ETHNOS AND GLOBALIZATION: Ethnocultural Mechanisms of Disintegration of Contemporary Nations. Monograph. A. L. Safonov
Читать онлайн книгу.
href="#note28" type="note">28, Amin,29,30 and others.
The synergistic approach, based on a somewhat incorrect extrapolation of the pattern in natural science of the emergence of ordered structures in non-equilibrium thermodynamic systems into the social form of being, was used in the works by Budanov,31 Kapitsa32, Moiseyev,33 Podzigun, Panarin,34 Fuller, Shadzhe and others. An indisputable advantage of the synergistic approach is a general presentation of a problem in the creation and gradual sophistication of new structures and entities as a result of the dispersion of flows of energy and matter, which, when applied to social phenomena, may mean the development of divergent social processes.
The problem of the genesis of local social groups – ethnic groups and nations being the most important among them – has an evident interdisciplinary character and is studied under sociology, ethnology, social anthropology, conflictology and ethnopolitics, as well as within history-related disciplines.
The processes of ethnogenesis, nation-building and (looking at it through a broader lens) the building of social communities are studied within three schools of thought: constructivism, instrumentalism, and primordialism.
Primordialism is based on an evolutionary approach to sociogenesis and ethnogenesis. It looks at large groups that have existed for a long time (in particular, ethnic groups and nations) as a result of the long and continuous evolution of social communities that maintain their agency even in the course of deep social transformations of society. Two leading strategies in the ethnology of the nineteenth century, evolutionism and diffusionism, as well as the evolutionist approach in linguistics that allowed specification of the genesis of cultural and linguistic communities, established the basis for the primordialist approach.
Primordialism has two major branches, sociocultural (cultural primordialism) and sociobiological, the latter focusing on the genetic similarities of social groups – ethnic ones above all – as well as on the special social role of an instinctive underlying cause of social behaviour35
The leading approach of modern primordialism is undoubtedly cultural primordialism, which views the genesis of large social groups (ethnic groups and nations) as a result of the evolution of social institutes and social relations. Cultural primordialism in Soviet and Russian science is represented by the works by Bromley, Kozlov, Arutyunov, Mnatsakyan, etc.
The modern sociobiological movement, having overcome the legacy of racial sociogenetic theories of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, is mainly represented by ethnogenetic36,37,38,39 and neurogenetic concepts close to behaviourism.40 However, despite its seeming attractiveness, the sociobiological variations of primordialism, at best, explain the formation of tribal communities in a simplified manner. They do not explain the genesis and the patterns of establishment and evolution of more developed and complicated communities, in which culture and politics play a systematically important role.
Constructivism believes the leading mechanism for sociogenesis to be a direct sociopolitical and socioeconomic construction of social communities from top to bottom by political elites, which is usually led through state institutions. Constructivists see modern ethnos as a sociocultural relic, an ideological phantom that the elites used to rule over the masses.41,42,43
The instrumentalists also see this social group as an outcome of a target-oriented activity, not simply as an instrument of power and elites, but as a tool or instrument of the individuals that make up the group that allows use of membership of the group to reach certain goals or to fulfil certain social functions.
Fredrik Barth44 is considered the leader of this movement. Tishkov,45 Guboglo,46 Voronkov and Osvald,47 Shnirelman,48 Kulagin,49 Drobizheva,50 and Lurye,51 as well as recent works by Popov,52 Nizamova,53 Nimayeva,54 Ortobayev55 and others, should be mentioned among Russian scientists subscribing to the constructivist doctrine. Informational and symbolist (identificational) approaches to ethno- and sociogenesis are in line with constructivism and instrumentalism.56,57,58,59
Sociological research interested in the revitalization of ethnic and ethno-social processes in the south of Russia, includes works by Avksentyev,60,61 Abdulatipov,62 Gasanov,63 Gadzhiyev,64 Markedonov,65 Tishkov,66 Tkhagapsoyev,67 Chernous,68 Denisova,69 Zhade,70 Sampiyev,71 Hoperskaya,72 Hunagov,73 Tsutsiyev,74 Shadzhe,75 Shakhbanova76 and others.
Chapter I. The crisis of nations and increase of importance of the ethnos during globalization
The main goal of social philosophy has always been to understand the leading tendencies of historical evolution that determine the fate of the society and the individual, to search for the few key patterns that allow us to see or even create the outlines of the future through the chaos of reality.
