Globalization processes and the creation of a single cultural space. The role and importance of culture for humans

Culture and globalization.

What do countries that resist globalization fear? After all, globalization, in its ideal- this is the eradication of poverty, world order, eternal peace and material well-being. What force forces a person, peoples and countries to refuse the above benefits?

The fact is that representatives of original cultures, consciously or not, feel what

Economic, political, legal and technological homogenization will follow side effects, which, first of all, will cause changes in their traditions, culture and way of life. One of the essential needs of a person is his own belonging to something, be it a social group, confession, political or sexual orientation, geographical area, etc.; among these forms of identity, cultural identity is central and all-encompassing; it largely determines human mentality, psychology and way of life in general. You have to be an apologist for “conspiracy theories” to accuse the United States of developing an ideology that intends to destroy the diversity of cultures and languages ​​and make the world culturally homogeneous. Although it should be noted that those phenomena that accompany components globalization indirectly causes changes in national cultures. First of all, this relates to the national language and the derogation of its importance. Successful economic activity requires timely information exchange in one language; and such a language in the case of globalization processes is English. Specific

an individual, a society, an ethnic group, first of all self-identifies with language as a pillar of national culture; therefore, neglecting it, even reducing its distribution area, is perceived painfully. From a value position, language is not only a means of transmitting a message, that is, a means of communication, but also the worldview and attitude of the people who speak this language, it records the biography of the nation, it was spoken by the ancestors and it is a model of the world. Language is an integral feature of a nation: there is no nationality without language. The national consciousness perceives language as a living organism that requires careful attitude and worries. The loss of language is followed by the destruction of historical inheritance, connections between times, memory... Language is an object of love, it is the axis of national culture, an object of respect, because my native language is my property. Therefore, the national language is the most important cultural phenomenon. There is no culture without language; language permeates all cultural phenomena; for culture it is all-encompassing. This means that language is decisive not only for any specific, separately existing cultural environment, but if something exists in a culture, then it has its own design in language. In other words, culture exists in language, and language is a way of existence of culture.

They also believe or feel that globalization processes are causing a memory gap. Culture is a form of historical memory; it is a collective memory in which the fixation, preservation and memorization of the way of life, social and spiritual experience of this society. Culture as memory does not preserve everything that was created by the people who are the bearers of this culture, but that. which objectively turned out to be valuable to her. If we use an analogy and comprehend the meaning and role of memory in the real life of a particular person, then the meaning of cultural memory in the life of a nation will become clearer to us. A person, losing his memory, loses his own biography, his own “I” and individual integrity; it exists physically, but has no past, present or future. He doesn't know who he is, why he exists, what

wants, etc. The role that memory plays in the life of an individual is played by culture in the historical existence of society and a nation. Culture is a form of memory that is passed down through generations, and through which cultural life the nation maintains continuity, consistency and unity. In biological organisms, this function is performed by gene structures: species populations are determined by genetic heredity, which is transmitted through the blood. The social experience of people is transmitted to subsequent generations not by blood, but through culture, and it is in this sense that culture can be called non-genetic memory.

The nation is aware of its unity; it has a historical memory, through which its past is perceived as the basis of the present and future. In national self-awareness, the connection of times is understood as a single continuity, therefore contact is maintained even with distant ancestors: they and their deeds are permanently present in the lives of contemporaries. The way of life, which is determined by culture, is considered not just as an ordinary everyday factor, but as a significant achievement, to the achievement of which the diligence and labor of many generations contributed.

For national consciousness, the nation’s own way of life is perceived not only as a unique, unique way of organizing life, but also as superiority in relation to other cultures. For national consciousness, the solidity of culture and way of life is interpreted as overcoming finitude. Each representative of the nation sees the overcoming of his own empirical finitude in the immortality of the national culture, where future generations will preserve the way of life inherent in this culture, as contemporaries do and as their ancestors did. A peculiar feeling that constantly accompanies national self-awareness, awareness of the identity of one’s own nation and its differences from other nations is called national feeling. Representatives of one nation differ from representatives of another in their physical type; their customs, type of behavior and everyday skills are also different. In the process of historical development, a nation develops certain ideas and value orientations.

Communication with another culture only strengthens sympathy for one’s own nation. The consciousness of belonging to a nation means that a person is connected with it by a community of character, that the fate and culture of the nation influences him, that the nation itself lives and is realized in him. He perceives the nation as part of his “I”; therefore, he perceives an insult to his own nation as a personal insult, and the success of representatives of his nation and their recognition by others evokes feelings national pride. A person is so determined by culture that change even in such an insignificant area as cooking, the kitchen, the table, is perceived very painfully (remember the history of the arrival of the McDonald's and Coca-Cola corporations in Georgia). It must be said that “McDonaldization” is used as a synonym for “globalization,” not to mention the changes in traditions, religion, morality, art, and everyday life that it leads to. It is obvious that traditional, non-modernized societies resist the processes of globalization more strongly; for them, culture is historical memory, which, as is obvious, is perceived by the native model of life design. Refusal of culture means a break in memory and, therefore, the annulment of one's own identity. The continuity of culture for the national consciousness, whether they realize it or not, means the denial of personal death and the justification of immortality. Culture offers its bearer acceptable requirements for behavior, values ​​and norms, which are the basis for the mental balance of the individual. But, once a person finds himself in a situation where various cultural systems are involved in his everyday life and when the social environment requires him to act contrary to the norms of his culture, and often even exclude it, the person still tries to preserve his cultural identity, although the environment requires cultural adaptation. A situation is created in which a person or group of people is forced to fulfill the demands of different cultural systems, which often oppose each other and exclude each other. All this causes the destruction of the integrity of consciousness and leads to internal discomfort of the individual or social group, which, in turn, is reflected in behavior, which can be aggressive and expressed

in nationalistic, criminal, anti-confessional actions of the individual, as well as in depressive and melancholic moods.

Nature of culture and types of resistance

Let's try to analyze what factors determine anti-globalization movements, or, in other words, how different cultures relate to the process of creating a global society. Let's start with the culture that is the most ardent opponent of globalization processes, namely, Muslim culture. In addition to those features that we talked about above and which are valuable for them - traditions, language, values, mentality, way of life - in the minds of the individual or the peoples who bear this culture, the fact that globalization processes are perceived by them as a triumph of their traditional opponents is specific - Christians. Every political, economic, cultural and, especially, military action directed in their direction is perceived as crusade. The historical memory of this culture over the centuries was formed mainly in confrontation with Christians, which determined the introduction of such a radical point in their holy book, the Koran, which is expressed in the existence of religious war - jihad; Each Muslim who gave his life for his faith is guaranteed to receive a place in heaven. Muslim culture did not modernize religion, and it is still its main component, the axis of culture, and, therefore, the assessment of events is determined precisely by religious consciousness.

Representatives of the Orthodox Church also display a peculiar character of resistance - Slavic culture and their leading country, Russia. The attitude of Russia, as a former superpower, to globalization processes is very peculiar and comes from the soul of this culture. For centuries, Russia has been justifying the pan-Slavist idea, dreaming of becoming the third Rome, but, unfortunately, Washington, not Moscow, became that. Russia's policy is clearly anti-globalist. She envies America, but today she does not have the strength to resist it.

Regarding countries Western Europe, where the globalist idea was born, their situation is very dramatic. At first glance, they look like partners of the United States in globalization processes, but it is obvious that they have been trampled upon national dignity. They are trying to rehabilitate him by protecting the language and artistic culture. This is clearly noticeable when looking closely at French, German and Italian cultures; the creation of a new single currency can be interpreted in the same way. As for England, it satisfies its ambitions by the fact that English is becoming the language of the world as a result of globalization.

Representatives of Chinese culture display a more restrained opposition to globalization; they, so to speak, are trying to build the Great Wall of China in a modern manner. Chinese culture is experiencing tragic changes. They believe that each change moves them further away from the cultural ideal of a “golden age.” Therefore, the Chinese are trying not to succumb to the language, the conversation in which will push national values ​​into the background. The Chinese, for example, avoid talking about human rights, which they believe is how they maintain their identity. An obvious confrontation would be unnecessary trouble, and the United States does not call them to an open confrontation, since international capital has not yet strengthened and developed in this country; In addition, this country has nuclear weapons and, since it has not yet implemented a military space program, open confrontation with China would cause significant damage to American national interests.

Indian culture even today does not betray the principles of the Buddhist worldview and, as it were, is aloof from world processes. She is neither for nor against; and not a single hegemonic country is trying to disturb it, like a sleeping child.

Japan, on the basis of its unique experience, which is expressed in a unique synthesis of tradition and European values, believes that globalization cannot undermine the foundations of its culture, and is trying to use globalization processes to strengthen its own traditions.

