Socio-political aspects of global problems of our time. Global social and political issues

Introduction

2. Global socio-political problems. Negative Manifestations of the Arms Race and Disarmament Tasks

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

In modern scientific world There are many interpretations of the concept of civilization. Its study has always attracted politicians, sociologists, historians and philosophers. Various theories of the formation and development of both global and local, individual civilizations have always caused controversy among scientists. An integral part of these disputes is the place of Russia in world civilization, its belonging to one or another line of development. Westerners, Slavophiles, Eurasians - there are many areas of discussion. But the purpose of these discussions is the same - to understand how original the civilization of Russia is. Some versions are built solely on historical facts, others are based only on ideology. But it must be admitted that a socio-political approach to the study of this problem is impossible without such independent sciences as history and philosophy. Let us try to give an objective analysis of the civilizational development of Russia in the context of the development of world civilization.

Introductory, to consider the second question of this work, we can take the definition of the political scientist V.A. Maltseva: “Global problems of our time are complex and comprehensive. They are closely intertwined with regional and national-state problems. They are based on contradictions of a global scale, affecting the foundations of the existence of modern civilization. The aggravation of contradictions in one link leads to destructive processes in general, gives rise to new problems. The resolution of global problems is also complicated by the fact that the level of management of global processes by international organizations, their awareness and financing by international organizations is still low. sovereign states. The strategy of human survival on the basis of solving the global problems of our time should bring peoples to new frontiers of civilized development.”

1. The concept of civilization. Two historical lines and Russia's place in the stream of world civilizations

CIVILIZATION - a stage in the development of society; the level of social and cultural development, which is associated with the division of labor.

For a long time, civilization was viewed as a stage in the historical development of mankind, following savagery and barbarism. Today, such a meaning is insufficient and inaccurate. Civilization is understood as a qualitative specificity (originality of material, spiritual, social life) of a particular group of countries, peoples at a certain stage of development.

According to a number of researchers, civilizations have decisively differed and differ from each other, as they are based on incompatible systems of social values. Any civilization is characterized not only by a specific social production technology, but also by a culture corresponding to it to no lesser extent. It has a certain philosophy, socially significant values, a generalized image of the world, a specific way of life with its own special life principle, which is based on the spirit of the people, its morality, conviction, which determine a certain attitude towards oneself. This main life principle unites people into the people of a given civilization, ensures its unity throughout its own history.

Civilization as a large-scale socio-cultural community has its own hierarchy of ideals and values that represent society as an integral system and subject of world history. Each civilization, differing from others in its special forms of life, has an active influence on the content of all social processes. The combination of specific socio-cultural factors in their interaction forms the mechanism of the functioning of civilization, the features of which are manifested in the ethno-social, religious, psychological, behavioral and other ways of life of a given human community. In this regard, in history there have been and exist at the present time Various types and forms of civilizations, the total number of which scientists determine within thirty. The following features contribute to the identification of types of civilizations: - common fundamental features and mentalities; - commonality and interdependence of historical and political fate and economic development; - Interweaving of cultures; - the presence of a sphere of common interests and common tasks in terms of development prospects.

On the basis of the features formed, two types of civilizations can be distinguished.

The first type of civilizations are traditional societies. Their original cultures were aimed at maintaining the established way of life. Preference was given to traditional patterns and norms that absorbed the experience of their ancestors. Activities, their means and goals changed slowly. Traditional societies originate in the ancient Eastern civilization, where extensive technology dominated, aimed mainly at mastering external natural processes. Man coordinated his activities with the rhythms of nature, adapting to the environment as much as possible. This type of society has survived to this day. And today, among the spiritual values in them, one of the leading places is occupied by the orientation towards adaptation to natural conditions, the desire for their purposeful transformation is not encouraged. Valuable activity is directed inside a person, to self-contemplation. Of particular importance are traditions and customs passed down from generation to generation. In general, the value-spiritual sphere of human existence is placed above the economic one.