The key to understanding the world of today is, undoubtedly, globalization – the ever more complex process of qualitative sophistication, acceleration and integration of the development of humanity that is pointing with ever-growing certainty to the transition from the technical and social progress of the two preceding centuries towards uncontrollability and global catastrophe.
Globalization is, in the first place, a system of qualitative social changes that include the formation of not only a single global market, but also a global social and information environment, devoid of spatial and political borders, giving rise to the previously unseen sophistication and acceleration of social-historical processes. It also means the appearance of global informational openness, the appearance of new information technologies, directly and non-inertially, influencing individual and mass consciousness
Amin, Samir. The American Ideology. M., 2005. – p. 211—219.
Amin, Samir. Political dimension // Globalization of Defiance. Translation. M., 2004. – p. 265—286.
Budanov, V. G. Methodology of synergy in post-nonclassical science and in education. PhD dissertation. M., 2007. – 56 p.
Kapitsa, S. P. Model of the Earth’s population growth // Success of physics. 1995. 26. №3 / Model’ rosta naseleniya Zemli // Uspekhi fizich. Nauk. 1995. №3 – p. 111—128.
Moiseyev, N.N.Human Being and Noosphere. M.: Nauka, 1990—p. 331
Panarin, A. S. Postmodernism and globalization: the project of liberation of property-owners from social and national responsibilities // Issues of Philosophy. 2003. №6 – p. 18—27.
Lorenz, Konrad. On Aggression. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1966. Translated by Marjorie Kerr Wilson. Originally published in Austria under the title DAS SOGENANNTE BÖSE. Zur Naturgeschichte der Aggression. Viena: Dr. G. Borotha-Schoeler Verlag, 1963, p. 263.
Dawkins, R. The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene. M: Astrel’, 2010. – 512 p.
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. Genes, Peoples, and Languages. New York: North Point Press, 2000. – 267 р.
Gil-White F. J. How thick is blood? // Ethnic and Racial Studies. 1999. №22 (5) – P. 789—820.
Geertz, C. The Interpretation of Cultures. M.: Rosspen, 2004. – 128 p.
Varela, F. Neurophenomenology: a methodological remedy for the hard problem // Journal of Consciousness Studies. 1996. №4 – P. 330—349.
Anderson, B. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. M.: Kanon Press, 2001. – 286p.
Gellner, E. From similarity to ethnicity // Civilizations 1997. №5 – p. 41—54.
Berger, P., Luckmann, T. The social construction of reality. M.: Moscow Philosophy Fund: “Akademiya-Tsentr”, Isdatel’stvo “Medium”, 1995. – 334 p.
Barth, F. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference. M: Novoye izdatel’stvo. 2006. – 286p.
Tishkov, V. А. Russian people as European nation and its Eurasian mission // Political Class. 2005. 5 Mая.
Guboglo, M. N. Identification of Identity: Articles on Ethnosociology. M.: Nauka, 2003. – 288 p.
Voronkov, В., Osvald, I. Introduction. Post-Soviet Ethnicity // Construction of Ethnic Community of St. Petersburg. St. Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin, 1998. – p. 7.
Shnirelman, V. A. Misfortunes of one discipline: ethnogenetic research and Stalin’s national policy // Ethnographic Review. 1993. №3 – p. 52—68.
Kulagin, A. A. Ethnic and religious identification of the Druze community // Historical Journal – Scientific Research. 2012. №1 – p. 141—159.
Drobizheva, L. M. Methodological problems of ethnosociological research// Sociological Journal. 2006. №3—4.
Lurye, S. V. Historical Ethnology: Coursebook for Universities. 2nd edition – M.: Aspekt Press, 1998. – 448 p.
Popov, Y. A. Ethnic identification in the society through language // Politics and Society. 2012. №3 – p. 104—107.
Nizamova, L. R. Complex concept of contemporary ethnicity: limits and possibilities of theoretical synthesis// Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology. 2009. №1 – p. 141—159.
Nimayeva, B. B. Young people of Agin-Buryat Autonomous Okrug: repertoire of identitites in contemporary sociocultural context // Politics and Legislation. 2011. №9 – p. 75—81.