Americanization.

Globalization is often identified with Americanization. This is due to the increasing influence of the United States in the world in the second half of the 20th century. Hollywood produces most of its films for worldwide distribution. World corporations have their origins in the USA: Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Coca-Cola, Procter&Gamble, Pepsi and many others. McDonald's, due to its prevalence in the world, has become a kind of symbol of globalization. Comparing prices in different countries ah on a BigMac sandwich from a local McDonald's restaurant, The Economist magazine analyzes the purchasing power of different currencies (Big Mac Index).

Americanization - the influence of the United States on the popular culture, business models, language and politics of others

Country The term was coined in 1907 and originally referred to the growing popularity of the American lifestyle in Canada. In the US itself, the term is applied to the process of assimilation of immigrants, while outside the US the term is often used in a negative context, comparing it with the loss of traditional culture and customs.

Media and popular culture

Film and television

Hollywood and the American film and television industry are the main sources from which people living outside the United States learn about American culture and customs. According to a 2000s study by Radio Times - The Simpsons, Desperate Housewives and Lost are the top most popular programs in more than 20 countries. American films are also popular around the world, with 20 of the highest-grossing films in history being made in the US, including Avatar and Gone with the Wind.

Music

American music is widely popular outside the United States, such performers as Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson are recognized throughout the world and their work is sold in huge quantities even after their death. Michael Jackson album - Thriller It has sold over 100 million records and is the best-selling album in history. In addition, genres of American music in general are extremely popular and even form their own regional scenes, such as Russian rock and Japanese rock.

Image and youth trends

The influence of American youth traditions, including clothing styles or youth subcultures, is also widespread. For example, in Japan, the passion for hip-hop led to the emergence of a subculture of gyaru who spent a lot of time in tanning salons and dyed their hair in order to look like African Americans, and the popularity of glam metal throughout the world made a great contribution to the formation of visual kei.

Americanization of Asian words

Most sources on such exotic countries as Japan or China are in English, and original materials are difficult to access due to the average person’s poor knowledge of these languages. Because of this, Japanese and Chinese words are often transcribed from English notation. This is how such terms as geisha, hemlock from Japanese, and kung fu, Feng Shui from Chinese entered the Russian language.

Other countries are also contributing to globalization. For example, one of the symbols of globalization - IKEA - appeared in Sweden. The popular instant messaging service ICQ was first released in Israel, and famous program Skype for IP telephony was developed by Estonian programmers.

Growing globalization covers all sides modern life. Having originated in economics, it then spread to politics and culture. At the moment, the United States benefits most from globalization, which is why it is often called Americanization.

Globalization in culture continues and complements economic globalization, but at the same time has essential features. Many processes and trends take on more acute forms in it. In culture, globalization is much more to a greater extent acts as Americanization, since mass, commercial, and media culture, which is strengthening its global dominance, is predominantly American. Cultural globalization leads to the further displacement of high culture and the complete dominance of mass culture, to the erosion of cultural diversity, uniformization and standardization. More and more researchers point out that Hollywood and the Internet are celebrating victory all over the planet.

IN foreign literature There are three points of view on the processes cultural globalization and commercialization. The first point of view comes from the fact that cultural globalization is an objectively necessary and fundamentally positive phenomenon. This position is defended, for example, by the Swiss linguist J. Molino. He believes that the concerns existing in European countries regarding the American direction of globalization of the world have no serious grounds. The main reason He sees the concern in the fact that Europeans find it difficult to abandon their usual Eurocentrism, that for centuries they carried out globalization that was beneficial to them, and when it changed its direction, it is difficult for them to come to terms with it.

The second point of view, on the contrary, is sharply critical, one might say apocalyptic, in relation to cultural globalization. This position is especially clearly presented in the works of representatives of the Frankfurt school in philosophy T. Adorno and M. Horkheimer. They were the first to discover the phenomenon of the cultural industry, which gave rise to mass, commercial culture, today called media and postmodern. In their opinion, the spread of products of the cultural industry leads to the degradation of society, to the irreparable loss of what constitutes the basis of the authenticity of man and his existence. These ideas were continued in structuralism (M. Foucault), situationism (G. Debord), postmodernism (J. F. Lyotard, J. Baudrillard), and in other trends of modern thought.

The third point of view is, as it were, between the first and second, being moderately critical. Its foundations were laid by the English sociologist R. Hoggart, who studied in the 30s. XX century the process of introducing English workers who came from peasant backgrounds to urban culture. He noted that adaptation to mass urban culture was not automatic and passive: workers showed the ability to resist, evade, and deviate from its standards. In France, these ideas are developed by the historian M. de Certeau, who believes that strategy, system and language are set by the dominant economic order and power, while tactics, speech, tricks and tricks are created and applied by users and consumers of culture.

These positions to one degree or another reflect the real state of affairs. Each of them can be confirmed by certain facts. And yet the first point of view has fewer supporters than the other two.

Of particular relevance are the problems of the relationship between national cultures, Western and non-Western cultures, center and periphery, dominant and dependent culture, cultural imperialism, cultural identity, acculturation, etc. The complexity and severity of these problems are clearly visible in the example of the relations between the cultures of America and France. As the French researcher J. Leclerc notes, France and the United States are in many ways different civilizations. The first represents a civilization of traditional classical art and high culture. The second is the civilization of audiovisual art and mass culture. The first is best personified by the Louvre, a world center for storing and displaying masterpieces, which is visited by people from all over the world. The symbol of the second is Hollywood - the global center for the production of films that have captivated the whole world.

The globalization of the art world leads to an asymmetry in the flow of classical and audiovisual works, the art markets and the film market. It is believed that Americans have never seen French films, and many French have never seen American paintings. However, seemingly spontaneous, contradictory and changeable cultural flows, like any other, are subject to market logic. As a result, the emerging structures of French and American exports of cultural property appear significantly different. On the one hand, there is a finite, limited, irreproducible and decreasing number of classical works. On the other hand, there is an unlimited, reproducible and non-decreasing number of films. Absolute rarity meets absolute abundance. France, selling masterpieces, becomes poorer and is gradually left with nothing, since masterpieces are irreproducible. America, by selling copies of films, actually loses nothing and only gets richer. Absolute impoverishment collides with absolute enrichment. This situation is typical not only for France, but to a large extent for the whole of Europe.

In this situation, France came up with a “cultural exception” project, according to which the laws of the market and competition should not apply to all cultural values. Some of them should be removed from action market laws. In France itself this project has been carried out since the early 1980s. This idea finds understanding and support among the countries of the European Union.

Some countries manage to successfully resist American cultural expansion. Thus, Brazil has significant achievements in distributing its television series, and Egypt is doing a lot to preserve its national culture. However, the greatest successes in this area have been achieved by India. IN last years More than 2,000 films are shown here, of which only about 10% are foreign. The same thing is observed in the field of music: Indians give unconditional preference to their national music.

Based on the examples given, some authors conclude that cultural globalization is not a cause for concern. However, the example of South Korea tells a different story. Back in the 80s. the country produced about 100 films annually and national film production completely dominated. After refusing government regulation economic situation has changed dramatically: in recent years, South Korea has been importing hundreds American films, and produces significantly less of its own than before. The same fate befell the Hong Kong film industry: it could not withstand the competition with Hollywood.

As we see, the process of cultural globalization is extremely complex and contradictory and leads to ambiguous consequences. Such consequences include standardization and uniformization of cultures, their hybridization and “creolization.” Therefore, the question of the survival of local, national cultures remains open.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

The concept of “globalization” was introduced into scientific circulation quite recently. It is believed that it was first used in scientific publication in 1983. Its origin is associated with the Latin term “globe”, which means Earth, Earth. In the very general view Globalization refers to numerous social processes of a planetary nature. The essence of globalization is still largely unknown. We can say that now only scientific approaches to the phenomenon of globalization have been clearly identified, within the framework of which a theoretical interpretation of this phenomenon is carried out. As a dimension of various cognitive disciplines, the concept of “globalization” is distinguished by conceptual diversity. Philosophical, sociological, geopolitical, environmental and other ideas about this phenomenon exist and are developing. Interdisciplinary systems of knowledge of globalization are also being formed.

Sociological aspect of globalization. The relevance of the sociological aspect of her research lies in the fact that it is the human dimension of globalization. Sociology examines a new phenomenon from an angle that reveals its influence on the further development of social reality, on the conditions and opportunities for self-realization in it of individuals, social groups and societies as a whole.

In modern scientific literature the concept of “globalization” is used in two main meanings - as an objective trend of modern world development and as a real multifaceted process.

