines and separation of countries and peoples are emerging. There is a globalization of inequality. Most countries of the Afro-Asian world remain in the grip of economic backwardness and are a zone of economic, political, ideological, ethnic and social conflicts and upheavals. Throughout the twentieth century, the standard of living and average annual income per capita in third world countries lagged by an order of magnitude behind the corresponding indicators in developed countries. It is significant that in the 1980-1990s. this gap tended to widen. This allows us to talk about an increasing tendency to widen the gap between the developed center and the periphery of the world economic system. Already in the 1980s. The number of countries classified by the UN as least developed has increased from 31 to 47.

The most alarming trend in this sense is the emergence of the “deep South”, or fourth world countries, which indicates a real danger of the complete degradation of a number of states that can generally lose the ability to maintain their basic functions as a result of constant reductions in budget expenditures for the basic reproduction of social infrastructure and population . The paradox is that, for all its planetary nature, the global economy (at least at the present stage of its development) stimulates an increase in the number of states and regions excluded from the processes of globalization.

Thus, the consequences of globalization are very contradictory. On the one hand, the growing interdependence of various countries and regions of the world is obvious.

On the other hand, global problems, geo-economic rivalry are a permanent competition, the goal of which is to improve the “tournament position” of one’s country in the world market, creating conditions for continuous and fairly dynamic economic growth. There is a permanent struggle to maximize resources and opportunities in the context of globalization. It is impossible to take a break, just leave the game for a while - you can only “fall out” of it. This gives rise to only one real alternative facing each country: either dynamic advanced development, or decline and marginalization.

Basic concepts: globalization.

Terms: marginalization, geoeconomics, GDP, WTO, IMF.

Globalization concept

The diversity of definitions of globalization. The term "globalization" appears in the 1980s. at Harvard Business School and is associated with the global activities of transnational corporations (TNCs). Economic basis The birth of the term “globalization” is not accidental. The formation of a global community truly begins with dynamic changes in the economic sphere. Activity in this area is so superior to all others that globalization is often identified with the emergence of a global economy. This approach is especially typical for academic economists. Thus, the domestic economist V. Obolensky, although he admits that the phenomenon of globalization goes beyond purely economic boundaries and has an impact on all spheres of public life, nevertheless notes that a quantitative indicator of globalization is the growth rate of international exchange of goods, services, and capital, which is faster than the dynamics of production. , and the qualitative indicator is to strengthen the relationship and interdependence between national economies 12 .

At the same time, globalization includes many aspects, including international trade, telecommunications, international finance, the activities of transnational corporations, technical and scientific cooperation, cultural exchange of new types and scales, migration and refugee flows, relations between poor and rich countries of the world etc. In this regard, there are many definitions of globalization. Here are some of them. “Most often, globalization is associated with qualitatively new conditions of integration, integrity and interdependence of the world... In many ways, the current stage of globalization comes down to a unique addition to the interdependence of the increasing transnationalization of economic, information and other types of activities” (Yu.E. Fedorov). The new quality of being determines “the understanding of globalization as a complex geo-economic, geopolitical and geo-humanitarian phenomenon that has a powerful demonstration effect on all aspects of the life of the countries involved in this process” (A.G. Volodin, G.K. Shirokov). There is also this interpretation: “Globalization is the development of economic and political interdependence of countries and regions to a level at which it becomes possible and necessary to raise the issue of creating a single world legal field and world bodies of economic and political governance” (V.V. Mikheev). Finally, “globalization is the process of articulation of various components of humanity in the course of its evolution, as opposed to the process of differentiation of humanity” (M.A. Cheshkov).

If we try to generalize the signs of globalization as one of the leading trends in world development, we can identify six main interconnected phenomena and processes:

1) an objective increase in the permeability of interstate partitions, expressed in the phenomena of “overcoming borders” and “economic citizenship”;

2) a sharp increase in the volume and intensity of transstate, transnational flows of capital, information, services and human resources;

3) massive spread of Western standards of consumption, life, self- and worldview to all other parts of the planet;

4) strengthening the role of extra-, supra-, trans-, and simply non-state regulators of the world economy and international relations;

5) boosting exports and implanting certain variations of the model of democratic government into the political fabric of different countries of the world;

6) the formation of a virtual space of electronic communication, which sharply increases the opportunities for socialization of the individual, that is, for the direct involvement of the individual in passive and interactive qualities in global information processes, regardless of his location 13.

As a common denominator of the above definitions of globalization, one can single out a key term that defines its essence. This is the “interdependence” of states and societies. In turn, interdependence implies two phenomena - interconnectedness (flow of capital, services, information, human resources) and mutual vulnerability (dependence of the state of some countries and regions on processes occurring in other countries and regions).

General characteristics of globalization. A simple overview of the manifestations of globalization allows us to divide them into material (objective) and virtual (manipulative). The first includes everything that concerns the real movement of financial flows, transfer of technologies, goods and services, mass migrations, construction of global information networks, etc. The second is the content filling of these networks, the formation and promotion of political and psychological attitudes intended for international public opinion. The latter include Western values ​​and patterns of life, which initially suggests the potential for conflict in the phenomenon of globalization. Thus, globalization “is not only what actually exists, but also what people are asked to think and what they actually think about what is happening and its prospects” 14. Obviously, the last clarification seems extremely important, given that the processes of globalization are perceived ambiguously in the world. If the material manifestations of globalization are not in doubt, since they are hourly confirmed by life practice, then an appeal to the Western component of globalization, consonant with the thesis of Westernization (spread

understanding of Western values ​​and lifestyles) do not seem to be either flawless or the only possible options for understanding reality.

A comparison of the theoretically designated features of globalization with reality allows us to conclude that globalization is a new qualitative state of the world and, to a lesser extent, its quantitative characteristic. In other words, the processes mentioned in the definitions of globalization concern the developed regions of the world to a much greater extent, while they have almost bypassed the “deep Periphery”. Globalization is a very uneven process. Thus, two neighboring African countries often have telephone connections through London or Paris. Foreign investment bypasses these states, and not only does the concept of “global socialization” not apply to the population, but sometimes they are completely unaware of life in a neighboring country, limiting their horizons to information about the life of neighboring tribes.

In the context of globalization, the nation-state ceases to act as the only entity that monopolistically integrates the interests of large communities and represents them on the international stage. TNCs with their multiethnic staff, international professional communities, non-governmental organizations, and informal interest groups emerging on the Internet are playing an increasing role in world politics and economics. In various fields of activity, through the efforts of the most energetic and well-prepared people, numerous formal and informal associations of “citizens of the world” appear, which completely or partially escape the control of “their” state.

However, it is premature to write off nation-states as the main subjects of world politics. Having lost their former monopoly in the field of international relations, they remain key players in this field.

As for the internal policies of states, it should be noted that the methods by which they perform their economic and social functions are changing. In the context of the growing interdependence of national economies, the information revolution and the liberalization of cross-border flows of goods, services, capital and people, growing exogenous vulnerability requires increased protection of national interests. This contradiction finds its solution in the fact that the “quantity” of government intervention in the economy observed in recent decades has been replaced by an increase in its “quality.” In particular, governments of developed and (to a lesser extent) developing countries are moving to increasingly complex methods of macroeconomic regulation, primarily related to foreign economic aspects - exchange rates, balance of payments, customs policy, etc. Governments of developed countries actively protect the activities of their capital abroad.

The Achilles heel of globalization is the world governance system and political structures. Without falling into utopias like a world government, we can safely say: even the first steps along the path of globalization require a qualitatively higher level of controllability of social processes. You cannot build the future with the political tools of the past. Those means of control, coordination, and management that have been created for centuries at the national level are clearly losing their effectiveness in a globalizing world. In order to cope with the elements of social processes, they need to be supplemented with some kind of supranational management systems. In the meantime, it can be stated that the world under globalization has become more chaotic than in the past, during the period of stable existence of the Westphalian state-centric system.

By its nature, the process of globalization cannot be conflict-free. One of the sources of contradictions generated by globalization is large differences in the potentials of individual participants. The inequality of starting opportunities that predetermines the distribution of roles lays the seeds of future conflicts between the winners and losers of globalization. The polarizing effect of modern globalization is largely due to the neoliberal policies of the Western world. By relying on the unimpeded movement of capital, neoliberalism perpetuates inequality between regions of the world.

Another source of conflict is a fundamental difference in lifestyle, in attitudes towards various aspects of life, in value systems. Today's globalization is mainly the brainchild of the West, primarily the United States. Since Western civilization represents a small part of the Earth's population, much in the development of globalization processes causes fair protests and criticism from the rest of the world.

Stages of globalization

Since when can we talk about the emergence of some social relations and functions beyond the boundaries of national states as a global phenomenon, and not just an international one? Is current globalization a direct continuation of the internationalization of capital, the beginning of which is attributed by the French historian F. Braudel to the 16th-17th centuries and which he called the process of creating a “world economy” around some centers of the formation of European capitalism (Genoa, Holland, England). This is what, for example, the French professor-geographer O. Dollfus thinks so 15. A similar point of view is shared by some other scientists - B. Badi 16, V.I. Kuznetsov. The latter writes: “Globalization is not a linear process. It is developing in waves and has already gone through more than one stage: from the period of the Great Geographical Discoveries and the creation of the Spanish and Portuguese colonial empires, from the capitalist colonization of the world in the 19th century to the post-socialist overcoming of the consequences cold war» 17. What is attractive about this argument is that its author does not view globalization as something fundamentally new in history, born of the events of recent decades, and also that he sees the process of globalization as cyclical. But dating the beginning of this process to the Middle Ages is a rather controversial position.

Pax Britannica – first global integration cycle (mid XIX V. – 1914). The point of view that the “world era” in the development of civilization began to emerge in the mid-19th century, replacing the “Atlantic era” 18, seems more convincing. The world market, indeed, began to take shape during the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries, but only by the beginning of the 900s. swept the whole world. Almost the entire world turned out to be open to economic ties. The European world-economy has assumed a planetary scale, it has become global. At the end of the 19th century. a system of global capitalism has emerged 19.

The economic unity of the world grew out of the Industrial Revolution, which created the first British factory industry in history. The transformation of England into the “workshop of the world” radically changed its foreign trade policy. Duties on raw materials and food products became an anachronism - the country experienced a shortage of raw materials and food. With the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846, Great Britain, the world's largest economic power, abandoned its policy of protectionism. The era of “free trade” has begun.

The lifting of restrictions gave a powerful impetus to the development of all international trade. The transition to “free trade” is even called the first example of “shock therapy” in history: in just one decade, the amount of world trade turnover almost doubled, i.e. There was a sudden acceleration in the growth of the world market. From the middle of the 19th century. Before the outbreak of the First World War, the liberal world order prevailed in the sphere of international economic relations. World trade grew at an average annual rate of 3.4%, while global production grew at only 2.1%. If in 1850 the share of exports from developed countries (USA, Western European countries, Canada, Australia) was slightly more than 5% of their GDP, then in 1913 it was already about 13%. The slogans of the “international” and the “union” of the proletarians of all countries, put forward by K. Marx and F. Engels in the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” in 1848, reflected the essence of the new era.

Since the mid-1870s. Along with commodity exports, the export of capital became important. Capital flows from country to country have become one of the main factors in global economic development. Thus, up to 10% of the French population owned Russian bonds. In Russia, about a third of the share capital belonged to foreigners, in particular Germans. The “Great Age” of international borrowing ended in 1914.

It is significant that the globalization factor manifested itself in other areas besides economics. Research conducted by K. Deutsch showed that the share of international correspondence relative to domestic mail in the early 1950s. was significantly lower than in 1913, and somewhat lower than in 1880, that is, during the time of Karl Marx 20.

On the crest of the migration wave that rose high in the mid-19th century, the world entered a new century. In the 1880s. 7% of Scandinavian residents moved to the USA, more than 6% of the Italian population moved here only on the eve of the First World War. Before the war, American-born workers did not make up half of the country's entire working class. Passports and work permits for foreigners were not required.

