Globalization: political and economic and sociological analysis of cultures

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Globalization: political and economic and sociological analysis of cultures

Today the dialogue of world develops on the background of global structures, which form on the basis of political, economic and social relations, extending beyond civilizations. As P. Worsley had fairly marked, «by this time the only human society has never existed», but nowadays no one state can't be considered «self-sufficient island» [7, p. 2]. Scottish sociologist R. Robertson defines globalization as «a set of processes that make up a single world» [5, p. 67]. So which processes do we call global?

Nowadays globalization is a fashionable branch of researchers' interests that is proved by the scientific publications of politogists, sociologists, and philosophers. The topic of globalization attracts attention of the scientists because it acts as the primary cause of any phenomena - both positive and negative ones.

The purpose of our work is investigation of the political and economic and sociological analysis of cultures in the context of globalization processes.

The main material. In our opinion, we should start with examining the political and economic state of the world. The twentieth century has demonstrated the power of supranational military-political blocs (NATO), the possibility of governing coalitions groups (Big seven), continental and regional organizations (EU), the world's international organizations (UN, UNESCO). At the end of the last the contours of the «world government» have outlined: some international organizations have started to perform important political integration functions (European Parliament, the international Tribunal, Interpol).

In the economic sphere the value of the global division of labor has increased, the role of transnational corporations, which have become powerful forces in the world economy, has increased. Having lost the national roots, such corporations operate globally, using local resources and subsidies. The role of international coordination and integration, global and regional economic agreements (EU, OPEC, EFTA) on the world market increases every year. Foreign exchange securities markets instantly react to events in the remote corners of the globe, flexibly changing financial policy.

Globalization trends have also touched the culture, although here they are not so noticeable. Media unites peoples and continents, informing millions of people about the events in different parts of the world, attracting them to various cultural experiences, traditions and customs of exotic tribes and nationalities. Today, there is no doubt, that the desire to solve global problems that affect interests of the peoples of all continents leads to the formation of the world humanistic consciousness. As M. Cheshkov emphasized, such consciousness should first of all include «the so-called world intellectuals, humanitarian and scientific ones, and the movements - pacifist, alternative, ecological», which are «reproduced and understand themselves globally» [1, p 141]. Computer technologies contribute to the development of unification in the other direction: they demonstrate the unity of processing, storage and transmission of information by general means.

Such changes forced modern scientists consider socio-political processes from the position of the world community. National and even regional scale today is clearly insufficient, as globalization changes the fundamental quality of the political processes. Any major political event immediately resonates around the world, and this feedback is becoming a powerful political factor of the present time. In the global world political processes are developing according to their own laws: their own driving forces, their communication and tendencies.

For a long time, the phenomenon of globalization has been considered in social and political theories mainly from the standpoint of economic centrism. This can be explained by the fact that in the economic sphere globalization centrism was mostly discovered. In the sphere of economic centrism three main concepts developed that can be considered as classic: theory of imperialism, dependency theory and the theory of world system.

In their time, V. Lenin and M. Buharin saw the trend of globalization in the economic expansion of imperialism - conquest, colonization, economic oversight. They defined imperialism as the highest and final stage of capitalism, when the overproduction of goods and the falling rate of profit compelled it to economic attacking the undeveloped countries. Economic expansion solves three following problems: getting cheap labor and cheap raw materials and markets for their goods. As a result of the global economy is becoming more and more asymmetric: several metropolitanates shamelessly exploit the majority of advanced societies. Only world revolution of the proletariat can interfere in this process a put the world injustice to an end.

Marxist ground and left orientation describes second popular conception of globalization - the theory of dependence. It was developed in Latin America in the 1950's and 60's. The main idea of this theory is that the cause of the backwardness of undeveloped countries is not so much connected with internal factors as it is with external influences. One of the authors of dependence - R. Prebisch, stressed that in the world economy the dominant center - highly developed industrial States and periphery - the numerous agrarian country are differentiated [4, p. 128].

Developing his ideas, F. Cardozo and E. Faletto explained the dependent development by the absence of independent technologies and developed national production of basic goods. They sharply criticized the distorted forms of dependent capitalism: «Accumulation, expansion and self-realization of local capital invariably require support from outside, these processes are impossible on a national basis. To survive, dependent capitalism must join the system of global capitalism [2, p. 163]. At the same time, global economic connections may also become the way of getting rid of dependence in favorable conditions. The constant inflow of foreign capital promotes the appearance in various branches of high-tech enterprises, where highly qualified personnel are educated, local elite of manager's forms. In case of flexible national policies these quantitative changes can lead to qualitative leap in the economic breakthrough and as a result reduce the economic dependence. South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong demonstrate the successful development exactly this way.