Globalization as an objective trend in the development of mankind represents a qualitatively new stage in the internationalization of social life. What both stages have in common is that internationalization and globalization as the embodiment of the energy of sociality human race in the space of the planet are expressed in the expansion and deepening of social ties in the world and the strengthening of the interdependence of states and peoples. At the same time, globalization is not just a “surge” of this global trend, but a fundamentally new stage. Its qualitative novelty is due to new objective circumstances in the life of the world community.

By the beginning of the twentieth century. The globe was divided between states and peoples. The world has become complete, closed, ultimate.

In the 60s of the twentieth century. earthlings realized themselves as a global entity. This happened against the negative backdrop of serious emergencies. global problems modernity, which cannot be resolved through the efforts of one or even a group of states. The efforts of all humanity are needed.

Information and technological revolutions, a new generation of communication systems (jet aircraft, rocketry, television, computers, microcircuits, communication satellites, mobile phones, the Internet) by the end of the twentieth century. made any point on the planet accessible to people, capital, ideas, documents in real time. People have acquired the ability to simultaneously be in different parts planet and be participants in events outside of their physical presence, and the development of connections and interactions between people has become possible across state borders, border rules, norms, and procedures.

Cultural globalization is characterized by the convergence of business and consumer culture between different countries of the world and the growth of international communication. On the one hand, this leads to the popularization of certain types of national culture around the world. On the other hand, popular international cultural phenomena can displace national ones or turn them into international ones. Many regard this as a loss of national cultural values ​​and are fighting for the revival of national culture.

Modern films are released simultaneously in many countries around the world, books are translated and become popular among readers from different countries. The ubiquity of the Internet plays a huge role in cultural globalization. In addition, international tourism is becoming more and more widespread every year.

Isolation from the world, isolation within one’s own framework was the ideal of an agrarian-type society, but modern society is characterized by the type of person who always transgresses established boundaries and takes on a new appearance, always driven primarily by motives of renewal and change. The processes of interpenetration of worldviews and cultures are becoming more and more active; many phenomena of, say, Indian or Chinese culture have become known in Russia. Islamic culture is no longer as alien and incomprehensible to Russian people as it was, say, in the 18th century. It is obvious that in such processes there are more positive than negative. They certainly contribute to mutual understanding between people. different traditions, spiritually enrich national cultures.

But in practice, it turns out that instead of enriching traditional cultures with the cultures of other countries and peoples, instead of expanding the cultural range, we are dealing with something just the opposite. Surrounding us cultural landscape not only does it not increase its diversity, but tends to greater and greater monotony, and again the monotony is not ours, but someone else’s, brought from distant countries. What is characteristic is that this phenomenon is noticed not only in Russia, but also in many countries where cultural innovations of the era of globalization also cause significant rejection.

To correctly consider the issue, the scientific concept of “culture” should be clarified. Culture is a historically determined level of development of society and man, expressed in the types and forms of organization of people’s life and activities. The concept of culture is used to characterize the material and spiritual level of development of certain historical eras, socio-economic formations, specific societies, nationalities and nations (for example, ancient culture, Mayan culture), as well as different spheres of life (work culture, artistic culture, everyday culture). In a narrower sense, the term “culture” refers only to the sphere of people’s spiritual life. IN ordinary consciousness"culture" appears as collective image, combining art, religion, science, etc.

In domestic cultural studies, the concept of culture is widespread, which reveals the essence human existence as a realization of creativity. It is culture that distinguishes man from all other creatures, for the essence of the image and likeness of God lies precisely in the ability to imitate the Creator, that is, to create.

The concept of culture denotes the universal attitude of man to the world, through which man creates the world and himself. Each culture is a unique universe created by a person’s specific attitude to the world and to himself. When we study different cultures, we study more than just books, cathedrals, or archaeological finds. We discover other human worlds in which people lived and felt differently than us.

Every culture is a way of human creative self-realization. Therefore, understanding other cultures enriches us not only with new knowledge, but also with new creative experience. It includes not only the objective results of people’s activities (machines, technical structures, results of knowledge, works of art, etc.), but also subjective human strength and abilities realized in activities (knowledge and skills, production and professional skills, level of intellectual, aesthetic and moral development, worldview, methods and forms of mutual communication of people within the team and society).

Due to the spiritual-material duality of human nature, a person consumes both material and spiritual fruits. To satisfy material needs, he creates and consumes food, clothing, housing, creates equipment, materials, buildings, roads, etc. To satisfy spiritual needs, he creates spiritual values, moral and aesthetic ideals, political, ideological, religious ideals, science and art. Often both channels merge in the same artifact; for example, a building can serve utilitarian purposes and at the same time be a work of art. Human activity spreads through all channels of both material and spiritual culture. Man can be considered as the initial system-forming factor in the development of culture.

Man creates and uses the world of things and the world of ideas that revolves around him. The person then acts as the creator of cultural meanings. Man creates culture, reproduces it and uses it as a means for his own development. Based on all that has been said above, culture is all tangible and intangible products human activity, values ​​and recognized modes of behavior, objectified and accepted in any communities, transmitted to other communities and subsequent generations.

Culture, since it is a product of human activity, cannot exist outside the community of people. These communities represent the subject of culture, are its creator and bearer. Thus, a nation creates and preserves its culture as a symbol of the realization of its rights. The nation, as a cultural reality, manifests itself in different areas, which should be considered custom, direction of will, value orientation, language, writing, art, poetry, legal proceedings, religion, etc.

Each people has a meaning of its existence, “written down” in its culture and defining its claims. But its implementation is unthinkable without the existence of the nation as such. Therefore, culture must always take care of strengthening the independence of the people and the state. The preservation of identity and its strengthening mainly depends on the activity of internal forces and on the identification of national internal energy. The culture of a community is not a simple sum of the cultures of individuals, it is supra-individual and represents a set of values, creative achievements and standards of behavior of a community of people.

Culture is the only force that shapes a person as a member of a community. The culture of preserving national characteristics becomes richer if it interacts with many peoples of the world. A high level of social cohesion, social solidarity, etc. - these are the basic values ​​that ensure the viability of any nation, be it great or small, and realize national aspirations and ideals.

“No culture can exist without society, but also no society can exist without culture. We would not be “humans” in the full sense that is usually given to this term. We would have no language to express ourselves, no self-awareness, and our ability to think and reason would be severely limited,” notes Anthony Giddens. Social life is, first of all, intellectual, moral, economic and religious life. It covers all the features of people living together. The connection between culture and social life is a special cultural phenomenon called the value system. Values ​​always express generalized goals and means of achieving them. They play the role of fundamental norms that ensure the integration of society, help individuals make socially approved choices about their behavior in vital situations, including the choice between specific goals of rational actions. Values ​​serve as social indicators of the quality of life, and the value system forms the internal core of culture, the spiritual quintessence of the needs and interests of individuals and social communities. The value system, in turn, has a reverse impact on social interests and needs, acting as one of the most important incentives social action, individual behavior. The culture of each community has adopted certain value systems and a corresponding hierarchy.

World human values, affected by turbulent changes, became very volatile and contradictory. The crisis of a value system does not mean their total destruction, but a change in their internal structures. Cultural values ​​did not die, but they became different in rank. In any perspective, the appearance of a new element entails a reshuffling of all other elements of the hierarchy.

Moral values ​​and norms are very important phenomena in the life of an individual and society. It is through these categories that the life of individuals and society is regulated. Both values ​​and norms are “woven” into society. At the same time, compliance with standards is not only their external function. In accordance with group norms, the individual examines himself and evaluates his life path.

In the course of globalization, under the slogan of the interpenetration of cultures and traditions, there is actually an onset of one and only one - the Western cultural model. This one-sidedness of globalization is quite natural, because within Western civilization the “material carriers” of this process have grown - telecommunication systems and the world market. What is dangerous in Western culture, what is dangerous in it for all other cultures of the world? After all, we still admire works of Western art from “The Tales of the Nibelungs” to “Tristan and Isolde” by Richard Wagner? The fact is that today we are faced not with Western culture in its pure, original form, but with a certain mutation of this culture, which, like all historical processes occurred gradually, but ultimately changed the face of Western civilization beyond recognition. These processes are associated with the emergence of capitalist mass production and the corresponding production and consumption of culture for the masses.