The second type is Western societies or Western European civilization, in many respects the opposite of traditional society, although it has rather deep historical roots. It was based on other values. Among them is the importance of science, the constant striving for progress, for changes in established forms of activity. Another was the understanding of human nature, his role in public life. It was based on the Christian doctrine of morality and attitude to the human mind as created in the image and likeness of the divine and therefore capable of comprehending the meaning of being. Western European civilization is called differently: technogenic, industrial, scientific and technical. She took on the accomplishments ancient culture, Western European Middle Ages, the Renaissance. Due to the harsher natural environment compared to the countries of the East, the intensive production that has developed in the European region required ultimate stress physical and intellectual forces of society, the constant improvement of tools, methods of influencing nature. As a result, a new system of values was formed. Gradually, active, creative, transformative human activity came to the fore. The ideals of civilization were constant renewal and progress. Acquired unconditional value scientific knowledge, significantly expanding the intellectual powers, inventive abilities of man, his ability to transform the world. Unlike traditional societies, where the collective forms of human coexistence are of paramount importance, Western civilization has put forward as essential value an independent, autonomous person, which, in turn, served as the basis for the development of ideas about inalienable human rights, about civil society and the rule of law.

An attempt to understand the laws of the world historical process, to identify its main directions, to determine the originality and role of various cultural and historical types, which we call civilizations, in the formation of a single human civilization puts us before the need to comprehend Russia's place in the global civilization.

What type of Russian civilization should be attributed to? Or maybe it is a special, third type?

This key problem was posed in the 1930s. 19th century Russian philosopher P.Ya. Chaadaev (1794-1856), who wrote: “They say about Russia that it does not belong to either Europe or Asia, that it is a separate world. So be it. But it is also necessary to prove that humanity, in addition to its two sides, defined by the words - West and East, also has a third side. For more than thousand years of history The Russian state has gone through a difficult path of development, which was influenced by both internal and external factors.

Ancient Russian civilization differed both from medieval Western European and from traditional Eastern types of civilizations. Due to a unique combination of socio-economic, political and geographical reasons, it turned out to be an exceptionally centrifugal, mobile and therefore extensive civilization, built not so much due to the comprehensive cultivation and maximum development of limited natural and social space, but due to the inclusion of ever new spaces into its orbit. It is not known how long this civilization would have existed, but the church hierarchy that came from Byzantium not only brought with it the sacred books and thus laid the foundation for ancient Russian literacy and writing, but also united the ancient Russian world through baptism, primarily as a Christian one. It can be assumed that the ancient Russian civilization, despite its significant originality, would gradually be drawn into a single civilizational style of Western Europe. However, the rapprochement between Russia and Europe was then prevented by two circumstances: a special form of Christianity and another order of reign, which, under powerful external influence, led Russia along a different path.

We can talk about modern Russian civilization starting from the era of Peter's reforms, from the 18th century, from the imperial, St. Petersburg period of Russian history. Peter's reforms laid the foundations of that civilization in Russia, within which we continue to live today. This civilization fully developed in the second half of the 18th - early 19th centuries. The 19th and 20th centuries became the era of its intensive development.

Introduction

2. Global socio-political problems. Negative Manifestations of the Arms Race and Disarmament Tasks

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

In the modern scientific world there are many interpretations of the concept of civilization. Its study has always attracted politicians, sociologists, historians and philosophers. Various theories of the formation and development of both global and local, individual civilizations have always caused controversy among scientists. An integral part of these disputes is the place of Russia in world civilization, its belonging to one or another line of development. Westernizers, Slavophiles, Eurasians - there are many areas of discussion. But the purpose of these discussions is the same - to understand how original the civilization of Russia is. Some versions are built solely on historical facts, others are based only on ideology. But it must be admitted that a socio-political approach to the study of this problem is impossible without such independent sciences as history and philosophy. Let us try to give an objective analysis of the civilizational development of Russia in the context of the development of world civilization.

Introductory, to consider the second question of this work, we can take the definition of the political scientist V.A. Maltseva: “Global problems of our time are complex and comprehensive. They are closely intertwined with regional and national-state problems. They are based on contradictions of a global scale, affecting the foundations of the existence of modern civilization. The aggravation of contradictions in one link leads to destructive processes in general, gives rise to new problems. The resolution of global problems is also complicated by the fact that the level of management of global processes by international organizations, their awareness and financing by sovereign states is still low. The strategy of human survival on the basis of solving the global problems of our time should bring peoples to new frontiers of civilized development.”