The feeling of unity and integrity of the world, inherent in antiquity and the Renaissance, returned to the man of the 900s. The World Olympic Games have been held since 1896. International Nobel Prizes have been awarded since 1901. In 1887, the language of international communication, Esperanto, was created. The system of global capitalism reached its peak by 1910. Approximately 89% of the world's population lived in countries with convertible currencies. The world was open to merchants and travelers. “A resident of London could order by telephone...a variety of goods from all over the world..., could risk his fortune by investing a day in natural resources and enterprises in any part of the world... He was provided with inexpensive, comfortable and unhindered travel to any country and natural area... But, most importantly, he considered this state of affairs to be natural, unchangeable and permanent. The internationalization of social and economic life was absolute,” Keynes later wrote 21 . August 1914 put an end to the history of PaxBritannica.

Global disintegration (1914 – 1945). Any serious and prolonged war, he wrote at the end of the 19th century. V.S. Soloviev, is inevitably accompanied by the greatest economic shocks, which, given the current connection of parts of the entire globe, will be worldwide shocks. The collapse of the free trade system began during the First World War with the introduction of restrictions characteristic of a wartime economy and the intensification of autarkic processes. From the point of view of economic history of the 19th century. ended in 1914

The system of international division of labor, since 1914, has been subject to severe shocks. The First World War partly severed and partly disorganized international economic ties. Their recovery after the war proceeded with the greatest difficulties. Great Depression 1929-1933 marked the beginning of a new disorganization of the world economy. In the trade policy of most states, the tendencies of protectionism and economic nationalism are sharply increasing. There is a growing tendency to make do with home-produced products more and to depend less on imports. In 1938, the dependence of the economies of developed countries on foreign trade was more than 1.5 times lower compared to 1880 and only 20% higher than the level of 1850. In European countries, a system of issuing permits for the employment of foreigners was introduced, which generally had a prohibitive character. Passports, previously common only in Russia and the Ottoman Empire, became necessary for foreign travel. The Second World War disrupted world economic ties even more than the First.

The “Great Schism” in the world economy also had underlying reasons related to the change in technological structures. In old industrial countries (Great Britain, USA, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland) the era of railway construction ended. A whole era has gone into the past when railways were “the most visible indicators of the development... of bourgeois-democratic civilization” (V.I. Lenin). N.D. Kondratiev associated the new cyclical rise of the world economy with the automobile industry, which, despite the fact that the Ford assembly line began working in 1913, began much later - after the Second World War. All this indicated that during the interwar period the world economy entered a “transitional age”, when the old driving forces of development and global integration generated by the first industrial revolution had exhausted themselves, and new ones (including motorization, the transition from coal to oil and etc.) have not yet become fully operational.

Britain was no longer the “manager” of the global economic system, and the United States was not yet ready to assume global leadership. When the system began to fall apart in the early 1920s, no one felt responsible and nothing was done to prevent the disasters of the late 1920s and 1930s.

Second global integration cycle (since 1946). The second global integration cycle grew out of the second industrial (technological) revolution, which gave rise to industries such as automobile manufacturing, oil production and oil refining, which in the second half of the twentieth century. became the main driving force behind the international division of labor. At the end of the twentieth century. crude oil, automobiles and petroleum products are the three most important commodity groups in world trade, accounting for about 25% of world exports. The most important basis of modern globalization has also become the latest information and communication technologies, which have become widespread since the 1990s.

After World War II, much of the global economy had to start from scratch. At the end of the 19th century. international flows of goods, capital and labor were in many ways more intense than in the 1950s. In the early 1960s. the prospects for globalization were assessed very pessimistically. In all likelihood, the world will not return to the “normal” situation that existed before 1914, wrote K. Deutsch and A. Eckstein in 1961 22 .

The international division of labor and the share of foreign trade in the world economy were restored only in the first half of the 1970s. Industrialized countries returned to the 1913 level in terms of the share of merchandise exports in GDP. TNCs have “come into fashion” again - their influence on the global economy has become truly significant. It is significant that only in the fourth edition of Charles Kindleberger’s famous book “International Economics,” published in 1968, did the author first pay attention to foreign direct investment. In 1974, the Commission on Transnational Corporations and the Center for TNCs were created at the UN, which became evidence of the recognition by the world community of the growing role of TNCs in the global economy. However, the total volume of foreign direct investment as a percentage of gross world product was restored to the 1913 level only in the early 1990s.

The United States became the “manager” of the second wave of globalization. This is not surprising, considering that in the mid-twentieth century they accounted for accounted for 80% of world trade turnover. They initiated massive economic support for Western Europe devastated by World War II as part of the Marshall Plan, which made it possible to quickly intensify economic relations between them. On the initiative and with the full support of the United States, global economic organizations were created - the WTO, the IMF, the World Bank, which have become a distinctive feature of the current stage of globalization. Their creation was a recognition of the fact that world trade and world financial relations have reached such a level of development that they require global regulation.

However, the role of the United States as the main “globalizer” is not so clear. Paradoxically, the United States, in a certain sense, is also a brake on globalization. At the end of the twentieth century. a fourth of the world economy is “located” in the United States – the most economically self-sufficient, “autarkic” of the developed countries. In the figurative expression of P. Krugman, “the USA corporation, even after globalization, sells almost 9/10 of its products to its own workers and shareholders.”

There are other restrictions imposed on the process of globalization. Foreign-controlled enterprises in Japan produce less than 1% of the country's industrial output. Along with the United States, Japan has the lowest per capita indicators of merchandise exports and foreign trade turnover among highly developed countries. The processes of regionalization of the world economy also work against globalization. Exports of goods from the EU (less intra-regional supplies) equal only 9% of its GDP. In other words, the “United States of Europe”, in a certain sense, is an example of the same “autarkic” entity as the USA and Japan.

Thus, the current openness of the world economy is not unique or unprecedented. Lev Gumilyov wrote about the “aberration of proximity,” which disrupts the scale of phenomena, in which recent events seem more significant than long-ago ones. It should be recognized that today the world is experiencing a “rebirth” of global capitalism and economic (and not only) unity.

However, it is likely, given past cycles of globalization, that the current unprecedented openness of societies and economies is reversible. “Before every crisis there is certainly a boom” (J. Soros). As has been shown, periods of integration are followed by periods of disintegration. These changes occur over long periods of time and, as a rule, are associated with “general” changes in the nature of economic development, caused, for example, by the scientific and technological revolution and associated fundamental changes in the nature of production or energy supply of our world.

Contradictions of globalization

Socio-economic contradictions. Most domestic and many foreign scientists agree that globalization is an extremely contradictory phenomenon that gives rise to deep socially negative processes in global society. Countries that are lagging behind in their development find themselves in the most difficult situation in the conditions of modern globalization. Russian authors, speaking about the enormous difference in the levels of development of advanced and developing countries, operate with the expressive image of a “broken civilization.” “The result of the twentieth century, which felt the taste of earthly abundance, which experienced the taste of the “Gilded Age”, the century of scientific and technological breakthrough and the most intense breakthrough of the productive forces of society,” writes A.I. Neklessa, “this result, in general, is still disappointing: on the threshold In the third millennium of the existence of modern civilization, social stratification on planet Earth is not decreasing, but growing” 23.

Describing the living conditions in poor Third World countries, the scientist writes that about a billion people there are cut off from productive work: 150 million are unemployed, more than 700 million are underemployed, an uncertain but significant number are involved in criminal activities. A billion are illiterate (2/3 of them are women). Almost every third inhabitant of the Earth still does not use electricity, 1.5 billion do not have access to safe sources of drinking water. All this gives rise to socio-political tension. The number of emigrants and victims of inter-ethnic conflicts has increased rapidly from 8 million people in the late 1970s. to 23 million people by the mid-1990s. Another 26 million people are temporary migrants. These facts give reason to talk about “the organic undemocratic nature of the global universe, its...classes” 24 . Another domestic scientist V.L. Inozemtsev believes that the question of the impact of globalization on the problems of world inequality, the scale of which represents perhaps the main threat to the stability of the existing world order, is as significant for modern scientists as the notorious fundamental question of philosophy.

Of course, globalization itself is not the cause of socio-economic inequality in the world and the uneven development of regions, which have always existed and are of an enduring nature. But the current one neoliberal The globalization model contributes to the conservation of negative trends in the world economy and their strengthening. In general terms, the main features of neoliberal globalization are the following:

emphasis on the forced homogenization (on a strict monetarist basis) of the mechanisms of economic regulation of countries included in the world economy;

proclamation of the main, if not the only regulator of the development of a spontaneous market mechanism;

consideration of the national economic complex, sovereignty, and partly even the state as dying categories; overcoming them as quickly as possible is presented as the key to success;

directing the main efforts towards weakening the economic role of the state, towards liberalization and deregulation 25 .

The main danger of neoliberalism is that peripheral countries are deprived of the ability to use government measures to protect themselves from the destructive forces of the market, from the expansionist attempts of more powerful competitors, from destructive financial and economic crises. Such a model cannot ensure sustainable and rational development of backward countries. The neoliberal model deliberately does not take into account the socio-economic and political environment in which it must exist.

At the same time, a characteristic feature of the propaganda and practice of neoliberalism is the double standard. Agents of neoliberalism impose the most radical market concepts on developing countries, not always considering them obligatory for themselves. All previous history suggests that in the event of a rampant market element, Western societies introduced certain forms of regulation that made the market more civilized, for example, banking and antitrust legislation in the USA at the end of the 19th century, Keynesian recipes after the crisis of 1929-1933. and World War II, etc. Currently, with all the talk about weakening the role of the state, in reality, completely different processes are observed in the economies of Western countries. What is happening is not a curtailment of the economic role of the state, but a change in its economic functions towards more active participation in the struggle for world economic positions. The statement of the US business organ, Fortune magazine, is typical: “... when American business speaks of capitalism, it means free markets for everyone except itself” 26 . Neoliberals deny developing countries the right to regulate the market element. This model of globalization can be called extroverted liberalism, which is aimed at liberalizing not its own, but the foreign market.

To better understand the reasons for the formation of just such a model of globalization, it is appropriate to recall that the transition of the countries of the economic avant-garde to the post-industrial phase of development was accompanied by a slowdown in the rate of its growth, which has not been stopped to this day. If in the 1960s. at the final stage of industrialization, the average annual growth rate of their total GDP was 5%, then in the 1990s. they dropped to 2.2%. They tried to find a way out of the protracted recession through economic liberalization of the world economy, including through the “opening up” of developing economies with their cheaper factors of production (labor, resources). Consequently, globalization is also a consequence of the decline in the profitability of production in developed countries. In addition, an important factor in the formation of the neoliberal model of globalization was the factor of the interests of transnational capital (TNCs), for whose activities favorable political conditions developed after the collapse of the colonial system. The economic interests of TNCs in these conditions were associated with “stepping over” the customs tariffs of the new independent states - former colonies, which was precisely facilitated by the demands of the “captains” of neoliberalism.

The ideological inspirers of neoliberal globalization are big capital, the governments of developed Western countries, primarily the USA, and its implementers are the IMF, IBRD and GATT/WTO, overstaffed and understaffed by neoliberals.

The IMF policy is especially indicative in this regard. Instead of the initial focus on supporting the activities of states to compensate for the “failures” of the market, due to the lessons of the Great Depression, in accordance with the so-called Washington Consensus (an informal agreement on the principles of activity between the IMF, the World Bank and the American financial and economic circles) on the “correct” policy in relation to developing countries, the IMF has focused its main efforts on intensifying the processes of privatization and liberalization there. This notorious consensus was based on an assessment of the situation in Latin America, which had little in common with the situation in other regions of the developing world, where private capital was far from gaining independence and strength. At the same time, the Washington Consensus practically ignored the experience of the leaders of technogenic civilization themselves. After all, the most advanced countries, including the United States, developed their economies based on thoughtful, selective protection of certain industries until they gained enough strength to compete with foreign companies. No less thoughtfully and carefully, in accordance with the real economic situation, other limiters of market competition were then eliminated. Thus, the liberalization of capital markets in Western European countries began only in the 1970s. The most successful developing countries, the so-called “Asian tigers” - Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Thailand - followed a similar path.