The unifying aspect of the cultural associated with the dominance of certain “centers” of the global North and, accordingly, with their epistemology and linguistic traditions, in the field of verbal arts and culture is expressed, in particular, in the quantitative predominance of English-language material, which is associated with the totalization of Anglo-Saxon models characteristic of globalization and international English. The processes of linguistic unification naturally cause lamentations from adherents of national identity, but they do not take into account that the choice of language today is not equal to the choice of national identity. Although in the European consciousness, belonging to a certain national tradition, at least in the last 200 years, was associated with the choice of language - a powerful means of maintaining the nation as an “imagined community”, and national culture was interpreted through the organic connection of territory, ethnic group and state, today, when national discourses turned out to be largely discredited, multi- and transcultural and multilingual phenomena have become signs of the times, it is very important not to create false opposition globalization and national culture. After all, the national myth with its entire network of discourses is not capable, in its locality, of effectively resisting globalization at any level. Writing in English should not be taken as a sign of automatic adherence to English or American culture. This is just a choice of means, in most cases devoid of nationalistic pathos, but marked by market pathos, i.e. again bringing us back to the core element of globalization. After all, it is much easier to sell what is written, staged, filmed in English and one will become significantly more familiar with such cultural products. larger number readers, viewers, listeners. Here English seems to be losing its nationality. belonging, acting as the language of globalization, the lingua franca of modern times. peace.
According to V. Benjamin, there is a certain resistance in the process of cultural and linguistic transformation, a certain residue of untranslatability, which expresses the essence of transculturation. The concept of multilingualism in a broad semiotic sense, the problem of cultural translation-paraphrase and untranslatability, as well as translingual phenomena as a source of the formation of new meanings are close to the problems of cultural relationships and the concept of double translation, proposed by V. Mignolo and F. Chiui, is more complex and a multidirectional movement between different imperial and colonial languages, which is no longer equal to the national, because a process of transculturation is taking place, breaking down the dichotomy of nation and other. In the era of globalization, the national geo-political configuration in the transnational world is changing and the problem of deconstructing previously unshakable and stable complexes of language - culture - territory comes to the fore. Modern linguistics, not yet having the means and necessary apparatus of concepts, is only learning to see the obvious connection between the colonization of the world and the development of dominant linguistic ideologies and practices. It is necessary to go further to see a special world of culture, a special epistemology, a special artistic dimension that lives in the Caribbean, English, Maghreb, French or Uzbek, Russian.

The unifying trend of cultural globalization, if we talk about literature, cinema, fine arts, strives for a “text” devoid of national and cultural characteristics, will take topos and time. The ideal in this case may be some kind of “Internet text”, created unknown where, unknown by whom and unknown for whom intended, which radically changes the usual relationship between text and context, which can be defined as a text without or without a context, or a text functioning in any context. Many genres of mass culture have reached the point of complete unification, even if they exist in a completely traditional printed form and are signed with the name of the author. This applies to such forms as thrillers, detective stories, etc., which have truly become international. Although the mechanism of international dissemination of genres and styles itself is far from new and, as is known, lay at the basis of the replication of many literary forms earlier, but its scale in the sphere of mass culture today is truly global. At the same time, the archaic nature of the division into mass and elite products in the globalized cultural space becomes especially obvious.

In the last decades of the 20th century. The process of art losing its autonomy and changing its traditional functions has also intensified, which leads to the gradual replacement of the purpose of art by its means, and is associated primarily with total technization, with what is often called the aesthetics of cyberspace, where the criterion of aesthetics becomes the connection with high technology, and art turns into craft again.

Globalization has an impact on changing the communicative functions and processes of culture, when the exchange of texts in in a broad sense is influenced not only by the logic of transculturation, in which similarities, differences and belonging define traditions and are interpreted outside of national principles, but also under the influence of the logic and metaphors of cyberspace. The aspect of globalization manifested in the World Wide Web is the illusion that the “process” completely absorbs “space”, to a certain extent negating it, combining the technological and market aspects of communication. The Internet, as a structure without content, a form that is outwardly devoid of clear and familiar boundaries that a traditional book or newspaper offers, undoubtedly changes the way information is transmitted and perceived. Thus, the spatio-temporal relations on which communication models have been built until now are truly destroyed. Almost completely repeating the logic of “deterritorialization,” cyber space objectively strives for the disappearance of the concepts of “here” and “now,” which are increasingly less likely to appear in a certain and once and for all given place and through a certain voice that expresses the speaking and writing subject of communication. . In the World Wide Web, authorship in the previous sense, property rights, and censorship, as they existed in the world of book culture, are potentially excluded. The world of cyberspace operates only in the category of quantity, the principle of possession, dividing the world into those who have access to the Internet and those who do not, or those who use the Internet as an educational force and those who mindlessly play computer games. Essentially, the old idea of ​​developed and undeveloped - in this case, in the informational sense - countries and cultures and typically colonialist clashes and interactions, which do not disappear, but rather intensify in the era of globalization, are being reproduced in a new round. On the other hand, it is through the Internet that the foundations of a global political subject are created, which, in combination with transnational movements of huge groups of people, leads to the emergence of a special cosmopolitan journalistic sphere of the era of globalization. The peculiarities of network organizations are that they lack a rigid center of power and bureaucratic hierarchy. Unlike the usual forms of organizational culture, based on a formal institution, the basis of a network organization is an active individual. Their advantages: quick response, flexibility, speed, coherence and great resonance. The network type of organization is better adapted to the dynamic state of the environment. Network organizations are very varied in their diversity: these include pressure groups, informal clubs, large and small religious and other structures.

The paradox of the Internet is that, being aimed at cultural diversity, it objectively leads to its collapse and homogenization of local features, reproducing old principles of domination.

Another important aspect of cultural globalization, manifested in the field of art, is the actualization of intermediality and the permeability of boundaries between different languages arts At the end of the 20th century. The process of synthesis of arts and complication of forms of mediality has noticeably accelerated. And today, with the general tendency towards the technicalization of art, the strict division into visual and verbal, image and word has turned out to be blurred, special synergy takes place (for example, complex interactions of film and literary text), hybrid painting, film, illustrated text, verbal text, based on play with visual tradition, etc.

Cultural globalization affects the area of ​​production and distribution of cultural products, turning art, culture, literature into goods, which, in the context of erasing the distinction between mass and high culture, which existed several decades ago, makes the phenomenon of commercialization truly global. It is connected, in particular, with the fashion for something different, for the exotic, with the frequent transformation of former negative stereotypes into exotic ones. Exotic, which means to a certain extent individual, and not mass, must be presented in a convenient package, not irritate the average consumer, not frighten him with its otherness or incomprehensibility, but at the same time not offend and, if possible, something else that is subjected to stereotyping. An example of the commercialization of culture in the era of globalization - the famous Booker Prize - the main literary prize the English-speaking world, the change in tactics in the awarding of which illustrates the plasticity of changes in the principles of the relationship between dominant and suppressed cultures and speculation on cultural diversity, when the exotic is exploited, and the third world writer bought by Booker acts as a kind of “colonial commodity”. In the era of globalization, the corporate award model comes to the fore, as transnational corporations become the main source of support for art, culture and literature.

With general chaos and increasing diversity, with the rapid development and legitimation of cultural multi-stylistics in the last decades of the 20th century. It is possible to identify a conditionally general line of movement of world humanitarian knowledge, which is closely related to the impact and understanding of the processes of globalization. In the 1970s - mid. In the 1980s, this process finds expression in various theories and practices of Western postmodernism. Not Western or post-Western deconstruction of the cultural foundations of modernity for a long time remained marginal, and its attempts often ended in assimilation, attribution to Western values ​​or ignoring, emphasizing isolation, closedness to the rest of the world. The next decade saw the beginning of a rollback from the postmodern model and either the adaptation of non-Western trends or the search for parallel, overlapping, alternative paths and aesthetics to postmodernity. First of all, this is the postcolonial complex, as the most global in its significance, as well as smaller subdiscourses of otherness, such as eco-aesthetics, modern. a scattering of feminisms, homoerotic discourses, etc. In the 1990s, the other “painted the entire semiosphere in its color and managed to solidify and become the object of intense theorizing at the metacultural level” (Lotman. “Semiosphere” of the 20th century).

The problem of total, legitimized “xenophilia” of the late 20th century. turned out to be connected with the question of the socio-political nature of art, which unexpectedly became relevant in the era of globalization. The 1990s brought neo-avant-garde tendencies with a focus on revolutionary changes and bringing to the fore the long-digested, seemingly boring problem of the cultural and political engagement of art. Being different, different for an artist is becoming increasingly difficult, “otherness” has become a commodity in the modern politically correct world , ceasing to fulfill its main role of deviance, often structuring itself into violent group radicalism, essentially leading to the loss of individuality.

