Features of socialization and its structural transformation in Ukraine under Russia’s aggression in Ukraine

Although, as noted above, in the general systems of human activities, the activity-based approach is a key one since it assumes the individual's ability to act, while the individual, in turn, is under the influence of his interaction, particularly with the cultural system. The latter also includes the so-called basic cultural features of the entire society, which have their fundamental dimensions (for the entire society). They both shape and transform the values of the entire society because they become subjectivised during the assimilation of values and eventually acquire the ability to innovate and further create conditions for internalization +. This means a possibility of internalization with an increment, which changes the character, the content, and the active force of both development and resocialization as a secondary element of socialization.

As a result, actions can be assimilated and carried out in terms of self-affirmation and expansion of activities - both productive activities and those based on the exchange of thoughts and intentions, as they say, both in word and deed. Later, we will consider this aspect of socialization and resocialization in the example of the fight against poverty under the conditions that arise during the war with an ensuing decrease in living standard, and, especially in the post-war period, when there should be an opportunity to intensify activities to restore the losses resulted from the hostilities, as well as to improve living standard.

Before considering this aspect of socialization and resocialization in the war and post-war period, let us first dwell upon the results of the rating of basic cultural values of Ukrainian society against the background of trends typical for the EU countries in the pre-war period. The latter is important given the processes that took place in Ukraine before the intensification of rapprochement with th e EU and on the way to this country's future membership in the EU, which can and should be intensified in the post-war period.

In our analysis, we start from the interpretation made by Hofstede and his colleagues that culture can be considered a universally accepted concept since it involves the generalized patterns of thinking and behavioural standards characteristic of a group of people and distinguish it from other groups [15].

In this work, we are interested in cultural values, which are the core of culture and can be used for comparison since they have a common basis. However, each person's or group's culture has unique components specific to them. Still, there are necessarily common phenomenological features characteristic of the majority.

Since cultural values often look like established standards and rules, particularly the rules of behaviour, spelling, etc., they are most closely related to various kinds of institutional support and, therefore, are implemented through institutions. Institutions - if they are set up to ensure competition, including freedom of speech - play a key role in development since, according to Amartya Sen [5], development also exists as the freedom of social organization of society following the dominant cultural values and institutional forms in this society.

The informal and supra-constitutional cultural values make the real institutions indirect. And here is one important feature. On the one hand, as a rule, values change in the long run, although not exclusively (as will be shown below), but institutions change. Institutional changes often occur in a much shorter period, particularly during, for example, economic reforms, which usually involve the social sphere, and often even the whole society. For example, in case of a change in the political system, including through a revolution. In this case, the contradictions are exacerbated due to institutional change, which occurs as a transformation of institutions and the transformation of the value core based on long-term cultural values. To overcome these exacerbated contradictions, it is necessary first of all to identify the nature and dynamics of the emergence and manifestation of cultural values, as well as their impact on institutional changes (both long-term and short-term ones) - to define what extent the new institutional system is inclusive during the period of transformation, that is, to what extent it corresponds to the long-term impact of cultural values, motivating the actors for active behaviour or proactive promotion of changes.

The dimension and nature of cultural values and socialization in Ukraine. The known and distinguished dimensions of culture that embody its values and the long-term nature of its changes are called canonical and are primarily investigated through surveys, including power distance, individualism, masculinity as opposed to femininity, avoidance of uncertainty, long-term orientation, and indulgence (in the pleasures of life) as opposed to containment [15].

According to the above definition, we consider socialization because of internalization of social life activities and providing it with appropriate institutional solutions. The latter are implemented properly and thanks to culture, which either makes them viable or causes the majority of society to reject them due to the mismatch between cultural values, which does not contribute to development. As a result, transformational reforms may be unsuccessful.

In 2015, a research team at the Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, under the leadership of O.M. Balakireva, conducted a study on the basic cultural values of Ukrainian society and the possibilities of their use for socio-economic development [16]. International databases and indices of cultural dimensions from the so-called home page of G. Hofstede, and databases created at that time in our institute because of surveys and analysis of national statistics data, were used for those calculations.

Generalized calculations by the executors of the study mentioned above testified that Ukraine at that time was characterized by a high-power distance and low individualism. On the masculinity-femininity scale, the society was in an intermediate position, uncertainty avoidance was very high with a long-term trend, and containment prevailed overindulgence. Thus, the fundamental features of the culture in Ukrainian society turned out to be far from ideal for development and - what is especially important - for a modernization oriented to the dominance of market relations [16].

Given the fundamental cultural values, the practice of modernization in Ukraine primarily faced a high distance of power and low individualism. However, the orientation of Ukrainian society to the long terms, avoidance of uncertainty and high containment will favour economic modernization and sustainable development in the post-war recovery. For the successful post-war recovery of Ukraine's economy, it is important that the predictability of development will become a conviction for reviving the activities of broad segments of the population, who have a clear tendency to containment, both in their orientations and consumer attitudes.

The indicator of the perception of hierarchy in society is the level of power distance: if it is high, it means a significant inequality in power distribution. In societies with a high level of power distance, inequality between people is perceived as "natural" or "normal", that is, it suits most members of society. This, in turn, means that hierarchy in decision-making dominates the interactions in the family, education, work team, and power institutions, through which certain institutional forms of interaction with a dominant uneven distribution are implemented. Hence, depending on their place in the hierarchy, members of society behave differently.

The concept of power distance was introduced by Dutch sociologist Gert Hofstede [17], it helps assess the degree of social stratification in society. If parents require children to be obedient, obedience to authority is learned from childhood, so in such a society, the "natural" perception of hierarchy is not surprising. But in the practice of European countries - on the contrary - emphasis is placed on the upbringing of individuality in children, therefore, as they grow up and develop their personality, they also develop an orientation towards mutual relations.