The shift in the IMF's activities towards the forced opening of underdeveloped economies did not ensure the dynamization of the fading growth of the leaders of technogenic civilization, but it greatly complicated the position of its outsiders. It is no coincidence that the least economic losses among the countries directly affected by the Asian crisis of 1997-1998 were suffered by Malaysia, which flatly refused to follow the instructions of the IMF. It is also characteristic that the PRC and Taiwan were practically not affected at all by the crisis. If the “invulnerability” of the PRC is explained primarily by the preservation, despite strong external pressure, of complete state control over all foreign economic transactions, then Taiwan survived due to the fact that, when carrying out financial liberalization, it promptly attended to the creation of new and modernization of traditional levers of strategic financial regulation.

The answer to the question why most developing countries accept the conditions of the IMF and large Western capital in general is simple: privatization and liberalization in most countries is carried out in conditions of structural crises in exchange for the necessary financial support in the form of concessional loans, restructuring of external debt, humanitarian aid, etc. .d.

This is not to say that developing countries have not benefited at all from being connected to transnational industrial complexes. Of course, we received quite a lot. But these benefits are much more modest than those of the leaders of neoliberal globalization. The main benefits from globalization according to the recipes of the Washington Consensus were received by the “globalizers” themselves. The developing countries, which found themselves in the role of “globalized”, essentially received crumbs from the master’s table according to the principle “it’s on you, God, that it’s not good for me.” And this is not the idle speculation of anti-globalists, but a real fact of modern history, recorded in the fundamental study of UNCTAD, included in the traditional report of this organization on world trade and development 27 .

IN recent years In Russian literature one can find interesting comparisons of the first phase of globalization at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. and its modern stage from the point of view of the role played by the “globalizers” in relation to the “globalized” countries. According to V.L. Inozemtsev, the first (European) stage of globalization was characterized by a certain concern of the developed center for the periphery. It was the colonialists who laid the foundation for those branches of industry and agriculture that sometimes remain the most important for the economies of the periphery countries today. The development of diamonds in Africa, metals in Latin America, even the cultivation of tea in Ceylon and the cultivation of rubber trees in Malaysia are all consequences of European intervention. Flows of technology, goods, financial resources and people moved from Europe towards the global periphery, and not vice versa, as now. For decades, Europeans have made gigantic efforts to rebuild the periphery. They followed the path of subtle political maneuvering and the formation of alliances with peripheral peoples. Without idealizing the times of European colonial rule, Inozemtsev argues that by the beginning of the twentieth century. Europeans were more able to interact constructively with representatives of other cultural traditions than the inhabitants of any continent at any other time in history.

Americans at the end of the twentieth century. offered the world their own vision of globalization, based on their inherent interpretation of freedom and an unshakable belief in the optimal nature of market regulation. The new approach suggests that the incorporation of peripheral countries into the system of international division of labor may be the optimal strategy for their accelerated development. However, such an approach has flaws and, in a hidden form, contains all the main defects of the modern stage of globalization. "Modern globalization radically different from westernization past times,” concludes Inozemtsev. “This is movement for the sake of movement, a path to nowhere, an attempt to use market mechanisms to overcome chaos, for which these mechanisms are, in fact, obviously not suited” 28 .

Socio-political contradictions. Most researchers of globalization note that its “downside” is the process of “regionalization” or “fragmentation,” i.e. increasing socio-political heterogeneity of the world against the backdrop of increasing Westernization pressure from the West. According to M. Castells, “The era of economic globalization is also the era of policy localization” 29 . There are active attempts by different peoples and regions to isolate themselves from the costs of globalization by searching for the specifics of their region, their identity, which is often associated with an increase in conflicts. Anti-American sentiment is growing around the world. Vivid examples are two regions - Latin America, which has traditionally been in the sphere of US influence, and the Muslim East. Latin American countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and a number of others are increasingly striving to break away from US influence, create regional structures of international cooperation without American participation and in spite of it, and find an alternative to American capital in their countries. Attempts by the West, led by the United States, to “democratize” the Near and Middle East and to “accelerate” its progress “from the outside” only intensify the radicalization of Muslim countries. Traditional Muslim society resists any external pressure. The rights of women, religious, national and, especially, sexual minorities, as well as the right to voluntarily change religion, are part of Western political culture. Experiments with free elections bring extremist groups to power (Palestinian territories). As a result, bloody chaos does not subside in the Middle East, and the Muslim periphery - from Malaysia and Indonesia, through Central Asia, the North Caucasus to Somalia, Sudan and Nigeria - remains the target of the international “terrorist international”.

Another political contradiction of modern globalization, which, unlike “regionalization,” is subjective in nature, is the often extreme protests of opponents of globalization (anti-globalists). Domestic scientists note that the current anti-globalist movement represents only the tip of the iceberg, the main, larger part of which is hidden “under water,” i.e. does not manifest itself either actively or radically. This is a growing part of the middle class, especially its youth and intellectual categories. Entrepreneurial groups, most of which are not global functionaries and work for the domestic market, have a far from unambiguous attitude towards the process of globalization. The representatives of their interests are international and national non-governmental organizations, trade unions, as well as social democrats. The problem, however, is that the forces potentially capable of challenging global neoliberalism do not gravitate toward each other and, as a rule, do not show interest in unification. They have not yet formulated either a program or a strategy capable of becoming a guide to action to promote a global alternative. Meanwhile, among the intellectual elite, such an alternative has been developed - this socially-market model of globalization, subordinated to the concept of “sustainable development” of different countries and regions.

Judging by the way the Social Democrats - a political force included in the power structures of many Western countries - are behaving, one cannot count on any decisive actions on their part. Although they reject neoliberal approaches and the ideology of the “pure” market, at the same time they have moved quite far away from the social reformism of the past. Their relations with big capital, including transnational ones, have improved by an order of magnitude. All this makes them extremely careful in anything that could disrupt relations with business. It is unlikely that today's social democrats are capable of leading the struggle for the “socialization” of transnational capitalism, as they began to do with national capitalism more than a hundred years ago. However, in fairness, it should be noted that in Russian literature there are also quite positive assessments of the challenges that the anti-globalization movement poses to neoliberal globalization 31 .

Ratings

Assessments of foreign scientists. The essence and prospects of globalization are assessed abroad very ambiguously.

Orthodox globalists (hyperglobalists) - K. Ohmae, J. Redwood, M. Friedman, P. Kennedy, E. Slaughter and others - consider globalization as the implementation of liberal economic principles. The global market promotes economic growth and prosperity (not of all countries, but of those that are most integrated into the global market). This economic process is leading to the obsolescence of traditional states as economic units. As a result, states lose power, which passes to supranational institutions such as the IMF and the EU, and to transnational actors such as TNCs and NGOs. Technocrats and the elite of liberal countries play a global role. The old division between North and South is becoming obsolete, since the global South is not a single whole; its countries differ depending on the degree of integration into the world market.

According to transformists (B. Axford, D. Held, D. Goldblatt, E. Mangrue, D. Perraton, J. Rosenau, E. Giddens, etc.), globalization is deeply transforming world politics, government and society, which are trying to adapt towards a more interdependent and rapidly changing world. States are increasingly competing with non-state actors and extraterritorial organizations. Thus, globalization transforms power. State power is not so much weakened or strengthened under the influence of globalization as it is transformed in order to function in new conditions using new means. However, since integration is accompanied by fragmentation, the stability of the further development of globalization is questioned by these scientists.

Skeptics (P. Hirst, G. Thompson, J. Allen, R. Gilpin, N. Fergusson, etc.) believe that globalization is a myth. They note that the largest national economies today are no more integrated than before the First World War (during the period of British hegemony). Skeptics also question the claim that regional differences, such as the North-South divide, are disappearing under the influence of the global market. They tend to believe that this gap is widening under globalization. Skeptics also believe that economic integration does not lead to a single free world trade area, but to the formation of rival regional blocs in America, Europe and Asia. The expected formation of world civilization in practice results in the fragmentation of large entities (for example, such as Russia) and the formation of small socio-political units separated by linguistic, religious and other similar cultural boundaries. The world today is even less interdependent than it was in the 90s. XIX century.

Anti-globalists (N. Chomsky, R. McChesie, A. Callinicos, N. Klein, S. George, R. Falk, etc.), some of whom call themselves alter-globalists, actually oppose not the process of globalization itself, but its goals (to serve the selfish interests of mega-capital) and methods. However, just as scientists argue about the essence and prospects of globalization, anti-globalists also do not find agreement on the goals and tactics of the protest movement. Trade unions in the North are protesting against the transfer of jobs to countries in the South. Workers in prosperous countries in the global South, on the other hand, are extremely interested in these places in order to improve wages and working conditions. Anarchists compete with environmentalists on trade policy. However, resistance to modern globalization is realized on an international, that is, precisely global scale, although sometimes in the form of street riots 32.

Assessments of Russian scientists. There are also disagreements among domestic scientists in assessing globalization.

A significant part of the intellectual and propaganda elites (to a lesser extent political) are skeptical about the realities of modern globalization, if not to say that they do not accept them (A. Neklessa, V. Khoros, V. Inozemtsev, N. Simonia, etc.). Following the traditions of social class analysis (which has not lost its cognitive function to this day), they agree that the modern model of globalization is an extremely contradictory phenomenon that gives rise to deep socially negative processes in world society. There are reasons for such rejection: the historical experience of communication between Russia and the West in the 19th-20th centuries, the Soviet ideological and political heritage, traditional features of the relationship between society and the state, the current level of integration of Russia into the world economy. In the latter case, the situation is as follows: Russia fits primarily into global politics, rather than economics: its share in world GDP and trade is 1.7%, innovation is 0.95%, while in world nuclear potential it is about 50% (by number nuclear warheads at the beginning of 2003) 33. For comparison: the share of the US and EU GDP relative to world indicators is about 21%.

A different, generally optimistic point of view on the results and prospects of modern neoliberal globalization is shared by some Russian economists, for example, S.I. Dolgov, Yu.V. Shishkov. Referring to the “frightening data on the dire prospects for the Third World” cited by many publications, including at the UN level, Shishkov argues that they are largely the result of a kind of statistical aberration, an inability or unwillingness to distinguish the relative rates of deterioration in living conditions in a number of peripheral regions world with in comparison with rapidly progressing regions from absolute data indicating a gradual improvement of these conditions for the vast majority of the world's population, including the most backward regions 34. Without the influence of globalization, Dolgov believes, the gap between poor and rich countries would be greater for at least two reasons: imports into developed countries and foreign direct investment into peripheral countries stimulate economic growth in developing countries and therefore mitigate inequality. This is also confirmed by “reverse evidence”: self-isolation of individual countries with closed or semi-closed economies (for example, North Korea) leads to the most disastrous economic consequences. Of course, the poverty of people in the modern world is indeed the most acute and difficult problem. The point, however, is that it is possible to improve the situation only through the gradual inclusion of the relevant countries in the processes of capitalist globalization 35 . This point of view has fewer supporters in Russia than the pessimistic one.

The third approach to assessing globalization seems to be the most convincing and balanced. It is represented by those scientists who, without at all denying the Westernization orientation of globalization, prove the “inconsistency” of the non-West with the West due to the deep cultural and civilizational differences between them. One of the supporters of this approach, A.D. Bogaturov, formulates the position according to which in the modern world three types of societies can be distinguished - traditional, modern and conglomerate. Russia is one of the latter. Modern society is rational, in contrast to the irrational traditional society, where the model of behavior is set by cultural experience. By conglomerate “we mean societies that are characterized by long-term coexistence and sustainable reproduction of layers of heterogeneous model-forming elements and relationships based on them. These layers form separate enclaves, the efficiency of organization of which allows enclaves to survive within the framework of the surrounding conglomerate society, maintaining unchanged or little changing proportions among themselves.”