Since the second half of the 1990s, the diversity of mini-discourses begins to fold back under the auspices of global studies and especially critical studies of globalization. At the same time, postcolonialism strives for dehistoricization, as a rejection of the linear teleological model of time, and in this, of course, it intersects with postmodernism, although postcolonial discourses are sometimes characterized by rehistoricization of a special kind, while global studies to a greater extent actualizes the idea of ​​deterritorialization inherent in postmodernity, translating this process on the scale of a fragmented but unified “world system”, linking together Western and post-Western discourses. Globalization demonstrates that postcoloniality and postmodernism are two sides of the same coin - the global process of modernization, as, indeed, are nationalist and fundamentalist discourses. If postmodernism is a generally Eurocentric phenomenon, destroying and exploding European philosophy and cultural model from the inside (although this is not always effective), then postcolonialism is a not entirely successful attempt to break with this European meta-narrative and give a voice to the “other” , although often by means of the same postmodernism, as it were, to translate into a generally understandable and generally accepted language the problems of imperial-colonial differences, and global studies is already linking together Western and post-Western discourses, finding possible points of contact and common denominators.

Some peoples who have even more or less strong national tradition, actively oppose globalization, including with a weapon in their hands. An example of this is Islamic civilization (the term is based on Samuel Huntington). This is due to some characteristics of Muslim peoples. In addition to those features that were mentioned above and which are valuable for them - traditions, language, values, mentality, way of life - in the minds of the individual or the peoples who bear this culture, the fact that globalization processes are perceived by them as a triumph of their traditional opponents is specific - people of the West. Every political, economic, cultural and, especially, military action directed in their direction is perceived as a crusade. The historical memory of this culture over the centuries was formed mainly in confrontation with Western Christians, who have now been replaced by simply Westerners, already virtually deprived Christian faith, but still aggressive towards Islam (or rather, even more aggressive).

Muslim culture did not modernize religion, and it is still its main component, the axis of culture, and, therefore, the assessment of events is determined precisely by religious consciousness.

Representatives of Chinese culture display a more restrained opposition to globalization; they, so to speak, are trying to build the Great Wall of China in a modern manner. Changes Chinese culture experiences tragically. The Chinese believe that every change moves them further away from the cultural ideal of a “golden age.” Therefore, the Chinese are trying not to succumb to the language, the conversation in which will push national values ​​into the background. The Chinese, for example, avoid talking about human rights, which they believe is how they maintain their identity. Such protection, of course, is only partial; China still accepts many of the innovations of the Western world.

An obvious confrontation would be unnecessary trouble, and the United States does not call them to an open confrontation, since international capital has not yet strengthened and developed in this country. In addition, this country has nuclear weapons and, since it has not yet implemented a military space program, open confrontation with China would cause significant damage to American national interests.

Indian culture even today does not betray the principles of the Hindu worldview and, as it were, is aloof from world processes. She is neither for nor against; and not a single hegemonic country is trying to disturb it, like a sleeping child. But among the peoples of Hindustan there are many Muslim peoples who do not belong to by and large to the Hindu tradition. And, like all peoples of Islamic civilization, they are ready to resist globalization.

Japan, on the basis of its unique experience, which is expressed in a unique synthesis of tradition and European values, believes that globalization cannot undermine the foundations of its culture, and is trying to use globalization processes to strengthen its own traditions. The ideology of Japan is a unique version of liberal nationalism; it allows one to accept Western innovations, albeit after first passing them through the censorship “filter” of national culture. As we see, all these methods of protection have only a partial effect. After all, where defense is weak, the West does not hesitate to use military force, as happened in relation to Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Libya. Eastern methods of resistance to globalization can only slightly correct its course and slightly slow down (but not stop) the process itself.

Russia, like the previously original countries of Europe, actually does not resist the processes of globalization, because it has neither a strong national state nor a powerful national idea for this. Nowadays, Russians, Germans, French, Romanians, Greeks, etc. only sigh about the ongoing loss of national values ​​and the catastrophic destruction of traditional cultures. One gets the impression that now Russia (like France and Germany before) has exhausted its ideological potential. All talk about the national idea and traditional culture is now drowning in the quagmire of philistine conformism and passive acceptance of what comes from above, i.e. globalization.

Due to the systemic crisis in Russia in the 1980-1990s. Globalization has hit the Russian people and Russian culture even harder than many other peoples and their cultures. Some thinkers (Kara-Murza) talk about the actual dismantling of the Russian people with the complete destruction of their value system, connections between people and connections with other peoples. This is probably due to a special property of Russian people, which has not yet been well studied and described - the ability to get used to the role of representatives of other nations and play it, bringing their characteristic features to the grotesque. Now, having become accustomed to the person of the liberal West, Russian people selflessly fulfill this role, forgetting about all obstacles, throwing away the restrictions imposed by all cultures, primarily their own. The worst thing is when such a “game” is positively assessed by the state authorities and allows one to gain a certain prestige in society. This happened in Russia in the era of Peter the Great, in the 20s of the 20th century, but this phenomenon has reached its greatest extent now.

Thus, at the level of states and peoples with their culture and tradition, there are now practically no reliable lines of defense left that can stop the running mechanism of globalization.

Humanity has entered a new era of its development. This is, first of all, the creation of homogeneous images and ways of life, the uniformization of behavior to the detriment of folk culture, that is, the equalization of human diversity.

This could be called the spread and expansion of the ideology of “sameness”, “the same”: a set of different doctrines, which includes religious ideas and doctrines, and non-religious doctrines. Within the framework of these doctrines, man is the same everywhere, and, thus, this man must create the same political and cultural systems everywhere, to the detriment of the diversity of cultures of peoples, nations, and their ways of life.

The main sign of the new time, its content side is that modern man created a world that was too complex for himself as an individual, for his individual intellectual capabilities. As a result, he lost the ability to recognize the basic patterns of this world and their changes, to foresee the consequences of his efforts and the direction of his own development.

And, no matter what they say about new technologies, single markets and systemic crises, in the end they remain nothing more than properties of the new time, turned into universal symbols, with the help of which humanity, exhausted from an overabundance of unstructured information, fences itself off from the need to really understand its content.

List of used literature

cultural globalization linguistic tradition

Gurevich P.S. - Culturology - M.: Gardariki, 2008.

Solonina Yu.N., Kagana M.S. - Culturology - M.: Higher Education, 2005.

Levit S.Ya. - Culturology. Encyclopedia. M.: “Russian Political Encyclopedia” (ROSSPEN), 2007

Ilyina E.A., Burov M.E. - Culturology: Lecture notes. - M.; MIEMP, 2005.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

Study of the relationship between culture and society. Basic types of cultural processes. Familiarization with methods of removing sociocultural contradictions. Modernization and globalization in modern culture. The history of the spread of counterculture among young people.

test, added 10/26/2014


History of the development of globalization, its understanding in the cultural aspect. Positive and negative aspects of the rapprochement of different types of cultures. Features of the regionalization process in the European Union. Forms of cultural dissemination: borrowing and diffusion.

abstract, added 11/14/2013


Factors in the globalization process. Globalization as a systemic process, manifested in the multiplication and complexity of social connections, leading to international integration. Historical path and the nature of the development of globalization. Specifics of modern business communications.

abstract, added 02/22/2010


Historical roots globalization. The ideology of “world citizenship” in the Cynic philosophical school. Global ethics of the 20th century and the ecumenism movement. Analysis of the article by M.O. Rudenko. Threats to the unification of cultures, the danger of the disappearance of ethnographic diversity.

article, added 12/12/2009


The main provisions of S. Huntington's cultural concept, which studies the historical and cultural process. Analysis of differences between cultures of civilizations (peoples), their impact on political relations. Trends in cultural globalization in modern world.

article, added 08/20/2013


A study of images and their role in visualizing culture. Visual representation in culture and its ontological model in the context of the evolution of the figurative system of culture. Production of presence according to H.U. Gumbrecht. Visual dimension of globalization culture.

course work, added 05/11/2014


Human cultural space in the modern world. Globalization of culture: trends and contradictions. Dynamics of modern culture. Communication processes based on modern technologies. Social significance of information.

abstract, added 03/30/2007


Scientific and technological revolution, its achievements and the problems it generated. Traditions and innovations in the religious life of mankind. Mass culture and its "Americanization". Totalitarianism, modernism and postmodernism in culture. The cultural dimension of globalization.

abstract, added 03/28/2013


Components of culture: norms, values, symbols and language. Universal leaving cultures. Cultural integration and ethnocentrism. The concept and content of cultural relativism. Diversity of subcultures and countercultures. The process of cultural globalization.

course work, added 04/29/2011


Trends in cultural globalization in modern culture. Functions of musical culture and its transformation in the modern world. Features of local musical and cultural traditions. Methods of their functioning in the conditions of modern Russian society.

The abstract was prepared by Svetlana Anatolyevna Ivanova, student of group 407 of the evening department

St. Petersburg State University of Culture and Arts

Faculty of History of World Culture

St. Petersburg, 2005

Introduction

Today, not a single country or society perceives social groups and individuals as closed and self-sufficient phenomena. They are included in universal relationships and interdependence.