It is fairly considered that the theory of world system of the American sociologist I. Wallerstein is one of the variants of the world economic dependence conception. The author emphasizes that the capitalist market system shows enormous potential to expand. Having arisen in the leading countries of Western Europe, it has quickly reached the periphery. Cheap and various goods of mass consumption make it extremely attractive for wide layers of the population. The concentration of political and military power around the large capital accelerating the spread of the latest technologies throughout the world.

The world system, according to I. Waller - stein, has three levels of states: central, peripheral and half-peripheral. Underdeveloped peripheral States «were harnessed to the chariot of the world system by the main countries, but remained in the role of jury». Asymmetry and a hierarchy of the world system are preserved in the future, despite the fast dynamics of world development in General. I. Wallerstein considers the world system as a globally-systematic phenomenon, in which the leading role belongs to the supranational, global factors. The international contacts, competition, collisions and conflicts in areas of mutual influence give push for change [6, p. 77].

The understanding of the globalization process in economic-centric scientific thinking had a number of negative consequences. First of all, the phenomenon of globalization dawn to be looked upon as an unalterable pattern that arises from objective economic processes. That's why global modeling first suffered mechanical extrapolation of dominant economic tendencies of international development in general (for example, division into center and periphery with the inevitable lag of the latter). In addition the definition of globalization in terms of systems theory as a special type of socio-education system paired with the opposite type - localization, led to the underestimation and disparaging of local processes, which have practically excluded from global modeling.

As M. Cheshkov noted, «mainly systematic approach has caused objections of those who are not inclined to see the qualities of the system class object. And not only because he has not yet emerged, but also because the generalizations of the system approach seems doubtful in general.» [1, p 146]

Finally, the presented economic-centric pictures of globalization cannot explain the cultural-historical diversity of the world that is preserved in conditions of economic unification and sometimes conflicts with it. It becomes clear that the understanding of the process of globalization of the world community requires new approaches that can explain the integration processes in the most various spheres of social life.

Today images of a global world and globalization theories are developed by the scientists of various scientific disciplines - sociologists, anthropologists, philosophers, political scientists, and historians. The problems of the globalization of culture are represented more interesting by the social anthropologists, and culture experts. Their views on the phenomenon of globalization are quite opposite. The strong «Westerners» tend to identify the globalization and westernization, praising the civilizing mission of the Western world. They prefer to fight barbarism of «traditional» societies, to exterminate customs of nonWestern cultures.

However, most scientists rightly argue against the identification of ethnocentrism with globalism. They look upon Westernization as «cultural imperialism» of the Western world that leads not to the globalization of cultures, but to «lack of culture». In our time, the key problem for culturologists is interpretation of cultural diversity as a limited functional characteristic of the process of globalization. Intense scientific research is carried out in this direction. In our opinion, the concepts of U. Hannerz and Sh. Eisenstadt are of certain scientific interest.

U. Hannerz develops a theory of global populated universe as a region of permanent cultural interaction, exchange of information and transferring the phenomena of one culture to the language of another.

Global populated universe is continuously widening, preserving the complex asymmetrical structure of «multiple conglomerate with various specialized and regional centers, which evolve in different directions. He names some of such modern centers in the field of science, technology, mass culture this is USA, in the sphere of corporate culture - Japan, in production of delicacies and fashionable cloths - France, among the regional centers - the Vatican, (in the Catholic world), Mecca and Qum (the Islamic world), Mexico (Latin America), Egypt (the Arab world).

U. Hannerz thinks, that globalization can develop in four main directions. The most preferable would be a scenario of «ripening» globalization without Westernization. In the global populated universe the equal dialogue and exchange of information between major cultural metropolis and numerous peripheral cultures takes place, by this the metropolis act as stimulants, which revitalize the development of the periphery and contribute to the enrichment of local cultural values. But peripheral cultures, in their turn, interpret the introduced ideas, significantly modify cultural flow, and thus affect the culture of the metropolis. Thus the process cultures' «hybridization» takes place in their dialogue in the global populated universe all cultures are a complex synthetic deposit, which has deep rhythms of the local heritage intertwined with transnational grounds [3, p. 66-68]

U. Hannerz warns that there are other possible scenarios of globalization in the spirit that unifies the Westernization world, but they all lead to a dead end «cultural imperialism». Scenario of «global homogenization» provides the complete dominance of Western culture in the world: all countries copy the Western way of life - the same goods on the shop counters, endless soap operas on television, hits on the disks. Peripheral cultures slowly absorb cultural patterns of the West, gradually imbue with them, and after some time, local cultural traditions disappear in favor of cultural homogeneity [3, p. 69].