1. The concept of civilization. Two historical lines and Russia's place in the stream of world civilizations

CIVILIZATION - a stage in the development of society; the level of social and cultural development, which is associated with the division of labor.

Civilization as a large-scale socio-cultural community has its own hierarchy of ideals and values that represent society as an integral system and subject of world history. Each civilization, differing from others in its special forms of life, has an active influence on the content of all social processes. The combination of specific socio-cultural factors in their interaction forms the mechanism of the functioning of civilization, the features of which are manifested in the ethno-social, religious, psychological, behavioral and other ways of life of a given human community. In this regard, various types and forms of civilizations have existed in history and exist at the present time, the total number of which scientists determine within thirty. The following features contribute to the identification of types of civilizations: - common fundamental features and mentalities; - commonality and interdependence of historical and political fate and economic development; - Interweaving of cultures; - the presence of a sphere of common interests and common tasks in terms of development prospects.

On the basis of the features formed, two types of civilizations can be distinguished.

The second type is Western societies or Western European civilization, in many respects the opposite of traditional society, although it has rather deep historical roots. It was based on other values. Among them is the importance of science, the constant striving for progress, for changes in established forms of activity. Another was the understanding of human nature, his role in public life. It was based on the Christian doctrine of morality and the attitude to the human mind as created in the image and likeness of the divine and therefore capable of comprehending the meaning of being. Western European civilization is called differently: technogenic, industrial, scientific and technical. It absorbed the achievements of ancient culture, the Western European Middle Ages, the Renaissance. Due to the more severe natural environment, compared to the countries of the East, the intensive production that has developed in the European region required the utmost exertion of the physical and intellectual forces of society, the constant improvement of labor tools, and methods of influencing nature. As a result, a new system of values was formed. Gradually, active, creative, transformative human activity came to the fore. The ideals of civilization were constant renewal and progress. Scientific knowledge has acquired unconditional value, which significantly expands the intellectual powers, inventive abilities of man, his ability to transform the world. Unlike traditional societies, where collective forms of human coexistence are of paramount importance, Western civilization has put forward an independent, autonomous person as the most important value, which, in turn, served as the basis for developing ideas about inalienable human rights, about civil society and the rule of law.

What type of Russian civilization should be attributed to? Or maybe it is a special, third type?

This key problem was posed in the 1930s. 19th century Russian philosopher P.Ya. Chaadaev (1794-1856), who wrote: “They say about Russia that it does not belong to either Europe or Asia, that it is a separate world. So be it. But we must also prove that humanity, in addition to its two sides, defined by the words West and East, also has a third side. Over its more than a thousand-year history, the Russian state has gone through a difficult path of development, which was influenced by both internal and external factors.

How to find in Russia common features inherent in a particular civilization? This question has been asked for a long time. His decision is of great importance for the methodology of the study of the development of Russia. But this is not just a historical and scientific, but a socio-political, spiritual and moral problem. This or that solution to this problem is connected with the choice of the path of development of our country, the definition of the main value orientations. Therefore, the discussion on this issue does not stop throughout Russian history. It should be noted that each of the concepts that determine the place of Russia in world civilization is based on certain historical facts. At the same time, a one-sided ideological orientation clearly shines through in these concepts. There are four points of view:

1. Russia is part of Western civilization. This position was developed in the 1930s and 1940s. 19th century Russian historians and writers K.D. Kavelin, N.G. Chernyshevsky, B.I. Chicherin and others, who were called Westerners.

2. Russia is part of the Eastern civilization. This point of view is supported by many modern Western historians.

3. Russia is the bearer of an original Slavic civilization. Historians and scientists of this direction, called "Slavophiles", such as N. Kireevsky, S. Khomyakov, K. Aksakov, Yu. Samarin, in the 40s. XIX century, when Russia was on the verge of reforms, they defended the originality, the "Slavic character" of the Russian people.

4. Russia is an example of a special Eurasian civilization. Supporters of this theory, which was in circulation in the 50s. 20th century based on geographical position Russia, its multinational character and many common features of both Eastern and Western civilization, manifested in Russian society.

Let's take a closer look at these four points of view.

