Каталог статей из сборников научных конференций и научных журналов- Globalization at the present stage of social development: cultural consequences

O. Yu. Kolosova, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences,

assistant professor

Stavropol branch of Krasnodar university

of  Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation,

Stavropol, Russia

The subject of the current state of culture and tendencies of its change is one of the main directions of cultural researches. The experts, engaged in its studying and development, pay considerable attention to those factors which created modern culture in its current form and continue to have an impact on its further transformation [5, p. 21–24]. Recently they note the growing globalization phenomenon role as one of significant culture forming factors. A plenty of researches are devoted to it [13, p. 177–182]. And if one of their part is turned to a question of essence of globalization, another branch of discussions is made by a subject of various consequences of this process including for the sphere of culture in the society [7, p. 6–9].

Cultural consequences of globalization demand rather detailed research. Let us designate only main, most noticeable tendencies of impact of globalization on culture [9, p. 123–128].

Their list in many respects depends on idea of essence of a process of globalization. Taking into consideration different points of view, it is possible to find various reasons leading to different cultural consequences. For example, if we take globalization as an objective process of distribution of the most various phenomena, artifacts, events, people, ways of organization, ideas, worldview and other within all globe, then it creates a possibility of meeting of a set of various phenomena relating to different social, cultural, political and other contexts. Culturally it will lead to interaction of various cultures, penetration of various cultural elements, symbols and forms into new cultural spaces and contexts [4, p. 118–124]. Nature of this interaction can be both productive and destructive. Favorable result is mutual enrichment of cultures, merge of their separate elements and formation of new, hybrid cultural forms. Some of national and other local cultural phenomena can even gain the world cultural value and become a part of world culture [14, p. 10–16]. However if an internal content of culture – donor and culture – recipient discords, it can lead to a conflict between representatives of these cultures. Besides, negative impact of penetration of separate elements of certain culture into space of other culture consists in destroying its unity, its integrity [10, p. 87–93].

Process of globalization comprises powerful integration tendencies. Culturally they assume formation of uniform world cultural space [3, p. 80–85]. But at the same time the question of the content of world culture as an integral whole remains open. Is it different from many local cultures, or is it their set or sum? In the first case a question is what an essence of the world culture is. In the second case there is a problem of a consistent combination of content of various cultures within single world culture, and then its unity and integrity is questionable. Besides, the global cultural integration can comprise threat of unification of cultures, leveling of differences between them. Expansion of existence of various cultures, their exit to the world, global level means their meeting, interaction, some interpenetration and mixture. It leads to the fact that universalization in sense of unification of lifestyles, symbols of culture and transnational forms of behavior makes its way in the world; the global industry of culture in the increasing measure means convergence of cultural symbols and life forms [1, p. 95–100]. Among globalized elite new, global, not attached to any concrete territorial context cultural meanings and values are formed. They seek to force out and replace traditional, territorially certain meanings and values that generates their opposition and competition [6, p. 21–24].

Tendency of westernization acts nowadays as the most obvious manifestation of the unifying globalization impact. It represents a process of global distribution of the western political views, way of managing, culture, worldview and way of life, compulsory in nature imposing to the whole world of westernized values and standards [8, p. 136–143]. A problem of how globalization is connected with westernization and do they exist separately from each other, demands certain consideration. The difference between these processes exists, at least, at the theoretical, notional level. And it assumes a possibility of existence of ways of development of globalization process alternative to global westernization; principles and activity of the movement of alternative globalism and also arising projects of various national strategy of globalization act as a real confirmation [2, p. 168–177].

Global westernization has a noticeable impact on the sphere of culture, and both on its material, and spiritual component. The powerful channel of translation of the western cultural values with which mass, popular culture, show business is closely connected, is the most dynamic sphere of culture, which elements has greater mobility and is easily perceived owing to their availability. In many respects at the expense of mass culture there is an introduction of the western cultural elements in the national and other local cultural contexts. Deep layers of culture, spiritual wealth of the nations, at the same time are not influenced directly, though certain negative consequences nevertheless are inevitable [12, p. 73–78].

Culture as a phenomenon having its own independent value becomes one of the main targets of global westernization. At the same time, its content is out of subjects of liberal and capitalist globalization interest. It is curious, first of all, from a position of possible making a profit from operation of cultural symbols and values. However the main threat for national and other local cultures is not in commercialization of their separate elements. For implementation of global political, economic, financial hegemony adherents of capitalist variant of globalization need creation of unified global cultural space [11, p. 282–284]. Its formation allows them to attach countries of the world periphery to the system of the western cultural values. And it is valid, it is possible to find a set of illustrations of how the leading capitalist countries export and impose to the different countries of the world their cultural values, images, worldview and way of life. Such cultural expansion leads to destruction of the unique originality of national and other local cultures. Borders between cultures are disappeared, they become indistinct and differences between them are leveled.

Bibliography

1. Бакланова О. А., Бакланов И. С., Ерохин А. М. Методологические конструкты исследования социальности современного общества // Историческая и социально-образовательная мысль. – 2016. – Т. 8. – № 3-1. – С. 95–100.

2. Бакланова О. А., Бакланов И. С. Современная российская социальность в контексте социального конструкционизма // Вопросы социальной теории. – 2015. – Т. 7. – № 1–2. – С. 168–177.

3. Болховской А. Л., Говердовская Е. В., Ивченко А. В. Образование в глобализирующемся мире: философский взгляд // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. – 2013. – № 5. – С. 80–85.

4. Говердовская Е. В., Добычина Н. В. Взаимные референции между реальным и виртуальным пространством: новая коммуникационная среда // Социально-гуманитарные знания. – 2014. – № 7. – С. 118–124.

5. Гончаров В. Н. Информационная потребность в обществе: социокультурный аспект // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. – 2012. – № 6. – С. 21–24.

6. Гончаров В. Н. Информатизация образования общества: фундаментальный аспект исследования информатики // Фундаментальные исследования. – 2012. – № 3–1. – С. 21–24.

7. Daraganova Yu. S. Философия науки // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. – 2011. – № 4. – С. 6–9.

8. Джиоева Д. А., Камалова О. Н. Значение сенсорных технологий в жизнедеятельности человека // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. – 2011. – № 1. – С. 136–143.

9. Ерохин А. М. Научно-информационный аспект исследования социокультурного развития общества в области культуры и искусства // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. – 2015. – № 2. – С. 123–128.

10. Камалова О. Н., Карпун А. Б. Основные структурные элементы политической власти // Гуманитарные и социальные науки. – 2010. – № 1. – С. 87–93.

11. Лобейко Ю. А. Социальная активность личности в обществе: социально-педагогические аспекты формирования // European Social Science Journal. – 2014. – № 7–2 (46). – С. 282–284.

12. Лобейко Ю. А. Социально-психологические проблемы общения в контексте межличностных общественных отношений// Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. – 2015. – № 4. – С. 73–78.

13. Несмеянов Е. Е. Соотношение религии и науки в гуманитарном знании и современном обществе (по материалам монографии К. В. Воденко и А.А. Мекушкина «Христианство и наука: история и современность» (М., 2014)) // Гуманитарий Юга России. – 2015. – № 1. – С. 177–182.

14. Матяш Т. П., Матяш Д. В., Несмеянов Е. Е. «Науки о природе» и «науки о духе»: судьба старой дилеммы // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. – 2015. – № 1 (80). – С. 10–16.