Speaking about the social functions of conglomerate self-organizations of non-Western societies, Bogaturov notes that they arose as an immune response to modernization, acting as a selectively permeable “protective armor”: on the one hand, it allows societies to perceive innovations in a dosed manner, on the other hand, it protects organic the basis for the reproduction of non-Western societies from complete destruction, and thirdly, it softens the contradictions along the “West - non-West” line, preventing the escalation of mutual aggressiveness and “explosive” rejection. The conglomerate-enclave type of self-organization is a tool for the extremely successful adaptation of traditional society to the industrial and post-industrial environment. The enclave of the “traditional” is not doomed to dissolve in its environment. Likewise, the enclave of the “modern” is not guaranteed to prevail throughout society.

In Russia, the “anti-modern” layer of ethical norms, going back to ascetic-Orthodox values, constitutes a powerful enclave of the “traditional” in the life of Russian society (primarily the provinces). This is “grassroots rebellion” that does not develop into a form of revolution, which would be appropriate to expect given the failure of radical reforms of the 1990s. (hunger strikes, feasible forms of protest, “missionary” asceticism of teachers and doctors who lost their pay). The enclave-conglomerate structure of Russian society leads to an important conclusion about Russia’s place in the structure of the modern world. Globalization “does not necessarily condemn Russia to transformation into part of the “civilized world.” The tough internal resistance of the Russian material to Westernization in the form of radical liberal reforms forces one to reflect on the historical prospects of Russia in the context of not only its unity-merger with the West or the East, but also its conglomerate co-equal position with both” 36 .

It should be emphasized that the concept of a conglomerate organization of society leads to the methodology of supporters of the historical, philosophical and sociological tradition, which denies a straightforward perception of progress (“The West must spread, and all non-West must become the West”). Among those who defended the idea of ​​a plurality of civilizations are I. Herder, I. Goethe, A. Schopenhauer, T. Mann, O. Spengler, A. Toynbee and others.

Rakhmanov, social globalization. The problem of globalization - began to be actively discussed in the world of literature back in the 90s. Many books have been written on this topic. In the 2000s they began to write a lot in Russia. Now - all over the world. This area of ​​knowledge is global studies.

Globalization - integration of humanity, transformation into a single whole. Acceleration of globalization - in the 20th, 21st centuries. The processes of human globalization have occurred since ancient times: goods from China reached ancient Rome.

Approaches to globalization(in global studies):

Smith, Belis"Globalization" (1996). Globalization - process increasing interaction between members of society, in which changes in 1 part affect others. Globalization world- in which political, social, economic phenomena become increasingly dependent.

Austrian author Waters. Globalization - social process, during which the obstacles of social phenomena are destroyed, and people realize this, the attitude towards space changes, and fades into the background. In a global world, society and culture will be combined, but there may be internal differences and multicity. The locomotive of globalization - West. Western standards cover the whole world, becoming globalistic. But some people are going rejection reaction (Afghanistan). Points to 3 spheres in which globalization unfolds: economics, politics, culture. Especially quickly in culture.

English scientist Robertson . Globalization - compression of the world, awareness as a whole (compression of consciousness, people realize this)

McGrew: Globalization - increasing the process of worldwide communication

Amer social J. Ritzer "Globalization" (2010). Globalization - a transplanetary process that involves an increase in the fluidity of flows of people, places, information, structures that people generate. Globalization points: Roman Empire; Spread of Islam; Viking Campaigns; Activities of banks lending to Europe; Conquest of the army of Genghis Khan and his heirs; Trips of European merchants; Discovery of America by Columbus; Influenza epidemic; 2 MV in the 1st half of the 20th century; creation of the Internet; acts of terror.

Cohen, Kennedy"Globosociology". Object of globalization - 6 components :

1 change in ideas about space and time

2 increase in cultural interaction

3 the emergence of problems facing the entire planet simultaneously

4 increased interconnectedness and interdependence

5 increase in transnational actors, organizations

6 synchronization of all aspects of social life involved in globalization.

4 main factors of global peace:

1 Investments

2 Industrial development

4 Individual consumption.

British scientist Sklyar : Global system based on transnational practices- easily cross borders, develop into 3 spheres: economic, political, cultural-ideological. Each is characterized by the presence of basic institutional forms. Economical- companies, political - transnational class, cultural-ideological - culture and ideology of consumerism (consumption).

Many approaches . A classification system has emerged. Sklyar divided into: world-system approach, global cultures approach, global society approach, global capitalism.

Waters summarizes the results of the development of globalization by 2000 - the most typical approach:

1 Globalization is unfolding simultaneously with modernization

2 assumes the interconnection of all connections on the planet, isolation disappears

3 analogy of space compression

4 Phenomenology of globalization- reflection, people focus on humanity as a whole

5 Globalization involves a combination of risk and trust.

Processes of people integration - for a long time. Even in ancient times there were large associations. Globalization has increased with the rise of empires, the world of religions and trade. 1st representative pre-globalization Condorcet - a person turns into a single whole, lives according to the same principles. The basis of the idea was the development of capitalism, which presupposed an increase in contacts, primarily trade. Hence the increase in travel

Saint-Simon and Comte talked about fuss one world of order, Fr 1ya will follow this path

Marx and Engels « Communist Party Manifesto" - how the unification of people occurs. A world of production is created, a division of labor arises. Production and consumption become cosmopolitan. What is written in the Manifesto anticipates events

The beginning of the globalization process most researchers refer to era of great geographical discoveries 1492 - explorer Columbus of the “New World” - America. One of the consequences of the acquisition of new colonies by European powers is the need to develop trade, led to the need for new means of transport and communications, the spread of Western European languages ​​and cultures. However, the process of globalization has gained momentum as a result of the development world economy in the 2nd half of XX.

Globalization manifests itself through trends:

Global language. The need for a single language - English, spontaneous emergence, England was the leading country

Global migration - economical, job search

Global economy- global interests of transnational enterprises. Decline of the Peace of Westphalia. Now other countries have the right to interfere in the country. The interests of Western countries dominate. But lately China has also become stronger. Global politics: UN, NATO

Global spirit life(USA). Cinema, for example

Global Science and Education- interaction between scientists from different countries and nationalities, international awards (Nobel), integration of scientists. Science creates new knowledge. Education is the reproduction of knowledge. Ranking of higher education institutions - a manifestation of global science, leading position: USA and English

Global lifestyle. People in different countries lead practically 1 way of life - 1 book, have 1 idol. “Homogeneous fabric” throughout the world, mainly consumption, oriented towards global patterns. Even many distinctive societies tend to be exposed to global consumption and a global lifestyle. Standardization. Another factor of globalization is fast food restaurants - consumption for the sake of consumption. Social networks- consumption denominator

Global crime. Transnational global groups. Human trafficking. Drugs

Global cities- not necessarily big, the main thing is that it is decisive

Transnational proletarian class. Behind globalization one can see more essential processes - global classes. The transnational class is the master of the planet

Contradictions of globalization:

1 Opens possibilities : dissemination of technologies, innovations, economic growth, improvement of the resource distribution mechanism, increasing the efficiency of enterprises based on the development of global competition; improving the quality of life, family well-being, expanding access to choice and knowledge; strengthening international communication based on an economy based on common principles and rules, reducing the threat of international conflicts and local wars; dissemination of the ideas of humanism, democracy, civil rights; joining forces in solving global problems

2 creates threats and risks : technological and social backwardness of a number of countries due to lack of competitiveness and weak resources, uneven economic development; unemployment caused by restructuring of labor requirements; exacerbation of international conflicts, national and religious intolerance, terror; loss of national identity, habitual way of life, cultural traditions; inf discrimination

45. TYPES OF GLOBALIZATION. LIBERAL GLOBALIZATION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES FOR RUSSIA: +CULTURAL SCENARIOS OF GLOBALIZATION

Rakhmanov, lectures, social globalization. Modernization theories proclaimed the prosperity of the countries of the 3rd world to be a derivative of the consistency of implementation by the governments of these countries liberal politics and the readiness of these peoples to live in accordance with the laws of the economic market. The unipolar world, led by the United States, today most strongly influences global processes in all areas. The weakening and collapse of the USSR pushed Russia, as its successor, away from the position of a world power; other states are not so developed as to compete with the United States. Russian politicians have outlined an orientation towards a liberal economy (and Western values), the goal of foreign policy is to enter the civilized world (while neglecting the national interests). Criticizing neoliberal model of globalization, researchers draw attention to a complex of contradictions:

1 between the objective process of integration of countries into a single system and the hegemonic aspirations of individual representatives of the world elite

2 between the emergence of a single world of economic space and the division of the world into core and periphery

3 between the interests of the core and the periphery

4 between the formation of a single economic space and the emergence of powerful regional blocs

5 between the objective trend towards an increase in production volumes, an increase in labor production and a tendency towards deeper polarization of income and consumption

6 between the increasing efficiency of the world economy and the falling standard of living of parts of the population.

Economic globalization: free trade, capital movement, taxes on corporate profits, ease of movement of industries between states in the interests of reducing costs of labor and natural resources,

Developed and developing countries are getting closer in terms of wages and prices of goods

The number of company mergers within countries and at the transnational level is growing, accompanied by restructuring and a decrease in the number of employed workers

The trend towards outsourcing of non-core activities. Of particular importance is outsourcing from developed countries to developing ones, leading to a reduction in employment in developed countries and an increase in employment and income in developing countries.

Rapid dissemination of financial information around the world thanks to the Internet

The great importance of stock exchanges and financial instruments that are traded - shares of enterprises

The increase will consume loans as a platform for further growth of consumption. On the other hand, it is impossible to maintain an average standard of living without borrowing

Growing income stratification in developed and developing countries, which is influenced by unequal access to education

Erasing the nationality of products

Strengthening the role of transnational companies.

Under global economy Most often it is understood as an increase in the flow of goods, investments, loans, information, exchanges of people and ideas, expansion of the geography of distribution. Globalization leads to the fact that national economies become part of a single world economic system - a globalized economy.

Population migration as a manifestation of globalization, it will acquire a global character and become a serious source of aggravation of the social and economic situation in the world. The influx of cheap labor from outside has aggravated competition in the labor market of developed countries, leading to the complication of interethnic relations and the growth of nationalism. In the context of globalization, all countries are trying to attract talented specialists by providing them with visas and allowing them into their market.

Long-term migration has decreased, short-term movements - temporary and seasonal migrations, weekly and daily trips, an increase in the number of migrants without legal documents, and the spread of crime among illegal migrants: transporting people across borders and the slave trade.

While most immigrants remain less skilled than native workers, the demand for labor seen in host countries has evolved towards more skilled workers.

Political globalization. Global politics - a consequence of the fact that a global economy is emerging and the need to protect interests. Globalization is associated with the fact that governing entities are centralized, national states are weakened and their sovereignty is reduced. states delegate powers to influential international organizations (UN, WTO, NATO). There is a decrease in government intervention in the economy and an increase in the influence of enterprises, changing the relationship between the global and regional parts of the world of politics.

Globalization of political markets is expressed in the expansion of the circle of economic entities to whose requests national governments and international organizations are forced to respond. Political globalization is manifested in the institutionalization of international political structures. The European system was formed as an interstate system - a system of alternately conflicting and uniting states and empires. Phenomenon global rule- development of specialized international organizations - League of Nations, UN. This trend may in the future lead to the creation of a single world state.

Globalization in the field of communication. People must move masses of goods, exchange information. With the advent of information and communication technologies, opportunities have opened up for interaction between individual professional groups, people, associations, and unions through intensified communication. Central location Among computer technologies, the Internet ranks. By covering vast distances, it makes it possible for people of all countries to communicate at different levels and express opinions - networks can nullify the importance of distance and make transactions instantaneous not only in the sphere of production, but also in the sphere of communications.