Westernizers or "Europeanists" proposed to consider Russia as constituent part Europe and, therefore, as an integral part of Western civilization. They believed that Russia, although with some delay, developed in line with Western civilization, that in terms of its culture, economic ties, and Christian religion, Russia lies closer to the West than to the East, and should strive for rapprochement with the West. The period of Petrine reforms took a significant step in this direction. Many characteristics of Russian history speak in favor of this point of view. The vast majority of the Russian population professes Christianity and, therefore, is committed to those values and socio-psychological attitudes that underlie Western civilization. Reformatory activity of many statesmen: Prince Vladimir, Peter I, Catherine II, Alexander II aimed at the inclusion of Russia in Western civilization. Undoubtedly, the culture of Russia has long been included in the culture of the West. This primarily applies to Christianity, enlightenment, social utopianism, avant-gardism, elements of rationalism.

Proponents of the theory that Russia belongs to countries with oriental type civilizations believe that those few attempts to introduce Russia to Western civilization ended unsuccessfully and did not leave a deep mark on the self-consciousness of the Russian people and its history. Russia has always been a kind of oriental despotism. One of the most important arguments in favor of such a position is the cyclical nature of Russia's development: the period of reforms was inevitably followed by a period of counter-reforms, and the reformation was followed by a counter-reformation. Supporters of this position also point to the collectivist nature of the mentality of the Russian people, the lack of democratic traditions in Russian history, respect for freedom, dignity of the individual, the vertical nature of socio-political relations, their predominantly subservient coloring, etc. Thus, the American historian D. Threadgold, Determining Russia's belonging to Eastern civilization, he notes the following common features: Eastern society is characterized by political monism - the concentration of power in one center; social monism, meaning that the rights and property of different social groups are determined by the central government; weakly expressed principle of property, which is always conditional and not guaranteed by the authorities; arbitrariness, the essence of which is that man rules, and not the law. It is this model of society, according to Threadgold, that arose and strengthened in the process of the formation of the Muscovite state in the 15th-17th centuries. With the reforms of Peter I, Russia began a shift towards the Western model. And only by 1917 did she manage to come close to the line separating the Western and Eastern models, but October Revolution alienated Russia from the West again.

But the largest trend in the historical and social thought of Russia is the ideological and theoretical trend that defends the idea of Russia's identity. Supporters of this idea are Slavophiles, Eurasians and many other representatives of the so-called "patriotic" ideology.

Slavophiles considered Orthodoxy, communal life, and the collectivist nature of labor to be features of Russian history. As a result of the great migration of peoples at the beginning new era East Slavs found themselves on virgin, untouched land, unlike their relatives in the Aryan branch of the Franks and Germans, who settled in the former provinces of the Roman Empire and laid the foundation for the history of Western Europe. Thus, the Russian state develops "out of itself." These primary conditions of life of the Russian Slavs, according to V.O. Klyuchevsky, the comparative simplicity of their social composition was determined, as well as the significant originality of both this development and this composition. The Slavophiles associated the idea of the originality of Russian history with the exceptionally peculiar way of development of Russia, and, consequently, with the exceptional originality of Russian culture. The initial thesis of the teachings of the Slavophiles is to affirm the decisive role of Orthodoxy for the formation and development of Russian civilization. According to A. S. Khomyakov, it was Orthodoxy that formed “that primordially Russian quality, that “Russian spirit” that created the Russian land in its infinite volume.” The fundamental idea of Russian Orthodoxy, and, consequently, of the whole system of Russian life, is the idea of catholicity. Sobornost manifests itself in all spheres of life of a Russian person: in the church, in the family, in society, in relations between states. According to the Slavophiles, catholicity is the most important quality that separates Russian society from the entire Western civilization. The Western peoples, departing from the decisions of the first seven Ecumenical Councils, have perverted christian symbol of faith and thereby consigned to oblivion the conciliar principle. And this gave rise to all the flaws of European culture and, above all, its mercantilism and individualism. Russian civilization is characterized by high spirituality, based on an ascetic worldview, and a collectivist, communal structure of social life. From the point of view of the Slavophiles, it was Orthodoxy that gave rise to a specific, social organization - the rural community, the "world", which has economic and moral significance. In the description of the agricultural community by the Slavophils, one can clearly see the moment of its idealization, embellishment. Economic activity The community is presented as a harmonious combination of personal and public interests, and all members of the community act in relation to each other as "comrades and shareholders." At the same time, they nevertheless recognized that in the modern structure of the community there are negative aspects generated by the presence of serfdom. Slavophiles condemned serfdom and advocated its abolition. However, the Slavophiles saw the main advantage of the rural community in the spiritual and moral principles that it instills in its members: the readiness to stand up for common interests, honesty, patriotism, etc. In their opinion, the emergence of these qualities in the members of the community does not occur consciously, but instinctively, by following the ancient religious customs and traditions. Based on the fundamental principle that the community is the best form of social organization of life, the Slavophiles demanded that the communal principle be made comprehensive, that is, transferred to the sphere of urban life, to industry. The communal structure should also be the basis of state life and capable, in their words, of replacing "the abomination of administration in Russia." The Slavophils believed that as the “community principle” spread in Russian society, the “spirit of catholicity” would be strengthened more and more. guiding principle social relations will be the self-denial of each for the benefit of all. Thanks to this, the religious and social aspirations of people will merge into a single stream. As a result, the task of our internal history, defined by them as "the enlightenment of the people's communal principle," will be fulfilled. Slavophilism is based on the ideology of pan-Slavism. At the heart of their idea of the special fate of Russia lies the idea of the exclusivity, the peculiarity of the Slavs.