Ortobayev, V. V. Epistemological analysis of ethnosociology // Sociology in the System of Scientific Management: Materials of IV Russian Sociological Congress. M.: Sociological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, 2012. – p. 83—92.
Arutyunov, S. A. Ethnogenesis, its forms and patterns // Etnopolitichesky vestnik. 1993. №1 – p. 10—19.
Susokolov, A. A. Structural factors of self-organization of ethnos // Races and Peoples. 1990. №20 – p. 5—39.
Hutchinson, J., Smith, A. D. (eds.) Ethnicity. Oxford Readers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. – p. 29—34.
Hale, H. E. Bashkortostan: the logic of ethnic machine politics and the consolidation of democracy // Timothy J. C., Hough J. F. (eds.) Growing Pains: Russian Democracy and the Election of 1993. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1998. – p. 47—55.
Avksentyev, V. A. Northern Caucauses: Repolitization of Ethnicity and Conflictological Scenarios of Development // Observer. 2006. №6 – p. 19—20.
Matishov, G. G., Avksentyev, V. A., Batiyev, L. V. Atlas of Sociopolitical Problems, Threats and Risks in the South of Russia, V. III. Rostov-on-Don: SKNTS VSH Publishing House, 2008. – 176 p.
Abdulatipov, R. G. Russian Nation: Ethnonational and Civil Identity of the Russians in the Contemporary Context. M.: Novaya Kniga, 2005. – 472 p.
Gasanov, M. R. Paleo-Caucasus Ethnic Community and the Issue of Dagestan Peoples’ Origins. Mahachkala: Dagestan State Pedagogical University Publishing House, 1994. – 194 p.
Gadzhiyev, K. S. Ethnonational and Geopolitical Identity of the Caucasus. Saabrucken: Lambert Academic Publishing. 2011. – 531 p.
Markedonov, S. M. Ethnonational and Religious Factors in Sociopolitical Life of the Caucasus Region. M.: Maks Press, 2005. – 379 p.
Tishkov, V. А. On phenomen of ethnicity // Ethnographic Review. 1997. №3 – p. 3—21.
Tkhagapsoyev, Х. Political scientists’ keen interest in the Caucasusу // Kabardino-Balkarskaya Pravda. 2010. Feb. 6.
Chernous, V. V. Increase in importance of ethnocentrism on the cusp of the first decade of the XXI century as consequence of imitational modernization of Northern Caucasus // Collection of Materials and Reports of III International Scientific and Applicability Conference “Caucasus – Our Home” (September 29—October 2, 2011, Rostov-on-Don) / Edited by Y. G. Volkov. Rostov-on-Don: Sotsialno-Gumanitarnye Znaniya, 2011. – p. 25—30.
Denisova, G. S. Southern Russian identity in the context of administrative reorganization of the macro-region // Sociology in the System of Scientific Management: Materials of IV Russian Sociological Congress. M.: Sociological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, 2012. – p. 48—52.
Zhade, Z. A. Structure of multilevel identity of the population of the Republic of Adygea // Sociology in the System of Scientific Management: Materials of IV Russian Sociological Congress. M.: Sociological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, 2012. – p. 74—83.
Sampiyev, I. M. СаMоопределение народов: теория и онтология. Rostov-on-Don: SKNTS VSH Publishing House, 2004. – 152 p.
Khoperskaya, L. L., Kharchenko, V. A. Local Interethnic Conflicts in the South of Russia: 2000—2005. Rostov-on-Don: YNTS RAN Publishing House, 2005. – 164 p.
Khunagov, R. D. Russian identity in contemporary Northern Caucasus’ society// Sociology in the System of Scientific Management: Materials of IV Russian Sociological Congress. M.: Sociological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, 2012. – p. 62—68.
Tsutsiyev, А. А. Atlas of Ethnopolitical History of Caucasus (1774—2004). M.: Evropa, 2006. – 128 p.
Shadzhe, A. Y. Coexistence of identities in Northern Caucasus // Sociology in the System of Scientific Management: Materials of Russian Sociological Congress. M.: Sociological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, 2012. – p. 120—127.
Shakhbanova, M. M. Ethnic identity of Ando-Tsezic group (based on results of sociological research) // Scientific Problems of Humanitarian Research. 2011. №6 – p. 54—62.