Universal interconnection, interdependence and relationships are a pattern of extremely complex and contradictory processes of globalization.

Globalization is a general and multilateral process of cultural, ideological and economic integration of states, state associations, national and ethnic unities, which is a concomitant phenomenon of modern civilization.

Countries and peoples around the world exist in conditions of growing mutual influence. The accelerated pace of development of civilization and the course of historical processes have raised the question of the inevitability of global relationships, their deepening, strengthening and eliminating the isolation of countries and peoples.

Isolation from the world, isolation within one’s own framework was the ideal of an agrarian-type society; modern society is characterized by the type of person who always transgresses established boundaries and takes on a new appearance, always driven primarily by motives of renewal and change.

Subsequent historical processes predetermined the increasing rapprochement of peoples and countries. Such processes covered an ever-increasing area and determined general historical progress and a new stage of internationalization.

Today, globalization has become a process of building a new unity of the whole world, the leading direction of which is the intensive spread of economics, politics and culture developed countries in the diverse space of developing and underdeveloped countries. These large-scale processes occur primarily voluntarily.

The general processes of globalization are causing necessary and profound changes in the rapprochement and mutual cooperation of peoples and states. This is followed by a process of convergence and unification of the standard of living and its quality.

The world unites to solve interstate or local regional problems. Mutual rapprochement and integration are accompanied by processes that can be dangerous for the identity of small peoples and nationalities. This refers to the establishment of those norms and standards that to this day remain problematic for highly developed countries. A crude transplantation of norms and values ​​into the social body can be disastrous.

Concept – Culture

Culture is a historically determined level of development of society and man, expressed in the types and forms of organization of people’s life and activities. The concept of culture is used to characterize the material and spiritual level of development of certain historical eras, socio-economic formations, specific societies, nationalities and nations (for example, ancient culture, Mayan culture), as well as specific spheres of activity or life (work culture, artistic culture, culture everyday life). In a narrower sense, the term “culture” refers only to the sphere of people’s spiritual life. In everyday consciousness, “culture” acts as a collective image that unites art, religion, science, etc.

Culturology uses the concept of culture, which reveals the essence of human existence as the realization of creativity and freedom. It is culture that distinguishes man from all other creatures.

The concept of culture denotes the universal attitude of man to the world, through which man creates the world and himself. Each culture is a unique universe created by a person’s specific attitude to the world and to himself. In other words, by studying different cultures, we study not just books, cathedrals or archaeological finds - we discover other human worlds in which people lived and felt differently than us.

Every culture is a way of human creative self-realization. Therefore, understanding other cultures enriches us not only with new knowledge, but also with new creative experience. It includes not only the objective results of human activity (machines, technical structures, results of knowledge, works of art, norms of law and morality, etc.), but also subjective human forces and abilities realized in activity (knowledge and skills, production and professional skills, level of intellectual, aesthetic and moral development, worldview, methods and forms of mutual communication of people within the team and society).

Due to the fact that man, by nature, is a spiritual-material being, he consumes both material and spiritual means. To satisfy material needs, he creates and consumes food, clothing, housing, creates equipment, materials, buildings, roads, etc. To satisfy spiritual needs, he creates spiritual values, moral and aesthetic ideals, political, ideological, religious ideals, science and art. Therefore, human activity spreads through all channels of both material and spiritual culture. Therefore, a person can be considered as the initial system-forming factor in the development of culture. Man creates and uses the world of things and the world of ideas that revolves around him; and his role as a creator of culture. Man creates culture, reproduces it and uses it as a means for his own development.

Thus, culture is all the material and intangible products of human activity, values ​​and recognized modes of behavior, objectified and accepted in any communities, transmitted to other communities and subsequent generations.

Globalization and national cultures

Culture, since it is a product of human activity, cannot exist outside the community of people. These communities represent the subject of culture, are its creator and bearer.

A nation creates and preserves its culture as a symbol of the realization of its rights. A nation, as a cultural reality, manifests itself in different spheres, such as custom, direction of will, value orientation, language, writing, art, poetry, legal proceedings, religion, etc. The nation must see its highest function in the existence of the nation as such. She must always take care of strengthening the sovereignty of the state.

The preservation of identity and its strengthening mainly depends on the activity of internal forces and on the identification of national internal energy. The culture of a community is not a simple sum of the cultures of individuals; it is super-individual and represents a set of values, creative products and standards of behavior of a community of people. Culture is the only force that shapes a person as a member of a community.

The culture of preserving national characteristics becomes richer if it interacts with many peoples of the world.

Personal freedom high level social cohesion, social solidarity, etc. - these are the basic values ​​that ensure the viability of any small nations and realize national aspirations and ideals.

Globalization puts forward the ideal of “global legal statehood,” which inevitably raises the question of expanding the means of limiting state sovereignty. This is a fundamental negative trend of globalization. In these cases, underdeveloped countries with a historically traditional culture can find a place for themselves only among suppliers of raw materials or become a sales market. They may be left without their own national economy and without modern technologies.

Man is the only creature in the universe who not only contemplates it, but also active work interested in the expedient transformation of her and himself. He is the only rational being capable of reflection, of thinking about his existence. A person is not indifferent and not indifferent to existence, he always chooses between different possibilities, guided by the desire to improve his existence and his life. The main feature of a person is that he is a person who is a member of a certain community, with his own strong-willed, purposeful behavior and who, through action, strives to satisfy his needs and interests. The ability to create culture is the guarantor of human existence and its fundamental characterizing feature.

Franklin’s famous formulation: “Man is a tool-making animal” emphasizes the fact that man is characterized by activity, labor, and creativity. At the same time, it represents the totality of all social relations (K. Marx) into which people enter in the process social activities. The result of such activities is society and culture.

Social life is, first of all, intellectual, moral, economic and religious life. It covers all the features of people living together. “Society implies a system of relationships connecting individuals belonging to general culture", notes E. Giddens. No culture can exist without society, but also no society can exist without culture. We would not be “humans” in the full sense that is usually given to this term. We would have no language to express ourselves, no self-awareness, and our ability to think and reason would be severely limited..."

Values ​​always express generalized goals and means of achieving them. They play the role of fundamental norms that ensure the integration of society, help individuals make socially approved choices about their behavior in vital situations, including the choice between specific goals of rational actions. Values ​​serve as social indicators of the quality of life, and the value system forms the internal core of culture, the spiritual quintessence of the needs and interests of individuals and social communities. The value system, in turn, has a reverse impact on social interests and needs, acting as one of the most important incentives for social action and individual behavior.

The culture of each community has adopted certain value systems and a corresponding hierarchy. The world of human values, affected by turbulent changes, has become very changeable and contradictory. The crisis of a value system does not mean their total destruction, but a change in their internal structures. Cultural values ​​did not die, but they became different in rank. In any perspective, the appearance of a new element entails a reshuffling of all other elements of the hierarchy.

Moral values ​​and norms are very important phenomena in the life of an individual and society. It is through these categories that the life of individuals and society is regulated. Both values ​​and norms are “woven” into society. At the same time, compliance with standards is not only their external function. The individual views himself in accordance with group norms.

The awakening of national self-awareness, which is observed in today's reality, testifies to the unnaturalness of the process of merging nations, to its inconsistency with human nature.

In the meantime, some thinkers are concerned about the future of humanity in the context of increased civilization and globalization. “Our 20th century was perhaps the most dramatic in the history of mankind in terms of the destinies of people, nations, ideas, social systems and civilization,” notes A.A. Zinoviev, “...This was perhaps the last human century.”

The beginning of the globalization process

Since the 90s of the last century, the phenomenon of globalization has become known to the widest circles of society, despite the fact that its first signs began to appear back in the 50s. After the end of World War II, a new world order emerged. Two ideological camps emerged: the so-called communist, together with its military bloc (the Warsaw Pact countries), and the so-called capitalist, which formed the North Atlantic Alliance. The remaining countries, the so-called “Third World,” represented an arena in which the competition between two warring camps took place, but they themselves did not play a significant role in world political processes.

The capitalist bloc, with liberal democratic values ​​and an economy based on private property, represented an open society and proved to be more viable than a closed society built on social-communist principles of equality. Paradoxical but true: the communist regime betrayed the basic principles of Marxism and subordinated politics to economics, while an open society initially built its policies based on economic processes.