The Eurasians, unlike the Slavophiles, insisted on the exclusivity of Russia and the Russian ethnos. This exclusivity, in their opinion, was determined by the synthetic nature of the Russian ethnos. Russia is a special type of civilization that differs from both the West and the East. This particular type of civilization they called Eurasian. In the Eurasian concept of the civilizational process, a special place was given to geographical factor(natural environment) - the "place of development" of the people. This environment, in their opinion, determines the characteristics of various countries and peoples, their self-consciousness and destiny. Russia occupies the middle space of Asia and Europe, approximately outlined by three great plains: East European, West Siberian and Turkestan. These vast flat spaces, devoid of natural sharp geographical boundaries, left their mark on the history of Russia, contributed to the creation of a unique cultural world. A significant role in the argumentation of the Eurasians was given to the peculiarities of the ethnogenesis of the Russian nation. The Russian ethnos was formed not only on the basis of the Slavic ethnos, but under strong influence Turkic and Finno-Ugric tribes. Particularly emphasized was the influence on Russian history and Russian self-consciousness of the eastern "Turanian", predominantly Turkic-Tatar element associated with the Tatar-Mongol yoke. The methodological attitudes of the Eurasians were largely shared by the prominent Russian thinker N.A. Berdyaev. One of the most important characteristics of the Russian folk individuality, according to Berdyaev, is its deep polarization and inconsistency: “The inconsistency and complexity of the Russian soul can be associated with the fact that in Russia two streams of world history collide and come into interaction: East and West. The Russian people are not a purely European and not a purely Asian people. Russia is a whole part of the world, a huge East-West, it connects two worlds. And always in the Russian soul fought two principles, eastern and western. ON THE. Berdyaev believes that there is a correspondence between the immensity, infinity of the Russian land and the Russian soul. In the soul of the Russian people there is the same immensity, boundlessness, aspiration to infinity, as in the Russian plain. The Russian people, Berdyaev argues, was not a people of culture based on orderly rational principles. He was a people of revelation and inspiration. Two opposite principles formed the basis of the Russian soul: the pagan Dionistic element and the ascetic-monastic Orthodoxy. This duality permeates all the main characteristics of the Russian people: despotism, hypertrophy of the state and anarchism, freedom, cruelty, a tendency to violence and kindness, humanity, gentleness, ritualism and the search for truth, individualism, a heightened consciousness of the individual and impersonal collectivism, nationalism, self-praise and universalism, all-humanity, missionary religiosity and outward piety, the search for God and militant atheism, humility and arrogance, slavery and rebellion. These contradictory features of the Russian national character predetermined, according to Berdyaev, all the complexity and cataclysms of Russian development.

Let us sum up, based on the considered points of view on the civilizational development of Russia.