To understand the values ​​of other cultures and develop fruitful communication, English is today considered the language of international communication, to which there has been a surge of interest in recent decades. In almost all parts of the world, English is the language of science, economics, advertising, electronic communications. More than one and a half billion people worldwide are proficient; by 2050, according to forecasts, more than 50% of the planet's population will be proficient. Due to English, the nation's vocabulary is expanding.

Globalization in the field of culture: a noticeable phenomenon over the last 100 years is the globalization of culture based on the growth of cultural exchange between countries, the development of the mass culture industry. This process is accompanied by the erasure of the national characteristics of literature and art, the integration of elements of national cultures into the emerging general cultural sphere. The globalization of culture is a reflection of the cosmopolitanization of existence, the language of assimilation, the English language has spread across the planet as a global means of communication.

Globalization of economic activity is accompanied by a transition in the cultural sphere - at the same time, a percentage of cultural globalization is unfolding. We are talking, first of all, about universalization in the sense of the unification of life styles, norms of behavior, value guidelines and reactions - they influence the national cultures that have developed over the last 2 centuries thanks to the rise of the state nation, calling into question the traditional distinction between cultural centers and the periphery.

Defenders of globalism emphasize the “man-made” nature of national cultures; Since they were adapted for a world in which the masters of the state-nations currently experiencing a crisis, they cannot be considered something given once and for all. Cultures change; the most striking feature of cultural globalization is that it is carried out not by countries, but by corporations.

Emerging global culture has its own methods of dissemination, designed for the elites and the masses. As for the masses, the language of cultural globalization is the standards of mass culture. For the elite, the main cultural code is what Huntington (b. 1928) called “Davos culture”; We are talking about the international culture of the leading business and political circles of the world. We can talk about the globalization of the intelligence community - Berger(b. 1929) calls this phenomenon club culture of the intelligentsia. Just as the culture of the world’s business elite was formed and spread through Davos and other forums, club culture is produced by various academic structures, foundations, and non-governmental organizations.

Global patterns and trends of the emerging information society, the nature of which is determined mainly by the interests and capabilities of a small number of leading powers and supranational corporations, are increasingly influencing the lives of individual countries. And most countries of the second and third echelons are more likely to adjust and adapt to their requirements than to act independently and actively towards the realization of their own national interests.

On a global scale, today a rigid hierarchical system has emerged, which is based on the hegemony of the West, primarily in the information, monetary, financial and military-political spheres. Information hegemony in our time is beginning to play a decisive role in global development, increasingly dominating the production sphere and determining the nature and capabilities of the latter in the same way that production in agricultural-industrial societies determined the nature of people’s appropriation of natural resources. Globalization and the formation of the information society are two sides, facets, aspects of a single process, under the sign of which the modern stage of human history is taking place.

When considering the processes of globalization, the first thing that strikes the eye is the ever-widening gap between world leaders and most other countries. The general socio-economic condition, in particular the quality of life of the majority of the population of non-Western countries, has not improved over the past decade, but rather has deteriorated. This is especially noticeable in regions such as Tropical Africa and post-Soviet Eurasia. This trend, as already mentioned, is not new. This kind of process has been happening at an ever increasing pace over the past two centuries, since the industrial revolution in England at the end of the 18th century. and the further colonial division of the world between the leading states of Europe. The latter, as well as the United States, using their economic and military-technical advantage, were able to organize around themselves (and in their own interests) the rest of humanity, mobilize the resources of the planet in the interests of their own accelerated development and enrichment. Globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development 659

In recent years, when assessing the state and prospects of individual states, experts are increasingly focusing on the level of human development. Taking into account the latter is especially important due to its decisive role in the development of any country. Thus, according to the UN, based on a study of 192 countries, economic growth at the present stage is determined by the accumulation of capital and natural resources only by 16% and 20%, respectively, while human and social potential - by 64%.

In the modern world, in the context of globalization, we are dealing with interconnected but multidirectional trends in the historical movement. Developed Western countries, led by the United States, are confidently and with increasing acceleration ahead of the vast majority of other countries in terms of growth in consumption and quality of life. In parallel, many countries of the Far East are developing at a rapid pace, significantly ahead of the West in this regard. At first this was observed in Japan, then in South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, and during the last quarter of the 20th century. - primarily in mainland China. In recent years, we have also seen accelerated development in India and some other South Asian countries.

At the same time, in most countries of Latin America there are no significant positive changes in this direction, and Tropical Africa is simply degrading. Stagnation and then clear degradation of many areas of production and social indicators during the 80-90s. also took place in the “perestroika” USSR and even more so in the post-Soviet states (with the exception of the Baltic states). In the Soviet Union in the post-war decades, the level of poverty decreased significantly, but by the beginning of the 80s. this process stopped and soon went in the opposite direction. Accordingly, the question arises about the chances of Ukraine, like other post-Soviet states and other non-Western peoples, to ever rise to the level of the post-industrial, information society of the modern countries of North America, Western Europe and partly the Far East, which “rule the show” in the modern world and define, direct and control processes in the global dimension.

The establishment of a global society was and is being carried out in accordance with the changing forms, but essentially unchanged principle of unequal exchange. Its consequence is the depletion of resources in most regions of the planet and a deterioration in the quality of life of their inhabitants, who are forced into the process of globalization carried out by the West in its own interests. These regions, as the periphery of countries at the information level of development, have become the main areas of poverty on the planet.

Due to the above The main contradiction of globalization seems to be the ever-increasing contradiction between the group of the most developed countries of the West and the rest of humanity, exploited by world leaders and increasingly lagging behind them. This lag in many cases, if not almost everywhere, becomes irreversible. In such a situation, declaring equal opportunities and free competition between countries that are obviously unequal in all major indicators looks like hypocrisy and hypocrisy.

The main contradiction of globalization is revealed in many aspects. Among them we can distinguish: information technology, economic, social, political, demographic, environmental and cultural 660 __________

tourist or cultural and linguistic aspects. The main attention below will be paid to the latter, but to complete the picture of modernity, we should briefly dwell on others.

Information technology aspect. As a leader in the development of the latest electronic and other technologies, the West has secured a monopoly of control over information flows with all the ensuing benefits of a second-by-second overview of the state of the entire planet. Producing the latest production technologies, it sells the latest products of the best quality on the world market and manages to update its technological base and launch the production of the next generation of products before these standards are achieved and implemented anywhere in the world. Other countries are doomed to either replicate its already obsolete production capabilities, gaining from it minimum profit, or be content with areas that do not require high technology, in particular agriculture and the mining industry, the prices of which are generally not high.

By monopolizing control over information and the production of advanced technologies, the West ensured information and technological dominance and thereby made all other countries dependent on it. As a result, an insurmountable contradiction has arisen on the planet between it and the rest of the world in information and technological terms, which, in principle, cannot be overcome by the majority of lagging states.

Economic aspect. The ever-increasing economic inequality between the group of advanced in information technology and lagging, dependent states is now being realized at an accelerated pace. Due to the unequal exchange of recent centuries, first between Europe and the New World, and then between the Western European-North American Center for Advanced Development and the rest of humanity, the West has accumulated enormous capital in its hands. Currently, it is acquiring the character of the capital of transnational companies based, for a number of reasons, in Western countries, primarily in the USA.

The home countries benefit from its functioning, while most other states find themselves dependent on the flows of this capital, uncontrolled by any international organizations, and cater to it, as a rule, at the expense of the interests of their own people. The capital of transnational companies, to please themselves, regardless of the interests of individual regions and humanity as a whole, determines the pace and direction of development of individual states. It consolidates, with the benefit of the West, the nature of the international division of labor, thereby providing artificially high living standards to its home countries, and condemns the rest of humanity to existence in extreme conditions.

Non-Russian countries and peoples included in the global economic system receive only the means to reproduce their labor force (including the necessary minimum of education). In the same place (as, for example, in Tropical Africa), where in relation to the needs of the West there is an excessive increase in population, we are not even talking about ensuring its physical survival.

Social aspect. As a result of growing information, technological and economic inequality, an increasingly expanding globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development is being formed. 661

a growing and deepening social gap between the rich and poor parts of humanity. We can talk about the establishment of a global, supra-country social structure. It is formed by a superclass of the rich and a superclass of the poor.

Representatives of the first, dominant superclass are the owners and co-owners of global capital, operating through national, and more so through transnational financial structures based in the most developed countries of the West. They are represented by the majority of the population of Western countries, as well as those layers and strata of the population of non-Western states that work in the interests of these structures (the comprador bourgeoisie, corrupt governments and intellectuals who ensure the interests of Western corporations in their states, creating ideological support for this, etc.) .

Representatives of the second, exploited superclass form the bulk of the working population of the planet and are found in all countries of the world. However, in their pure form they are represented by the overwhelming majority of the population of non-Western states, since in Western countries, thanks to the redistribution of world wealth by its structures, the system has been raised to a high level social support the poor, and workers in general are provided with high standards of living that are not equivalent to their actual participation in the global production of goods and services.

Therefore, coarsening and schematizing reality, we can say that in the modern world the main social contradiction is unfolding not so much at the intra-country level as at the global level. Within developed countries, the social security system operates effectively, thanks to which social and class contradictions lose their severity. But these contradictions manifest themselves with even greater force on a planetary scale, determining excessive prosperity at one pole and extreme poverty at the other.

Political aspect. The ever-increasing information and technological gap, unequal intercountry exchange and social and property inequality on a global scale require the provision of the necessary political means to continue such developments. The West and the transnational corporations that dominate its system reinforce their information technology, economic and social dominance through political and military methods. They, being in the minority numerically, ensure the majority of votes in international organizations (UN, IMF, etc.) by various means of blackmail and pressure on weaker and dependent partners in the person of their highly corrupt and self-interested rulers.

This creates the appearance of a unanimous opinion of the “world community” on this or that issue, while ostracizing those who show disobedience. Various sanctions are applied to the “obstinate”, including military operations that violate all principles of international law (in relation to Yugoslavia even without the sanction of the UN Security Council, etc.). In most cases, countries that have stood in defiance of the West have really stained themselves with human rights violations, are governed by totalitarian or at least authoritarian regimes, etc. The clearest example of this is the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which was defeated by the end of 2001. However, there are enough criminal regimes among those states that

662 __________

They follow the lead of the West, and therefore are not subject to any significant censure from it.

At the same time, even after the collapse of the USSR, there remain states in the international arena that are powerful enough to pursue independent policies. Among them are not only Japan, which occupies a very ambivalent position in the modern world, but also China, India and Iran, and in some situations even Russia, which periodically demonstrates “great power” ambitions. These countries, especially rapidly developing China, create some political counterbalance to the planetary hegemony of the West. In the future, they (mainly China) may be able to support anti-Western forces in some of those states where communities serving the interests of transnational companies are currently in power. The West, naturally, is trying by all means to prevent the strengthening of anti-Western forces.

Demographic aspect. The various regions of the planet, and therefore the Earth as a whole, brought out of the state of socio-natural equilibrium by the colonial and neo-colonial intervention of the West, found themselves faced with uncontrollable demographic changes. Rapid population growth is characteristic of the poor and the poorest peoples, who have preserved at the everyday level the meaning and life values ​​traditional for their cultural and civilizational systems, which, as a rule, stimulate an increase in the birth rate. The rapid increase in the number of people at low rates of economic development, or even its negative indicators, determines the increasing poverty in the countries of Tropical Africa, many regions of Asia and Latin America. With the development of global information systems and means of communication, naturally the most active individuals flock en masse to countries with a high level of prosperity, overcoming opposition from the latter using a variety of, often criminal, methods.

The prosperous West is infiltrated from below with illegal immigrants, which gives rise to additional antagonisms in its own system. However, at the same time, he himself increasingly needs an influx of cheap, disenfranchised masses of emigrants, ready for any work, among whom a certain percentage are the most natural slaves, the majority are slaves who are outside the law. They are used in areas where mechanization and computerization are impossible or ineffective. By this, at the same time, underdeveloped overpopulated countries are deprived of the most energetic, able-bodied and largely educated people - that human material that could contribute with their knowledge and labor to the rise of the backward regions of the planet.