But there can be another version: the scenario of «peripheral corruption.» U. Hannerz foresees the decomposition of the Western culture into peripheries in the process of adaptation. The trend of «cultural dumps» implements - distribution of surplus products of low quality in the process of adaptation to normal life. It is known that in a totalitarian society, democratic values easily reborn: equality is reduced to nepotism; the freedom of meetings becomes factionalism and endless clan struggle [3, p. 72].

U. Hannerz scenarios adequately reflect the modern intellectual debate among culture experts. Sh. Eisenstadt joined the scenario of the «maturation», chose the path of globalization without Westernization. Examining the history of the cultural dialogue of ancient and modern civilizations, he came to the conclusion that the process of hybridization of cultures in the field of civilizations' interactions is, indeed, universal. Modern cultures crystallize through selection, and, therefore, transformation of a significant number of traditions, symbols and institutions, both national and borrowed from other civilizations. Globalization does not exclude, but implies the development of variability, because it has the potential for further development of mankind [3, p. 73-74]

Of course, the search for culture experts largely coincide with the ideas of sociologists and historians concerning the development of globalization processes in the contemporary dialogue of cultures

It is appropriate to emphasize that in the 1990s, the concept of anti-globalism increasingly began to make itself known. Dialogue of Cultures once began from overcoming ethnic separatism, and today this idea has been revived in response to the «cultural imperialism» of Westernization, which is tried to be imagined as true globalization. From this point of view the typology «of samples of the world order», designed by renowned theorist of globalization R. Robertson is interesting. He begins his typology exactly with the anti-globalization scenario: the world as a mosaic limited, closed civilizations. The author determines that some fundamentalist oriented forces of the world community would have a desire to restore their centuries-old social deposits, considering that past civilizations should be closed and not pose a threat to the «best» device «[5, p. 407].

The second scenario is reviving the idea of the Kingdom of God on earth, which is preached today by a number of Ecumenical movements, the Roman Catholic Church, the ecological movements. The realization of this project requires whole planet consensus on point of fundamental values and ideas in the field of international security, international borders, and international law.

The third scenario represents the world as a set of mutually open sovereign nation states, between which there is an intensive political, economic and cultural exchange. In this case R. Robertson provides two versions: egalitarian, in which international partners are politically equal participants in the dialogue of cultures, and hierarchical, when the hierarchy of civilizations, where the leaders guarantee stability.

The unity of mankind under the auspices of a world government under the unification of the national States underlies the fourth scenario. Marxists and Western liberals with certain differences in ideology support this particular project of globalization. Besides, recently the possibility of transformation of the European community from economic integration to a more politicized form is discussed more and more often [5, p. 404-409].

Modern concepts of sociologists suggest that today the trend of globalization is being tried to be taken under control by various social forces that fight for influence in the world. That is why many projects of the global world have controversial character. The representatives of the world humanistic consciousness - world intellectual community have a real chance to defend their project with one condition: they must unite and state themselves in major international organizations where Western liberal ideas dominate.

It is also necessary to expose the inhuman essence of Westernization. As from the positions of the long-term socio-cultural prospects, it is obvious that the implementation of the Western strategy is preparing a defeat for all mankind: inhuman, aggressively consuming tactics leading the world for the ethical angle.

In the beginning of XXI century human remains the being reaching a sense, and not just a passive recipient of material goods. We are witnessing the process of actualizing of civilized memory of non-Western peoples - Orthodox, Muslim, Hindu-Buddhist, and Confucian - Buddhist. The world is on the verge of unprecedented Renaissance of cultures. What will this Renaissance be like, where will it lead the peoples of different civilizations? It is obvious that the trend of globalization will develop in the prospect of open, unpredictable history, overcoming serious obstacles on its way. Once at the dawn of civilizations of archaic tribes the Roman idea overcame gods. Today the history repeats. Whether representatives of the Humanities consciousness will be able to oppose the strong humanistic consolidated idea that contains the rationalism of usefulness along with the enthusiasm for the protection of the great human values to tribalism? The future of the world depends on the answer to this question.

References

globalization economic political transnational

1. Cheshkov M.L. Developing peace and post-totalitarian Russia. M.: Science, 1994. P.141-156.

2. Cardozo F. Associated Dependent Development: Theoretical and Practical Implication. Authoritarian Brazil: Origins, Policies and Fitters. New Haven. 1973. P. 185.

3. Hannerz U. Notes on Global Ecumene. Public Culture. 1989. №1. Р. 65-75.

4. Prebisch R. The Economic Development of Latin America and its Problems. N.Y., 1950. P. 238.

5. Robertson R. Globality, Global Culture, and Images of World Order. Social Change and Modernity. Berkeley, 1992. P. 486.

6. Wallerstein I. Unthinking Social Science: the Limits of Nineteenth Century Paradigms. Cambridge, 1991. P. 77-78.

7. Worsley P. The Three Worlds: Culture and World Developments., 1984. P. 2.

Размещено на Allbest.ru