Details of the differences and coincidences of the socialization between Ukraine and the European Union are revealed by the author by analysing the content and specifics of the actions of socialization institutions in the pre-war period (2020) [18, p. 199-259].

The summarized materials demonstrate significant differences between the institutes' activities mentioned above, which naturally creates a barrier to the strategic movement towards Ukraine's integration into Europe. That is why it is very important to realize that transformational changes can take place and become successful only with corresponding changes in the understanding of social roles because, in the process of such a social action, certain values (including material ones) will be created, which will contribute to successful economic integration and economic development.

The global socio-political and economic changes in Ukrainian society from the end of the 20th to the beginning of the 21st century led to the search for new values. Contradiction and diversity in value-orientation tastes and the synthesis of various factors shaping the personality change the content and factors of socialization and the functions of its institutions. We can hope that the contradictions will be minimized in the future, and the social factor will contribute to economic development, which, in t he author's opinion, is one of the most important functions of both the state and society in implementing social policy. As shown below, such processes are already underway due to internal socialization in war conditions. Moreover, it is essential that even in the post-war period, they add impetus to development.

At the same time, we note that even under profound social transformations, individual institutions of socialization in Ukraine have not gotten rid of their "socialist" past. The reason is that the personality in Ukraine was often shaped under political manipulation and influence on people's consciousness with the help of mechanisms that lacked both trust and respect. Quite often, the state rudely intervened in its citizens' ongoing socialisation, disregarding the basic democratic norms, or just remaining aloof from this process. This is the essence of a serious contradiction between society and the state, which must be overcome through the mastery of social values, which includes the study of the world experience, primarily that of the European community, regarding the upbringing, education and development of citizens - both with the support of the state and without it - thanks to the creation of proper conditions for self-realization. The European integration path requires a thorough understanding and analysis of this experience and then adaptation of its best practices to Ukrainian realities. And this is the most important task for scientists, intelligentsia, and civil institutions.

The process of creating a market economy in Ukraine was accompanied by the revival of private initiative, thanks to which, either with the assistance of the state or with its direct participation, the wealth accumulated in the past was redistributed. The structure of the population changed in such a way that the poor population made up a significantly larger part, and the rich and very rich population - a much smaller one. Inequality has become a characteristic feature of Ukrainian society, and the way out is seen primarily in implementing the mechanisms of the "welfare state". Socialization of the "welfare state" type aims to solve the contradictions between poverty and excessive wealth through redistribution, so social policy should play a very important role in the post-war recovery of Ukraine's economy.

The tolerance for a large social distance and, accordingly, the advantages of a hierarchical distribution of power that existed in pre-war Ukraine were both established during education, where the central figure with role advantages was the teacher, not the pupil or student, which led to the development of a personality with a low level of individualism. Further behaviour of such a person in life, particularly at work, is characterized by the perception of managerial hierarchy according to the concept that only administration can manage effectively. At the same time, ordinary individuals should not participate in any decision-making. As a result, the so-called "role inequality" arises, in which a highly centralized managerial system shapes a certain business culture. Instead, shifting the centre of attention to the student in the educational process gives him better conditions for cognition and socialization, thanks to which knowledge is internalized and cognition of the surrounding physical and social worlds takes place. A personality is shaped by who in the future will be ready for effective leadership and active decision-making.

In Ukraine, as shown by the results of surveys and relevant comparisons, which were presented in the already mentioned scientific report of the Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, the pair "individualism - collectivism" is dominated by the collectivist model, which greatly differs from the pattern of Western Europe. Thus, the level of individualism in Ukraine is more than 2,2 -2,4 times lower than in Poland and Germany. Socialization in these countries focuses the individual on self-realization in activities, in contrast to Ukraine, where the cultural code orients him to the prevalence of collectivism and, hence, to a high distance of power. In this way, a high centralization of power is allowed, and accordingly, such a management system is built, where final decision-making is given to higher institutions of power. In the case of the dominance of individualism in the culture, the individual would be focused on self-realization, achieving certainty and mainly personal responsibility for the result. In Ukraine, there was a weak focus on avoiding uncertainty, so the management system was not dominated by justification and detailed designs for reforms. As a result, during 30 years of independence and the same period of "reforms" in the economy, even the level of economic development of 1990 was never reached.

When the country develops stably, when the economy has high growth rates and the standard of living increases, the level of trust in the authorities is high, even with the dominance of a centrally organized system of power and management. This is possible because the individual, not feeling his responsibility, agrees to focus on collective decisions, because it is easier that way since a positive result is achieved without "special” efforts, as opposed to the need for self-realization, which requires engaging internal forces and vigorous actions. If things improve in the economy, the trust grows, including the trust in the authorities, and people's opinions show that the country is developing in the right direction.

In case of exacerbations and losses, which begin to affect most of the population or even everyone, the vector of confidence and opinions on the country's development sharply change their direction, and discontent can become massive.

Surveys of such changes available in Ukraine are quite illustrative. According to Table 1, when the population assessed the economic situation in the country as "very bad" and "bad", the level of such answers reached more than 90% in 1998 and about 80% in 2002. Accordingly, the number of those who did not trust either the Verkhovna Rada or the Government of Ukraine was 65% or more in 1998-2002. Over time, according to the respondents, the situation in the economy improved, particularly in the period 2006 -2010. The number of those who considered the situation as "only relatively bad" decreased (in 2006 compared to 2002, by almost 17%, and in 2010, also compared to 2002, by nearly 35%), and the level of distrust in the Verkhovna Rada and the government as the highest authorities in Ukraine decreased in 2006 and 2010 by almost 24%, while the level of trust in 2006 increased more than twice compared to 2002.

Table 1 People's evaluation of the economic situation and attitude toward authorities