The processes occurring in the modern world have even more severe and far-reaching consequences for countries where traditional value motivations at the everyday level have been destroyed and, with a sharp deterioration in the quality of life of the bulk of the population, the birth rate has decreased so much that the mortality rate has exceeded it. In conditions of economic decline and the beginning of extinction (primarily, we are talking about the Slavic peoples of the post-Soviet space), a significant part of the most active, active, able-bodied, talented representatives of these nations, especially among young people, strive for everything legal and illegalGlobalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development 663

means to move to the West. In many cases this is possible. Thus, in conditions of a massive outflow of brains and hands, their own countries find themselves in an even more hopeless situation, which determines their further degradation. The West is fueled by additional portions of vital energy and intelligence, developed due to the potential of stagnating or even degrading nations.

Environmental aspect. It is quite natural that the environmental problem on a large scale arose before humanity only as a result of the establishment of an industrial society generated by capitalism. Traditional civilizations focused on simple rather than expanded reproduction and, in relation to the natural and economic conditions of individual regions of the planet, already in ancient times developed optimal forms of socio-ecological balance. But it was possible to maintain this balance only under the condition of simple, and not expanded, reproduction. The latter, as is known, is the essence of the capitalist economy in any of its historical variety, including modern.

Based on the industrial economic system of expanded reproduction, the West has launched a global exploitation of the planet's resources in its own interests, thereby irreversibly depleting them and causing irreparable damage to the environment. Over time, caring about the quality of his own life, he began to care about environmental protection in his Western European-North American area, removing hazardous industries and placing their waste in other parts of the planet. As a result, two qualitatively different types of artificial landscapes began to emerge (there are almost no natural ones left on the planet). The first is created and maintained taking into account the requirements for the environment on the part of the rich part of humanity. It meets scientific requirements and determines the environmental situation in developed and rich countries. The second is formed spontaneously in poor regions of the planet, specializing in dirty production and non-compliance with environmental requirements.

It is clear that the ever-increasing actual inequality between rich, dynamically developing and poor, stagnating or even degrading countries dependent on them, as well as the worsening global environmental crisis, threaten the well-being of the West itself. However, today these threats are not yet so strong that really affect the quality of life of the bulk of its representatives, especially its dominant stratum.

The emerging new world order suits Western society as a whole quite well. Moreover, it finds in it the implementation of the ideological, value, general cultural attitudes of Western civilization of the New Age, most clearly expressed in Protestantism, especially in Calvinism, with its belief in God’s chosenness of successful entrepreneurs who use the rest of humanity and the natural environment as a means to achieve their goals. (understood as “godly”) goals. However, in the current conditions of globalization, we also observe deep cultural contradictions both between Western forms of mass culture and the traditional values ​​of non-Western peoples, and in the socio-cultural system of the West itself. 664 Western Civilization, Macro-Christendom, and Globalizing Humanity

Cultural and value aspects of globalization

One can distinguish two main levels of cultural controversies in the era of globalization: in Western culture itself and on the scale of the cultural development of all humanity.

The main sociocultural contradiction of modern Western society is well revealed by the American cultural sociologist D. Bell. It consists in the incompatibility of essentially Protestant spiritual values, which ensured the very possibility of establishing capitalism on a European and planetary scale, and the attitudes of mass culture of a consumer society imposed by advertising means. The consumer-hedonistic attitude to life directly contradicts the ascetic-working spirit of early and classical capitalism, blocks the self-reproduction of its ideological, value-motivational foundations, and therefore everything based on them in its life program of the Western socio-cultural type. Therefore, it seems quite natural to introduce African or Latin American rhythms, drugs and meditative practices into Western popular culture.

However, for the Western sociocultural type, this contradiction can only pose a potential threat, which will not necessarily have fatal consequences for it. All great civilizations had in their sociocultural core a certain balance of rational-mobilization and emotional-ecstatic principles. It is enough to recall the Apollonian and Dionysian principles identified by F. Nietzsche in the foundation of ancient culture, the dynamic balance of Confucian and Taoist principles in the traditional culture of China, etc.

It is likely that the West, having made maximum use of the rationalistic-ascetic-sublimation principle of the stage of rising capitalism in the interests of enrichment and the establishment of world domination, during the 20th century. finds sociocultural balance, complementing the classical ethos of bourgeoisism, analyzed by M. Weber, with a consumer-hedonistic attitude to the life of broad sections of the population of North America and Western Europe. And the only question is whether it will be possible to achieve a dynamic balance of these principles or whether the contradiction between them will have a destructive character, undermining the very foundations of Western civilization.

It is likely that this controversy will have different consequences for the United States and Western Europe. The latter, despite the influx of emigrants, is still quite homogeneous and has deep cultural traditions that are far from being limited to those associated with the bourgeois ethos. In its current state, it is more self-sufficient than the United States, which is incapable of existing without the use of planetary resources and initially contains in its sociocultural basis the mutually inconvertible values ​​of completely different ethno-racial groups. As the “melting crucible” of the United States begins to falter, the Anglo-Saxon bourgeois-Protestant sociocultural type ceases to act as an absolute self-sufficient dominant, encountering restrictions from African-American, Latin American and Far Eastern stereotypes.

The highly formalized Anglo-Saxon-Protestant system, endowed with the entire arsenal of the latest electronic and administrative means, is being undermined at its very core by the commercial profitability of replication. 665

cultural forms that are exotic to the United States are in high demand. And ultimately, North America may turn out to be powerless against them, just like the Western Roman Empire before the influx of eastern cults and the infiltration of barbarians at all times.

In this regard, a more organic Western Europe looks more stable in sociocultural terms. It has a strong enough cultural basis to remain itself even with the influx of emigrants and in the event of the West losing its world hegemony. In this it can be compared with the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire, whose population very smoothly passed from Hellenism to Byzantium.

More acute than within the West itself, the cultural contradiction is now revealed on a planetary scale. At this level, we see an insurmountable contradiction between the specific ideological, value and motivational foundations of the great traditional civilizations, primarily Muslim-Afro-Asian, Indian-South Asian and Chinese-Far Eastern, and the pseudo-values ​​of the commercialized quasi-culture of a one-dimensional mass consumer society. We are talking about the contradiction between the values ​​of high traditional cultures and the world quasi-culture - quasi-culture precisely because its Americanized products are produced not in the name of proper cultural goals, focused on the values ​​of truth, goodness and beauty, but in the name of making a profit in the system of expanded reproduction.

Therefore, we should talk specifically about quasi-culture and quasi-values ​​of what is usually called modern mass culture. Its meaning is in its essence not cultural, but economic, and therefore for it it is not fundamentally important what figurative-ideological-value material to work with, as long as the maximum profit is ultimately obtained.

However, in practice it turns out that precisely because of its commercialization, mass quasi-culture acts primarily (although, of course, not in every specific case) as an inhumane (and in this regard, anticultural) principle. The greatest demand is for demonstrations of the asocial precisely because in organized social life its manifestations are taboo. The nerves are tickled by something that is condemned by society, but is intentionally hidden in everyone: the forbidden fruit is sweet. Profit is made from exploiting these hidden asocial instincts.

But the demonstration of the asocial, carried out for commercial purposes (with all the differences in identification as such in various cultural traditions) directly contradicts the basic value systems of all civilizations. It also contradicts the values ​​of Western civilization, but at the same time, Westernized products inherently contain and are generally accepted in the West, especially in the United States, the values ​​of individualism, activism, pragmatism, rationalism, thanks to which it fits into the Western sociocultural context and adapts to the actual cultural foundations of Western civilization. civilization.

A completely different situation arises in relation to the quasi-culture of a mass consumer society with the ideological, value and motivational foundations of high traditional civilizations, shaken to a greater or lesser extent, but not fundamentally crushed either by the imposition of Western stereotypes (Japan, India, partly the Muslim world), or even by the terrible communist

666 __________Western Civilization, Macro-Christendom, and Globalizing Humanity

kim experiment (as in China). Here we see an antagonistic, destructive contradiction that works to undermine the sociocultural foundations of the great civilizations of the East and therefore generates a reaction on the part of the latter against the introduction of forms of commercialized quasiculture.

In addition, in contrast to the diversity of ideological and value foundations of the traditional civilizations of the Old World, which entered into a productive dialogue with each other since the turn of eras, worldwide Westernization, or more precisely (as in the case of quasi-culture) quasi-Westernization, leads to the cultural and civilizational leveling of humanity. Using the terminology of K. Leontiev, we can say that flourishing diversity is being replaced by secondary simplification, the source of which he believed the West to be the source of more than a century ago.

We are not talking about the Westernization of humanity, but rather about its quasi-Westernization. What is happening is not a worldwide affirmation of Western values ​​(freedom, equality, representative democracy, personal dignity, progress, etc.) in their own sense. A completely different process takes place. The spread of attitudes of mercantile-hedonic consciousness destroys the mechanism of natural reproduction of traditional meaningful life values, without giving something of equal value in return.

Destroying traditional sociocultural foundations, quasi-Westernization instills fragmentary, superficial stereotypes. The latter, contrary to local traditions, are tolerated without the additional cultural accompaniment that is balanced in the West. Therefore, globalization has no less destructive effects on the cultural foundations of non-Western regions of the planet than on their economy or ecology.

It should be emphasized that the most destructive impact of quasi-Westernization is on the cultures of the regions closest in terms of civilization to the West: Latin America and post-Soviet Eurasia. Their own civilizational foundations, for many reasons, are not so developed and strong as to effectively resist the quasi-weight-tornization flow. The latter is aggravated by the fact that a significant part of their educated representatives consider themselves “almost-Western”, not wanting to see those fundamental and insurmountable barriers that will never allow Brazil with Colombia and Ecuador or Russia with Ukraine and Belarus to become full members of the Western world.

In the context of the issue under consideration, the linguistic and cultural aspect of globalization is of particular importance. In the context of globalization, there has been a transition from the language of concepts, which assume the multidimensionality of the meanings of each of them relative to the variety of acceptable discourses, to the language of visual images, which assume the one-dimensionality of their meanings relative to the variety of contexts used. Advertising and propaganda equally use a visually flattened, extremely simplified language of meaning-poor stereotypes. In this respect, they are opposite to the semantically enriched ideological and figurative systems of sign codes of traditional civilizations or Western culture in its non-commercialized forms that dominated somewhere before the First World War.

And the point is not that in modern mass culture, visually presented images (eidos) dominate over verbally expressed concepts (logoi). One or the other is relatively predominant in every high civilization. Globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development ________________________________667

lization: for example, the first in the Chinese or Ancient Egyptian, and the second in the Western or Muslim, revealing, as it seems, the greatest degree of balance in the Ancient and Byzantine-Eastern Christian socio-cultural systems. In each such case, the concept-logos or image-eidos have a transcendental, “sophian” dimension, carry a certain higher load, expressing something specific, and testify to something more, not entirely expressible, that was deeply comprehended, or at least , was understood by representatives of high traditional cultures in a wide range of variations from Japanese Shintoism to Christian Platonism. And in this sense, a sakura branch or Plato’s concept of good turn out to be commensurate as exponents of the deep meaning-organizing foundations of existence.

But during the cultural transformations of the era of globalization, concepts-logoi and images-eidos equally undergo coarsening and primitivization through the emasculation of their previously rich content, becoming elements of mass quasi-culture, objects of kitsch. This applies equally to the basic ideas-values ​​of Western society, such as freedom, democracy, human rights, which are discredited and devalued before our eyes by means of everyday political practice, and to its images-values, the inflation of which is determined by their commercialized advertising use. Their own social, moral, aesthetic meaning is replaced by a mercantile meaning that is completely alien to them, and they begin to become elements of the language of the quasi-culture of mass consumption and mass propaganda.

Multidimensional meaningful potential is replaced by one-dimensional pragmatic actuality, the ideological and value essence is eliminated, and the resulting empty visual image or common concept becomes a means of commercial or political manipulation, losing its independent and self-sufficient meaning.