The most important side of the concept of civilization is diversity, multilevelness, diversity and scale. Civilization is a large-scale, complexly organized enterprise, which is included in the world whole in the most direct way and has a significant impact on this whole. Russia fully fits into the framework of this definition. The self-identification of the majority of Russians has as its limit precisely belonging to Russia, and not the awareness of oneself as a “man of the West” or “a man of the East”. It is not at all accidental that in the entire array of literature devoted to Russia, there is hardly any significant publication that would unequivocally recognize Russia's belonging to any of the civilizations - Western or Eastern. Even for the most ardent Russian Westernizers, Russian “Westernness” has acted and continues to act as a project of the most preferable future, and not as evidence and given. In the works of foreign researchers, Russia, as a rule, is assigned an independent place in the world as a whole. Foreign authors, regardless of their attitude to Russia, positive or negative, assign it the role of a significant and independent factor in world life. Do not question the understanding of Russia as an independent civilization and many modern Russian researchers.

The history of Russia was often interrupted, as a result of which one should speak not about one, but about several Russias: Kievan Rus, Muscovite Rus, Russia of Peter I, Soviet Russia, etc. It must be remembered that the discontinuity of history and the presence of a number of sharply different faces of the country associated with this is not an exclusive feature of Russia. Obviously, this or that country, taken in a certain, rather long historical epoch, either belongs to one of the existing civilizations, or gravitates towards one of them, or, finally, in itself represents a separate civilization. It is the latter that applies to Russia.

Russian civilization is a multinational entity. This means that representatives of the most various peoples and cultures. At the same time, there is every reason to believe that the circle of peoples that make up the Russian civilization is fundamentally unlimited. It is likely that in the future it will include those who were not previously characteristic of Russia, were considered outlandish, for example, the Chinese, Africans or Indians. However, with the integration into Russian society they can become carriers of a specific Russian way of life and thought, however, without necessarily losing the inherent features of their socio-psychological culture.

The civilization of Russia can be studied at various time slices of its existence. It is clear that it is especially important and interesting to know and understand its current state. The way of life and thoughts in today's Russia is what can be called the current state of Russian civilization.

3. Global socio-political problems, negative manifestations of the arms race and disarmament tasks

The global problems of a socio-political nature are:

Prevention of nuclear war;

Cessation of the arms race, resolution of regional and interstate conflicts;

Building a non-violent world, based on the establishment of trust between peoples, strengthening the system of universal security.

In the second half of the XX century. mankind is faced with a group of problems, the solution of which depends on the future social progress, the fate of civilizations. These problems are called global (translated from Latin "globe" - Earth, globe). These primarily include the following: preventing the threat of a new world war, overcoming the environmental crisis and its consequences, narrowing the gap in the level of economic development between the developed countries of the West and the developing countries of the “third world”, and stabilizing the demographic situation on the planet. The problems of health care and the prevention of AIDS, drug addiction, the revival of cultural and moral values, and the fight against international terrorism are also becoming increasingly important.

Reflecting on the causes of the emergence of global problems, scientists point primarily to the emerging global community of people, the integrity modern world, which is provided primarily by deep economic ties increased political and cultural contacts, the latest tools mass communication. In conditions when the planet becomes the single home of mankind, many contradictions, conflicts, problems can outgrow the local framework and acquire a global global character.

But it's not only that. The very actively transforming human activity in terms of power and consequences (both creative and destructive) is now comparable to the most formidable forces of nature. Having called mighty productive forces to life, humanity cannot always put them under its reasonable control. The level of social organization, political thinking and ecological consciousness, spiritual and moral orientations are still very far from the requirements of the era.

Global problems should be considered those that do not affect any particular person, not any group of people, even a single country or group of countries, but those that affect the vital interests of the majority of humanity and may concern any individual person. The expansion and deepening of economic, social, political, socio-cultural, political-cultural and other ties and institutions have an ever-growing influence on the daily life of people in the most remote parts of the globe.

At the same time, the actions of nation states and even local communities can have important global consequences. Any local event can one way or another acquire global significance and, conversely, any world event- radically change the state of affairs in individual regions, countries, local communities.