Based on the principles of economic utility, it became necessary to unite many countries into a single force. First of all, economic integration was required, which necessarily led to the creation of a single legal space, homogeneous political governance and the universalization of democratic values. A new European liberal democratic project was created, the idea of ​​which is to build the world by an independent, free person who does not recognize anything that is not rationally understandable. The universe must be rationally transformed so as to become suitable for the life of any and every autonomous individual. The liberal project is a negation of everything that already exists, including the utopian ideas of communism, ethical ideas, ideas that are identified with superstition. The implementation of this project made it possible to transform national corporations into transnational ones, which, in turn, required the creation of a global information field. This led to an unprecedented flourishing in the field mass communications, and, in particular, led to the emergence of the Internet computer network. These processes were “steadfastly” resisted by the communist Soviet empire, which became the first victim of the globalization process.

After the destruction of the bipolar world, the world gradually became more homogeneous, and the difference between cultures began to be thought of as the main contradiction of modernity. Current processes are the subject of discussion by many intellectuals, and two points of view can be distinguished that represent the main principles of different approaches. From the point of view of the modern American thinker F. Fukuyama, with the advent of the post-communist era, the end of history is evident. Fukuyama believes that world history has moved to a qualitatively new level, at which contradiction has been removed as the driving force of history, and the modern world appears as single society. Leveling national societies and the establishment of a single world community heralds the end of history: significant changes will not occur after this. History is no longer a field of clashes between individual nations or states, cultures and ideologies. It will be replaced by a universal and homogeneous state of humanity.

A different point of view is developed by the American thinker S. Huntington. In his opinion, at the current stage, the place of ideological contradictions is taken by the contradictions of cultures (civilizations). The process of political homogenization of the world will cause civilizational conflicts. These different views are united by the fact that both authors emphasize the existence (course) of globalization processes, but assume different consequences and outcomes arising from them.

What qualities characterize globalization?

The main characteristic of the globalization process taking place in the modern world is the extrapolation of liberal democratic values ​​to all regions without exception. This means that political, economic, legal, etc. the systems of all countries of the world become identical, and the interdependence of countries reaches unprecedented proportions. Until now, peoples and cultures have never been so dependent on each other. Problems that arise anywhere in the world instantly affect the rest of the world. The process of globalization and homogenization leads to the creation of a single world community in which common norms, institutions and cultural values ​​are formed. There is a feeling of the world as a single place.

The process of globalization is characterized by the following main aspects:

1. internationalization, which, first of all, is expressed in interdependence;

2. liberalization, that is, the elimination of trade barriers, investment mobility and the development of integration processes;

3. Westernization - extrapolation of Western values ​​and technologies to all parts of the world;

4. deterritorialization, which is expressed in activity that has a transnational scale and a decrease in the significance of state borders.

Globalization can be called a process of total integration. However, it is fundamentally different from all forms of integration that previously existed in world history.

Humanity has so far been familiar with two forms of integration:

1. Some strong power forcibly tries to “annex” other countries, and we can call this form of integration integration through coercion (force). This is how empires were created.

2. Voluntary unification of countries to achieve a common goal. This is a voluntary form of integration.

In both cases, the territories where integration took place were relatively small and did not reach the scale characteristic of modern process globalization.

Globalization is neither unification by military force (although military force may be used as an auxiliary means) nor voluntary unification. Its essence is fundamentally different: it is based on the idea of ​​profit and material well-being. The transformation of national-state corporations into transnational ones, first of all, requires a uniform political and legal space in order to ensure the safety of capital. Globalization can be considered as a logical result of a new European liberal project, which is based on the scientistic paradigm of European culture of the New Age, which most clearly manifested itself at the end of the 20th century. The desire for the development of science and education, as well as the international nature of science and technology, helped the emergence of new technologies, which, in turn, made it possible to “shrink” the world. It is no coincidence that for an armed modern technology In society, the earth is already small, and efforts are aimed at space exploration.

At first glance, globalization is similar to Europeanization. But she is essentially different from her. Europeanization as a kind of cultural-paradigmatic process manifested itself and was considered in the value orientation of residents of the regions closest to Europe as an example of the rules for ordering life. The rules of European life and their advantages influenced border cultures, and not only through economic influence or military force. Examples of Europeanization are the modernization of traditional societies, the desire for education, the saturation of everyday life with the spirit of science and technology, European costume, etc. Although Europeanization to varying degrees affected only the countries closest to Western Europe, namely the countries of Eastern Europe and Western Asia, including Turkey. As for the rest of the world, it has not yet been significantly affected by Europeanization. Not a single country or culture, not a single region of the world shys away from globalization, i.e. homogenization. But, although this process is irreversible, it has obvious and hidden opponents. However, a country interested in globalization will not be afraid to use force, as exemplified by the events that took place in Yugoslavia and Afghanistan.

Why is there such strong resistance to globalization and protest against it? Do those who resist globalization really not want order, peace and material well-being? Although all economically, financially and politically advanced countries take part in the process of globalization, the United States of America is still perceived as the patron of this process.

After World War II, the United States was actively involved in world political processes. By pursuing a policy integrated with Western European countries, America is becoming one of the main factors limiting the spread of communism. Since the 60s of the last century, the United States has gradually become a world political leader. The implementation of the new European liberal democratic project took place in this country, which led to its military and economic prosperity.

Even European countries became dependent on the USA. This became especially clear after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

In the modern world, America's military political, economic and financial hegemony has become obvious.

Americans believe that they are defenders of liberal values, and provide assistance and support to all interested countries in this matter, although this in itself is in conflict with the spirit of the liberal project.

Today the situation in the world is such that there is no force that can compete with America. She has no worthy opponent who would threaten her safety. The only thing that can seriously interfere with the implementation of America's interests is general chaos, anarchy, in response to which follows a lightning-fast reaction, an example of which is counter-terrorism measures. This initiative of America as the “steering wheel of globalization” is clearly and openly opposed by Muslim countries. Hidden (at least not aggressive) resistance is offered by Indian, Chinese and Japanese cultures. Various options Although compliant, counteraction is demonstrated by the countries of Western Europe and Russia, as well as the so-called. developing countries. These different forms of resistance are in accordance with the uniqueness of cultures.

Nature of culture and types of resistance

I will try to analyze how different cultures relate to the process of creating a global society. I will start with the culture that is the most ardent opponent of globalization processes, namely, Muslim culture. In addition to those features that were mentioned above and which are valuable for them - traditions, language, values, mentality, way of life - in the minds of the individual or the peoples who bear this culture, the fact that globalization processes are perceived by them as a triumph of their traditional opponents is specific - Christian. Every political, economic, cultural and, especially, military action directed in their direction is perceived as a crusade. The historical memory of this culture over the centuries was formed mainly in confrontation with Christians, which determined the inclusion of such a radical point in their holy book, the Koran, which is expressed in the existence of a religious war - jihad; Each Muslim who gave his life for his faith is guaranteed to receive a place in heaven. Muslim culture did not modernize religion, and it is still its main component, the axis of culture, and, therefore, the assessment of events is determined precisely by religious consciousness.

Representatives of the Orthodox-Slavic culture and their leading country, Russia, also show a peculiar nature of resistance. The attitude of Russia, as a former superpower, to globalization processes is very peculiar and comes from the soul of this culture. For centuries, Russia has been justifying the pan-Slavist idea, dreaming of becoming the third Rome, but, unfortunately, Washington, not Moscow, became that. Russia's policy is clearly anti-globalist. She envies America, but today she does not have the strength to resist it.

As for the countries of Western Europe, where the globalist idea was born, their situation is very dramatic. At first glance, they look like partners of the United States in globalization processes, but it is obvious that their national dignity has been violated. They are trying to rehabilitate him through the protection of language and artistic culture. This is clearly noticeable when looking closely at French, German and Italian cultures; the creation of a new single currency can be interpreted in the same way. As for England, it satisfies its ambitions by the fact that English is becoming the language of the world as a result of globalization.

Representatives of Chinese culture display a more restrained opposition to globalization; they, so to speak, are trying to build the Great Wall of China in a modern manner. Chinese culture is experiencing tragic changes. They believe that each change moves them further away from the cultural ideal of a “golden age.” Therefore, the Chinese are trying not to succumb to the language, the conversation in which will push national values ​​into the background. The Chinese, for example, avoid talking about human rights, which they believe is how they maintain their identity. An obvious confrontation would be unnecessary trouble, and the United States does not call them to an open confrontation, since international capital has not yet strengthened and developed in this country; In addition, this country has nuclear weapons and, since it has not yet implemented a military space program, open confrontation with China would cause significant damage to American national interests.

Indian culture even today does not betray the principles of the Buddhist worldview and, as it were, is aloof from world processes. She is neither for nor against; and not a single hegemonic country is trying to disturb it, like a sleeping child.

Japan, on the basis of its unique experience, which is expressed in a unique synthesis of tradition and European values, believes that globalization cannot undermine the foundations of its culture, and is trying to use globalization processes to strengthen its own traditions.