Quasi-culture gives rise to a quasi-language, which loses the most important property of any language - the property of accumulation and translation of meanings, no matter whether by means of concepts-logos or images-eidos. Thus, globalization in its quasi-Westernizing form poses a formidable challenge to the natural languages ​​of traditional civilizations, but the language of Western civilization itself is in the most vulnerable position. Currently, it is he who predominantly finds himself a victim of the reduction of deep meanings to banal, common clichés.

Thus, we can distinguish two aspects of the cultural controversies of the era of globalization: in Western culture itself, in its surrogate form now dominant in the world, and on the scale of all humanity. The main socio-cultural contradiction of modern Western society is the incompatibility of essentially Protestant spiritual values, which ensured the very possibility of establishing capitalism on a European and planetary scale, and those imposed by advertising means by the attitudes of mass culture of a consumer society. On a planetary scale, we see an insurmountable contradiction between the specific ideological, value and motivational foundations of the great traditional civilizations, primarily the Muslim-Afro-Asian, Indian-South Asian and Chinese-Far Eastern, and the pseudo-values ​​of the commercialized quasi-culture of a one-dimensional mass consumer society. 668 __________Western Civilization, Macro-Christendom, and Globalizing Humanity

The spread of attitudes of mercantile-hedonic consciousness destroys the mechanism of natural reproduction of traditional life-meaning values, without giving something of equal value in return. And this process destroys the cultural and value foundations of Western civilization no less than that of other civilizational worlds.

When we talk about globalization, it often seems as if the processes that determine its character mark the formation of a truly universal human cultural-civilizational system. But if this were so, then it would be legitimate to assume somewhat equal participation of the ideological and value components of at least the main civilizational worlds. However, there can be no talk of “equality” in this matter. Of course, various Eastern teachings (or rather, their surrogates) and artistic clichés are popular in the West. But the fact that the basis of world cultural synthesis should be the values ​​of Western civilization, not only in the West, but also here or in Latin America, is taken for granted. In other words, when we talk about globalization, we also mean the formation of a certain system of world culture based on Western values ​​and ideals. However, this does not take into account at least two circumstances:

first, to what extent Western values ​​and ideals can be compatible with the basic cultural foundations of other civilizations;

secondly, to what extent the cultural products offered by the West to the rest of humanity as a standard represent the very basic values ​​of Western civilization itself, which allowed it to take leading positions in the world in the second half of the past millennium.

The value foundations of Western civilization are inextricably linked with the spirit of individualism and rationalism, while all other civilizational worlds were in one way or another based on the values ​​of collectivism and traditionalism. It would be naive to believe that the very fact of the tremendous successes of the West over the past few centuries is a sufficient reason for the Chinese, Arabs or Indians to abandon their age-old cultural and ideological foundations (which serve as the foundation of their entire life system). Attempts to implement such a policy only cause rejection and backlash, which in the 20th century. clearly demonstrated by Russia, China, Iran and many other countries.

It should be recognized that the values ​​of individualism and rationalism, which determine the entire ideological and worldview system of the peoples of the West, are in no way universal. They are not inherent even to the peoples of the Orthodox-post-Soviet space closest to the West, not to mention the Muslim-Afro-Asian, Indian-South Asian and Chinese-Far Eastern worlds. Having been generated by the Western Christian world during the era of its deepest crisis in the late Middle Ages, during the Renaissance and Reformation, they became the spiritual core of the New European-North Atlantic civilization. However, these values ​​have no basis in the system of other civilizational worlds that did not go through the transformations of the Renaissance and Reformation and, accordingly, did not develop within themselves the atomic individuality of the Western type. The transfer of Western socio-economic, political and legal norms to the rest of the world gives rise to ugly quasi-Westernized monsters and outbursts of protest, examples of which are numerous Globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development ________________________________669

Numerous revolutions of the 20th century, almost always leading to the establishment of authoritarian or even totalitarian regimes. In the same row are the crimes committed by extremists in September 2001.

Meanwhile, in our time, the West clearly no longer offers the rest of humanity its rather rigid ideological and value foundations of the New Age. The surge of neoliberalism, which appealed to the myths of the free market and self-sufficiency of private enterprise, at the turn of the 80s and 90s gave rise, especially in our country, to illusions about the possibility of rapid Westernization according to IMF recipes. However, following monetarist instructions led the countries that adopted them only to economic collapse with all the ensuing consequences for people’s lives and the cultural sphere.

What neoliberalism in economics during the times of R. Reagan and M. Thatcher meant for the developed countries of the West, and what was offered under this name to underdeveloped countries, had little in common except phraseology. In the West, this only meant measures to activate market regulators in a well-established economic system, the stability of which was determined by all possible, including government, mechanisms that had nothing to do with the free market. For us, the monetary-market system had to become something self-sufficient, despite the fact that it had no internal basis for such a role. This led to the well-known disastrous results.

Less intrusive, but more appealing to the worldview of the intelligentsia of the decaying non-Western civilizational worlds, was postmodernism, which affirms the self-sufficiency of relativism and multiculturalism. Again, as in the previous case, for the West and the rest of the world, especially for us, it has completely different content despite the commonality of the main declared provisions.

For the West, primarily for the countries of Atlantic Europe based on the centuries-old Western Christian-New European cultural tradition, postmodernism has become a natural phase of cultural and civilizational development, typologically close to the “second sophistry” of late Antiquity. Such processes are typical for all world civilizations, not only the West, but also the East, at that stage of their historical path when the cultural-creative potential initially inherent in them begins to dry up, but cultural creation itself, by inertia, continues as the norm of life. Then the belief spreads that everything important has already been said, it is impossible to create something lofty, which means that all that remains is to play card solitaire from the available achievements - to engage in the Hessian “bead game”. At the same time, this kind of mentality is largely established as a form of protest against the authoritarianism (not only political, but also cultural) of previous times.

Postmodernism cannot give anything to solve problems of meaning in life, it is aware of this and therefore does not try to answer eternal questions, but only ironizes over them or even ridicules and denies them. But if in the West postmodernism can act as an excess of intellectual and cultural luxury, a kind of ivy and vines on a still very strong civilizational building, then in our country it wraps only around ruins and extremely dilapidated buildings, covering their holes and failures, but in no way contributing to them. replenishment 670 Western Civilization, Macro-Christendom, and Globalizing Humanity

For us, postmodernism is an excessive luxury, adopted from rich neighbors and not related to the tasks of overcoming the difficulties that stand in our way. His anti-totalitarian pathos in our conditions, without the presence of a self-sufficient personality of the new European type, provokes only value-worldview confusion, the natural reaction to which is authoritarianism and fundamentalism.

For us, who do not have the individualistic-rationalistic spiritual foundations of culture, it is not a stimulant of cultural creativity, but a relaxing drug that prevents the search for a positive way out of the crisis. I believe that postmodernism has a similar meaning for all other non-Western cultures. It has the same narcotic effect on the consciousness of their Westernized cultural elites as neo-monetarist demagoguery does on economically half-educated circles that determine the direction of the political and economic life of the degrading countries of the Third and Fourth (post-Soviet) worlds.

The third aspect of modern cultural life, which I will dwell on only briefly, is the dominance in the world of mass quasi-culture, primarily in the form of Hollywood-style film production. And here we are again faced with double standards. In America there is an entire film industry focused on the underdeveloped countries of Latin America, Africa, and now, increasingly, the post-Soviet space. For the most part, these films do not appear on the screens of North America and Western Europe at all, especially since in many, for example, US states, they are simply prohibited from broadcasting on public channels. However, the rest of the world consumes film products that indulge the most primitive and base instincts, using it to form an idea of ​​the West and its values.

Advertising-mass quasi-culture is rapidly destroying the value foundations of cultures that do not have innate immunity against it. And if the peoples of the East, relying on the centuries-old traditions of the Muslim-African, Indian-South Asian and Chinese-Far Eastern civilizations, can still resist this, then the situation in Latin America, Tropical Africa and the post-Soviet space is becoming catastrophic. Instead of the real values ​​of the West associated with the ideas of human rights and freedoms, the screen quasi-culture promotes complete contempt for the individual, her life and spiritual needs. This circumstance, which seems to be determined not only by commercial considerations, further aggravates the negative aspects of the process of globalization, one of the most significant aspects of which Western ideologists are trying to present as one of the most significant aspects of the trend of democratization of political life on a planetary scale that is supposedly taking place in the modern world.

Democracy and quasi-democracy in a globalizing world

Few political regimes in the 20th century. did not call itself democratic or at least creating a democratic society. But it is impossible to subsume the political systems of Switzerland and North Korea, the USA and the USSR equally under this concept. Therefore, the problem arises of where we are dealing with democratic and where with quasi-democratic systems. Its consideration presupposes the presence of answers to several preliminary Globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development 671

telny questions. Among them: what is “democracy” and what forms of its distortions do we have in the history of the 20th century. and in the modern world?

Today the word “democracy” is used primarily not in a scientific, logical sense, but in an evaluative, emotional sense. Political systems to which the speaker has a positive attitude are called democratic, otherwise - non-democratic (totalitarian, oligarchic, etc.). This circumstance reflects the fact that in the modern world the concept of “democracy” rather points to a certain ideal of socio-political structure (not very clearly defined, like any other ideal concept) than to the socio-political reality, even of the most prosperous countries .

It wasn't always like this. The most authoritative social thinkers of antiquity (Plato, Aristotle, Polybius) had a negative attitude towards democracy as a form of socio-political system, and the political thought of the Enlightenment era for the most part recognized it (and more often not even it, but simply the republican system) as acceptable only in small societies , considering enlightened absolutism or an English-style parliamentary monarchy more appropriate in large states.

Widespread passion for democratic ideals began only with the American Revolution. But there, democracy was initially a form of political system in individual states, and only then (as a superstructure over them) at the level of the entire North American Union. It was also preceded by the practice of functioning of self-governing Protestant, mostly Puritan, communities on the East Coast of North America. But already the Great French Revolution demonstrated the shortcomings of the mechanical, decree introduction of democratic principles and institutions in relatively big country in the absence of traditions of self-government.

XIX-XX centuries testified that the widespread involvement of masses of voters in the political process gives positive consequences only where the institutions of popular representation have matured along a long evolutionary path - through self-government at the local level with the formation of national bodies on this basis, mostly under the auspices of the old monarchical institutions (Netherlands, England , Sweden). Under exceptional conditions, this was observed even without a monarchy (Switzerland). /

But in the event of the revolutionary abolition of the monarchy, society, as a rule, was not immune from forms of authoritarianism or outright totalitarianism (France of Napoleon I, Louis Philippe or Napoleon III, Spain of F. Franco, Germany of A. Hitler). Very often, the corresponding regimes proclaimed themselves to be political systems with real “rule of the people,” as was the case in Bolshevik Russia-SRSR, fascist Italy, National Socialist Germany or communist China.

How to define the content of the concept of democracy? It seems to involve an insurmountable internal contradiction and, it seems, cannot claim the status of a scientific category at all. The authentic meaning of this word is “power of the people.” But the word “people” itself is extremely significant.

Who constitutes the people: all the inhabitants of a certain country or its so-called “titular nation”? people, regardless of their gender and age, 672 Western Civilization, Macro-Christendom, and Globalizing Humanity

any differences? adult women and men equally, or only adult men (and only they had the right to vote in democracies of the 19th century and earlier times)? one or another of these categories, regardless of social and property status, or only those who belong to a certain class (those who meet a certain property qualification, or, conversely, the poor)?

Antiquity and barbarian (including Slavic) societies of ancient Europe for the most part provided for the participation in political life of all male owners who had full civil rights within the boundaries of the corresponding self-governing society. We see the same thing in the veche system of ancient Russian volosts, and among the Cossacks. But even under such conditions, power was almost always exercised by a minority over the majority (which included disadvantaged categories of the population, all women, and the like).