So, the problems generated by fundamental changes in the living conditions of the world society, threatening its existence, are called global problems of our time. The first such problem was the real danger of self-destruction of humanity, which appeared for the first time in history, associated with the emergence of nuclear weapons and the buildup of nuclear potentials. This problem was first formulated as a global one in the well-known manifesto of A. Einstein, B. Russell and nine other prominent scientists, published in 1955. The problem of nuclear annihilation became especially acute after it was created by Russian scientists under the leadership of Academician N.N. Moiseev's model of the global climate of "nuclear winter" - a mathematical description of the processes that can occur as a result of a nuclear war in animate and inanimate nature and in society. Following the threat of nuclear self-destruction of mankind, energy and environmental problems were recognized.

The arms race is the key problem on which the solution of all others depends. In the conditions of confrontation between the two world superpowers - the USSR and the USA - in principle there could not be any global approach to solving other problems. Its beginning was connected with atomic weapons. As you know, in 1945 the United States was the only nuclear power in the world. During the war with Japan, they detonated atomic bombs over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Strategic superiority led the US military to build various plans preemptive strike against the USSR. But the American monopoly on nuclear weapons lasted only four years. In 1949, the USSR tested its first atomic bomb. This event was a real shock to the Western world. In the course of further accelerated developments in the USSR, nuclear and then thermonuclear weapons were soon created. War has become very dangerous for everyone, and is fraught with very bad consequences. The accumulated nuclear potential was enormous, but the gigantic stocks of destructive weapons did not bring any benefit, and the costs of their production and storage grew. If earlier they said “we can destroy you, but you cannot destroy us”, now the wording has changed. They began to say “you can destroy us 38 times, and we can destroy you 64!”. The arguments are fruitless, especially considering that if a war broke out and one of the opponents used nuclear weapons, very soon nothing would be left not only of him, but of the entire planet.

The arms race was growing rapidly. As soon as one of the parties created some fundamentally new weapon, its opponent threw all his strength and resources to achieve the same. Frantic competition affected all areas of the military industry. Competed everywhere: in the creation of the latest systems small arms, in new designs of tanks, aircraft, ships and submarines, but perhaps the most dramatic was the competition in the creation of rocket technology. The entire so-called peaceful space in those days was not even the visible part of the iceberg, but a snow cap on the visible part. The United States overtook the USSR in terms of the number of nuclear weapons. The USSR overtook the USA in rocket science. The USSR was the first in the world to launch a satellite, and in 1961 it was the first to send a man into space. The Americans could not endure such a clear superiority. The end result is their landing on the moon. At this point, the parties reached strategic parity. However, this did not stop the arms race. On the contrary, it has spread to all sectors that have at least some relation to armaments. This can, for example, include the race to create supercomputers. Here the West took unconditional revenge for lagging behind in the field of rocket science, since for purely ideological reasons the USSR missed a breakthrough in this area, equating cybernetics along with genetics to the "corrupt girls of imperialism." The arms race has even affected education. After Gagarin's flight, the United States was forced to revise the foundations of the education system and introduce fundamentally new teaching methods.

The arms race was subsequently voluntarily suspended by both sides. A number of treaties were signed to limit the accumulation of armaments. Such as, for example, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Tests of Nuclear Weapons in the Atmosphere, Outer Space and Under Water (08/05/1963), the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the Creation of Nuclear-Free Zones (1968), agreements on SALT-1 (limitation and reduction strategic weapons) (1972), the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (1972) and many others.

War as a way to resolve international problems, bringing with it massive destruction and death of many people, giving rise to the desire for violence and the spirit of aggression, was condemned by humanist thinkers of all historical epochs. Indeed, out of more than four thousand years of known history, only about three hundred were completely peaceful. All the rest of the time, wars blazed in one place or another on Earth. 20th century went down in history as the era that gave rise to two world wars, in which dozens of countries and millions of people participated.

According to the unanimous assessment of many scientists and politicians, the third world war, if it breaks out, will be the tragic finale of the entire history of human civilization. Calculations made by researchers different countries, including ours, show that the most likely and most disastrous consequence of a nuclear war for all living things will be the onset of a "nuclear winter". The consequences of a nuclear war will not only be catastrophic for those who will participate in it - they will affect everyone. That is why the prevention of nuclear war is a global problem of our time. Is it possible to prevent nuclear war? Indeed, many military arsenals of all countries of the world that possess nuclear weapons are filled with a variety of their types. Testing of the latest military equipment does not stop. Even 5% of the nuclear stockpiles already accumulated by the great powers are enough to plunge the planet into an irreversible ecological catastrophe. Local military conflicts do not stop either, each of which is fraught with the danger of developing into a regional and even global one.