What countries that oppose globalization are afraid of

Globalization processes encounter various forms of resistance. Some of them have political, some have economic, and some have general cultural content.

The political aspect of resistance, first of all, manifests itself against the background of the decomposition of national states and the diminishing role of international institutions. The transformation of the essence of international politics is caused by the emergence of such global problems as human rights, ecology and weapons. mass destruction. For these reasons, the functions and importance of traditionally formed nation states are diminishing. They are no longer capable of pursuing an independent policy. They are threatened by such a danger as super-state integration. An example is a united Europe and intrastate separatism as a form of resistance to this danger. Illustrations of this last phenomenon include Abkhazia in Georgia, the Basque Country in Spain, Ulster in England, Quebec in Canada, Chechnya in Russia, etc.

The role and importance of the state during globalization is also decreasing in the aspect that military security is being reduced for the reason that the production of expensive weapons created by modern technology is impossible not only for underdeveloped countries, but also for those countries that are the standard of economic well-being.

In addition, economic and environmental security requires simultaneous and coordinated actions of many countries. Global markets are bringing states to their knees. Transnational corporations have greater financial capabilities than nation states. Awareness of all this tends to reduce devotion to nation-states and, therefore, increase devotion to humanity. It is also impossible not to take into account the fact that technological and, especially, cultural uniformity undermines the foundations of the national state.

The economic arguments of opponents of globalization are as follows. They believe that in this process, national governments lose control over the economy, and rich countries do not create social safety nets. Consequently, inequality deepens, both within a particular country and between different countries. Anti-globalists believe that their comparador bourgeoisie has sold itself to foreign capital and its desire for its own enrichment will lead to even greater impoverishment of the population. In other words, anti-globalists believe that economic globalization will lead to even greater enrichment of the rich and, accordingly, to the impoverishment of the poor.

As for cultural opposition to globalization processes, it is more serious and therefore requires special attention.

The role and importance of culture for humans

What do countries that resist globalization fear? After all, globalization, in its ideal version, is the eradication of poverty, world order, eternal peace and material well-being. What force forces a person, peoples and countries to refuse the above benefits?

The fact is that representatives of original cultures, consciously or not, feel that economic, political, legal and technological homogenization will be followed by side effects, which, first of all, will cause changes in their traditions, culture and way of life. One of the essential needs of a person is to belong to something, be it a social group, religion, political or sexual orientation, geographic area, etc.; among these forms of identity, cultural identity is central and all-encompassing; it largely determines human mentality, psychology and way of life in general. You have to be an apologist for “conspiracy theories” to accuse the United States of developing an ideology that intends to destroy the diversity of cultures and languages ​​and make the world culturally homogeneous. Although it should be noted that those phenomena that accompany the components of globalization indirectly cause changes in national cultures.

First of all, this relates to the national language and the derogation of its importance. Successful economic activity requires timely information exchange in one language; and such a language in the case of globalization processes is English. A specific individual, society, ethnic group, first of all, self-identifies with language as a pillar of national culture; therefore, neglecting it, even reducing its distribution area, is perceived painfully. From a value position, language is not only a means of transmitting a message, that is, a means of communication, but also the worldview and attitude of the people who speak this language, it records the biography of the nation, it was spoken by the ancestors and it is a model of the world. Language is an integral feature of a nation: there is no nationality without language. The national consciousness perceives language as a living organism that requires careful treatment and care. The loss of a language is followed by the destruction of historical inheritance, the connection of times, memory... Language is an object of love, it is the axis of national culture, an object of respect, because it is native and is property. Therefore, the national language is the most important cultural phenomenon. There is no culture without language; language permeates all cultural phenomena; for culture it is all-encompassing. This means that language is decisive not only for any specific, separately existing cultural environment, but if something exists in a culture, then it has its own design in language. In other words, culture exists in language, and language is a way of existence of culture.

It is also believed that globalization processes cause a memory gap. Culture is a form of historical memory; it is a collective memory in which the way of life, social and spiritual experience of a given society is recorded, preserved and remembered. Culture as memory does not preserve everything that was created by the people who are the bearers of this culture, but that. which objectively turned out to be valuable to her. If we use an analogy and comprehend the meaning and role of memory in the real life of a particular person, then the meaning of cultural memory in the life of a nation will become clearer to us. A person, losing his memory, loses his own biography, his own “I” and individual integrity; it exists physically, but has no past, present or future. He doesn't know who he is, why he exists, what he wants, etc. The role that memory plays in the life of an individual is played by culture in the historical existence of society and a nation. Culture is a form of memory that is transmitted through generations, and through which the cultural life of a nation maintains continuity, consistency and unity. In biological organisms, this function is performed by gene structures: species populations are determined by genetic heredity, which is transmitted through the blood. The social experience of people is transmitted to subsequent generations not by blood, but through culture, and it is in this sense that culture can be called non-genetic memory.

The nation is aware of its unity; it has a historical memory, through which its past is perceived as the basis of the present and future. In national self-awareness, the connection of times is understood as a single continuity, therefore contact is maintained even with distant ancestors: they and their deeds are permanently present in the lives of contemporaries. The way of life, which is determined by culture, is considered not just as an ordinary everyday factor, but as a significant achievement, to the achievement of which the diligence and labor of many generations contributed.

For national consciousness, the nation’s own way of life is perceived not only as a unique, unique way of organizing life, but also as superiority in relation to other cultures. For national consciousness, the solidity of culture and way of life is interpreted as overcoming finitude. Each representative of the nation sees the overcoming of his own empirical finitude in the immortality of the national culture, where future generations will preserve the way of life inherent in this culture, as contemporaries do and as their ancestors did. A peculiar feeling that constantly accompanies national self-awareness, awareness of the identity of one’s own nation and its differences from other nations is called national feeling. Representatives of one nation differ from representatives of another in their physical type; their customs, type of behavior and everyday skills are also different. In the process of historical development, a nation develops certain ideas and value orientations.

Communication with another culture only strengthens sympathy for one’s own nation. The consciousness of belonging to a nation means that a person is connected with it by a community of character, that the fate and culture of the nation influences him, that the nation itself lives and is realized in him. He perceives the nation as part of his “I”; therefore, an insult to one’s own nation is perceived as a personal insult, and the success of representatives of one’s own nation and their recognition by others evokes feelings of national pride. A person is so determined by culture that change even in such an insignificant area as cooking, the kitchen, the table, is perceived very painfully (remember the history of the arrival of the McDonald's and Coca-Cola corporations). It must be said that “McDonaldization” is used as a synonym for “globalization,” not to mention the changes in traditions, religion, morality, art, and everyday life that it leads to.

It is obvious that traditional, non-modernized societies resist the processes of globalization more strongly; for them, culture is historical memory, which, as is obvious, is perceived by the native model of life design.

Refusal of culture means a break in memory and, therefore, the annulment of one's own identity. The continuity of culture for the national consciousness, whether they realize it or not, means the denial of personal death and the justification of immortality. Culture offers its bearer acceptable requirements for behavior, values ​​and norms, which are the basis for the mental balance of the individual. But, once a person finds himself in a situation where various cultural systems are involved in his everyday life and when the social environment requires him to act contrary to the norms of his culture, and often even exclude it, the person still tries to preserve his cultural identity, although the environment requires cultural adaptation. A situation is created in which a person or group of people is forced to fulfill the demands of different cultural systems, which often oppose each other and exclude each other. All this causes the destruction of the integrity of consciousness and leads to internal discomfort of the individual or social group, which, in turn, is reflected in behavior, which can be aggressive and expressed in nationalistic, criminal, anti-confessional actions of the individual, as well as in depressive and melancholic moods.

Bibliography

1. Moreva Lyubava Mikhailovna, Ph.D., professor, program specialist in culture at the UNESCO Office in Moscow.

The UNESCO Department for Comparative Studies of Spiritual Traditions, the Specifics of Their Cultures and Interreligious Dialogue. The Association for the Development of Information Technologies in Education "INTERNET SOCIETY" held a virtual round table held within the framework of the Seventh International Philosophical and Cultural Congress "Dynamics of value orientations in modern culture: the search for optimality in extreme conditions."

2. Round table III

Fundamental problems of globalization in local contexts

Internet version round table took place on the educational portal AUDITORIUM.RU from August 1, 2004 to December 1, 2004.

3. Cassirer E. Experience about man: Introduction to the philosophy of human culture // In the book: The problem of man in Western philosophy. M., “Progress”, 1988. P. 9.

4. Giddens E. Sociology. M., 1999. P. 43.

5. Chavchavadze N.Z. Culture and values. Tb., 1984. P. 36.

6. Ortega y Gasset H. New symptoms // In the book: The problem of man in Western philosophy. P. 206.