Consequently, even under conditions of direct democracy, democracy (“rule of the people”) as such is only a metaphor, not a political reality. This is even more true for societies whose political institutions are based on the principle of representative democracy.

Representative democracy in its classical form formally recognizes equal political rights (first of all, to elect and be elected) practically for all adult citizens. But such formal equality in no way corresponds to the actual inequality of the subjects of the political process.

In any society, including one that calls itself democratic, there are always groups of people who have real power. As S.L. rightly wrote about this. Franc:

“In every society and under all forms of government, whether people want it or not, by virtue of the unchangeable and inviolable eternal law of social life, true power and influence always belongs not to the majority. Namely to the minority; and the difference between different orders and ideals is only Do they openly and obediently recognize this principle and try to consciously implement it, or do they deny it and therefore are forced to use it hypocritically, on the sly and to a certain extent accidentally and unplanned" 1 .

This ruling minority, or ruling community, is to a certain extent comparable to those leading social groups whose representatives A.J. Toynbee called the “creative minority”, and L.N. Gumilyov "passionaries" (the concepts are far from identical). However, their (the “creative minority” and the real bearers of power) a certain coincidence, as noted by both named thinkers, takes place only in some periods of the history of certain peoples and states, when they move along an ascending line. More often, there is only some overlap, or even complete alienation between the holders of power and the “creatively energetic” minority.

World history, in particular the 20th century, knows many forms of ruling communities, as well as types of struggle between their factions and social groups. Relevant issues were discussed by such thinkers as K. Marx, M. Weber, V. Pareto. It can be said that most public life

1 Frank S. L. Religious foundations of the public // Path Organ of Russian religious thought. Book 1 (I-VI). - M„ 1992. - P. 24. Globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development _______________________________673

is determined by two phenomena: power and property, which are either organically united (the phenomenon of “power-property”, analyzed by L.S. Vasiliev 2), or institutionally delimited.

In the first case, those who have power actually act as a community of corporate owners of public wealth. In the 20th century This was most clearly demonstrated in communist countries. This state of affairs corresponds to the dominance of the state form of ownership and the one-party system.

The ideology of states with a one-party system and the dominance of the state form of ownership as the economic basis of the nomenklatura class proclaims the corresponding political order to be democracy (“people’s democracy”, “socialist democracy”). In such countries, all the main democratic institutions and attributes formally functioned: elections, parliaments, constitutions with declared rights and freedoms of citizens, and the like.

But in reality, all this was just a cover, a decoration for the dictatorship of the party-administrative class of those in power. Within its framework, there was a struggle for power and control over resources horizontally (between separate groupings of nomenklatura leaders) and vertically (between higher and older and lower and younger, with certain differences in their mental-value parameters of consciousness).

In accordance with the overall vector of interests and will of the currently dominant group in the party, candidates identified at the top were promoted through the mechanism of elections to the governing bodies in the party and the state. Disagreements within the nomenklatura class itself were hidden from ordinary citizens. M. Djilas defined this type of political system as partyocracy. At the stage of its establishment, it provides for cruel personal tyranny (I. Stalin, Mao Zedong), but with further evolution it acquires more oligarchic features (under L. Brezhnev, Deng Xiaoping). The fact that such a political system is quasi-democratic (in essence, totalitarian with a transition to authoritarianism) is quite obvious.

Let's consider another political form that prevails in Western countries and declares itself to the whole world as a true democracy. It envisions a society where power and property are institutionally separated, that is, private or, increasingly, corporate ownership predominates.

In these conditions, in the presence of democratic institutions and mechanisms (parliamentarism, local self-government, electoral system), only those who represent the interests of big capital and receive financial support from its representatives (for campaigning through the media, direct bribery or pressure on voters or members of counting commissions, etc.).

When immediate danger threatens representatives of big business as a class, the latter unite and, neglecting democratic forms, install an outright dictator (like A. Pinochet) in power. When there is no such threat, there is a struggle between their competing groups.

2 Vasiliev L. S. The phenomenon of power-property // Types of social relations in the East in the Middle Ages. - M., 1982.674 Western civilization, macro-Christian world and globalizing humanity

ba, the consequences of which depend to some extent on voting in two- or multi-party elections. A classic example is the United States, where Republicans are traditionally supported by oil companies and the military-industrial complex, and Democrats are traditionally supported by the majority of banks and information technology manufacturers.

Strictly speaking, this is the maximum of political democracy in the conditions of the 20th century. and to this day. Cases such as those that took place in Russia from the end of February to the end of October 1917 are historical nonsense, partially fall under the concept of ochlocracy (mob rule) and certainly end in the establishment of a dictatorship.

The political system under consideration (especially in such forms adapted to the needs of the average citizen, as we see in modern Western Europe) can be called a real democracy of an industrial-information society of mass consumption, but not at all in the sense that the concept of “democracy” semantically contains.

In this case, the concept of “democracy” turns out to be a word to designate a certain socio-political system, which, as a result of centuries of evolution, has developed in the most developed countries of the West. In relation to the concept of “democracy,” this form is also essentially a quasi-democracy.

Particularly important is the question of the functioning of political forms and technologies, which are commonly called democratic (Western-style), in non-Western countries. Here we have great variability of forms: from Japan to Turkey, from Russia to India or from Ukraine to Colombia. For the most part, they fit a certain A.A. Zinoviev’s concept of “colonial democracy,” but sometimes (Japan, South Korea) demonstrate an unusual synthesis of national political traditions with externally perceived forms of Western institutions.

The essence of “colonial democracy” is that a non-Western country outwardly perceives the political forms of Western countries, primarily parliamentarism and a multi-party system, but in fact remains a country where fundamental issues of power and redistribution of property are resolved at the level of relations between oligarchic groups (plutocracies) with decisive, at least a very significant role of pressure from transnational companies, governments of predominantly Western countries and international (Western-controlled) organizations, primarily financial (such as the IMF, World Bank, etc.).

Accordingly, in the political life of such countries, those oligarchic, power-proprietary forces that are directly connected with transnational companies, foundations and Western governments acquire a distinct advantage - to the extent that they carry out the instructions of the latter and work for their interests. There are plenty of examples of this in Africa and Latin America, and in the last 10 years in the post-Soviet space.

In the modern world, these kinds of “colonial-democratic” countries are the most expressive examples of quasi-democracies, since relics of traditional totalitarianism (the example of North Korea) or direct personal dictatorships (Hussein in Iraq, Gaddafi in Libya) actually do not affect the status of democracies in the eyes of the world community claim.

Political forms somewhat different from the classical quasi-democracies of the African-Latin American model are observed in those countries of the East, where in one form or another there is a conscious unification of local Globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development ________________________________675

centuries-old principles of social life with forms of political institutions borrowed from the West, without the decisive role of pressure on this process from the West. This process takes on various forms in Japan and South Korea (where, however, the institutions of the Western political system after the end of World War II were largely introduced “by order”), as well as in India (to which the British left forms of parliamentary democracy), China , Vietnam, Iran, Saudi Arabia.

In this range, from Japan to Arabia, we see both an almost complete transfer of Western political scenery and an extremely cautious, selective perception of their individual elements. But it is quite clear that real Westernization of political life does not occur in any such case. Eastern societies adopt a parliamentary-multi-party appearance in the same way as the Chinese or blacks dress in European costumes - and no more. Neither the color of the skin, nor the shape of the eyes, nor the essence of the mechanisms for developing and making political decisions changes because of this.

Thus, we can conclude that during the 20th century. in the world, there was the establishment and predominant spread of three types of quasi-democracies: Western (so to speak, basic, matrix), colonial and traditional-eastern (with its variations on the basis of Muslim-Afrasian, Hindu-South Asian and Confucian-(communist)-Far Eastern traditions).

None of these types corresponds to the proper meaning of the concept of “democracy” as “democracy”. But if we do not give this term an evaluative load and rely on formal features (parliamentarism, multi-party system, the rights and freedoms of citizens declared by the constitution), then it can be applied to most modern states in the forms of “Western democracy”, “colonial democracy” and “Eastern (Japanese) , Chinese, Iranian and the like) democracy."

Let us look from this angle at the political processes that are taking place in Ukraine after its declaration of independence. Formally, we see the development of democratic institutions: the presidency, parliament, the Constitutional Court, a multi-party system, and the like. But under the conditions of growing social and property stratification, the gap in the quality of life and actual rights between a handful of oligarchs and the impoverished majority, it is unlawful to talk about the democratization of our society.

Since the time of Aristotle, it has been known that the political system that corresponded in his terminology to our idea of ​​real democracy - polity - is possible only if there is a powerful middle class capable of self-organization and struggle for its interests through the common efforts: small and medium-sized owners. But all these years, what has happened and continues to happen is not the strengthening, but, on the contrary, the erosion of this class, the polarization of society into oligarchs (plutocrats) with their entourage and service personnel, on the one hand, and a huge number of impoverished and demoralized people. The latter, for the most part, lose interest in political life, and a small minority, as in Galicia, becomes radicalized, creating parties of the “social-nationalist” type.

This alone makes us skeptical about talk about the development of democracy in Ukraine in recent years. The majority of people spend all their energy on obtaining the means of daily subsistence and do not believe 676 Western Civilization, Macro-Christendom, and Globalizing Humanity

no political declarations. In this state of society, we can only deal with openly despotic or quasi-democratic, oligarchic (plutocratic) political forms in their essence. We don't have the first one right now. Therefore, we can talk about the second one.

Among the three forms of quasi-democracies noted above in the modern world, the most humane and convenient for the life of the majority of citizens of the respective countries is its Western model. The fact that we do not have it does not require proof. It is better to ask the question: is there a great possibility that it is possible in principle for us and will someday be established. The answer to it would require special development, however, even a cursory glance at the essence of the problem does not give reason for optimism.

First, there is no reason to hope that the quality of life of the majority of the population will improve significantly in the foreseeable future. On the contrary, everything indicates that we will continue to consolidate the social structure of the Latin American type (not even the modern one, but the model of 20-*-40 years ago). The process of merging financial and industrial oligarchs with power structures has reached impressive proportions. If you look at this historically, it should be noted that this only reflects a new form of transformation of typical Soviet power-ownership structures, which over the past decade have acquired somewhat Western-like forms.

Secondly, in contrast to Western countries, which organically (though not without bloody excesses) moved towards their modern political forms for centuries, relying on their own Western values ​​of the inviolability of private property, work ethics, personal dignity, and a utilitarian-pragmatic attitude towards the outside world , rationalism and the like, Ukraine, like all other (except the Baltic) post-Soviet countries, has passed a fundamentally different historical path - from elementary forms of local self-government of princely and Cossack times through the bureaucratic authoritarianism of the Russian Empire to the totalitarianism of Soviet times. Over the past three centuries, we have not moved closer, but have moved away from the Western model of development and Western institutions (with extremely contradictory forms of this process in Western Ukrainian lands).

The social changes of the last 15 years, for all their democratic appearance, in their essence did not break, but in some ways strengthened this trend. In Russia, the turning point occurred between August 1991 (when the “Gekachepists” did not dare to use weapons) and October 1993 (when the “democrats” mercilessly opened fire on the crowds protesting against the policy of robbing the people and destroyed the parliament with tank shells). In Ukraine, the beginnings of parliamentarism were crushed less barbarically, but no less thoroughly.

And the point here is not about what is worse in our conditions - mediocre authoritarianism or helpless parliamentarism, but about the fact that in such conditions, talk about building a democratic society is worth no more than the chatter that many still remember about building communism. One political demagoguery was replaced by another - and nothing more. And the socio-political system develops by itself: through the privatization of state property by plutocratic groups emerging from the depths of the old nomenklatura, covering up their real actions with talk of socialization - Globalization as a phenomenon of civilizational development 677

Denmark nation state. In Russia, the set of propaganda cliches is somewhat different, but the essence of the matter does not change.

Therefore, it seems that in the foreseeable future we can count on best case scenario only for a more or less decent democratic appearance (and even then hardly), and no more. Compared to recent years (just remember