First time global community thought about the non-proliferation of weapons mass destruction in the 60s of the last century, when such nuclear powers as the USSR, the USA, Great Britain, France had already appeared; and China was ready to join them. At this time, countries such as Israel, Sweden, Italy, and others began to seriously think about nuclear weapons and even began to develop them.

In the same 1960s, Ireland became the initiator of the creation of an international legal document, which laid the foundations for the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. The USSR, the USA and England began to develop the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. They became the first parties to this treaty. It was signed on 07/01/1968, but entered into force in March 1970. France and China entered into this treaty a few decades later.

Its main goals are to prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons, to stimulate cooperation in the field of the use of the atom for peaceful purposes with the guarantees of the participating parties, to facilitate negotiations on ending the rivalry in the development of nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of its complete elimination.

Under the terms of this Treaty, nuclear-weapon states undertake not to assist non-nuclear states in acquiring nuclear explosive devices. Non-nuclear states undertake not to manufacture or acquire such devices. One of the provisions of the Treaty requires the IAEA to carry out measures to ensure safeguards, including the inspection of nuclear materials used in peaceful projects by non-nuclear States parties to the Treaty. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (Article 10, paragraph 2) states that 25 years after the entry into force of the Treaty, a conference is convened to decide whether it should remain in force or not. The reports of the conference were held in accordance with the terms of the Treaty every five years, and in 1995, when it came to the end of its 25-year period of validity, the parties - participants unanimously supported its indefinite extension. They also adopted three binding Declarations of Principles: - Reaffirmation of prior commitments regarding nuclear weapons and the cessation of all nuclear testing; - Strengthening disarmament control procedures; - Creation of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East and strict observance of the terms of the Treaty by all countries without exception.

There are 178 states parties to the treaty, including existing nuclear powers that have come out in favor of a missile technology control regime. There are also four countries hosting nuclear activities that have not entered into the Treaty: Israel, India, Pakistan, Cuba. Western assistance in this area has become an important element in strengthening the nonproliferation regime. This assistance shows that the West does not want to see the CIS countries as a source of spreading threats. At the G-8 summit in Canada in July 2002, important decisions were made on international terrorism and nuclear proliferation.

The most important components of the regimes for the non-proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction are: - security of storage, stockpiling, and transportation of weapons of mass destruction and materials suitable for their production; - a system to prevent illicit trafficking in nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction and materials.

The danger of global self-destruction by nuclear (chemical, biological) weapons has not disappeared after the end of the confrontation between East and West - it escaped from the control of the superpowers and is now associated with a threat not only from states, but also from non-state terrorism. Terrorism is a very big problem in our time. Modern terrorism appears in the form of terrorist acts that have an international scale. Terrorism appears when a society is going through a deep crisis, primarily a crisis of ideology and the state-legal system. In such a society, various opposition groups appear - political, social, national, religious. For them, the legitimacy of the existing government becomes questionable. Terrorism as mass and politically significant event- the result of wholesale "de-ideologization", when certain groups in society easily question the legitimacy and rights of the state, and thus self-justify their transition to terror in order to achieve their own goals. The tragic events of September 11, 2001 in the United States highlighted the danger that weapons of mass destruction might fall into the hands of terrorists. This attack could have been even more devastating if the terrorists had managed to obtain and use chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. One of the most effective ways to prevent this kind of threat is to strengthen the multilateral regimes already developed to ban the use of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and prevent their proliferation.

The key tasks of disarmament are the maintenance of international peace and security, multilateral disarmament and arms limitation. The highest priority is given to the reduction and eventual elimination of weapons of mass destruction. Although the goal of reducing the threat of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons has remained unchanged for many years, the scope of discussions and negotiations on disarmament is changing, reflecting the evolution of political realities and the international situation.

On the this moment not everyone knows about existing danger, on the possibility and extent of a catastrophe with the use of weapons of mass destruction. Mankind does not pay due attention to this problem due to ignorance and unawareness of the entire depth of the problem. In no case should we forget that the threat of the use of weapons of mass destruction, unfortunately, is present in everyday life through the active propaganda of violence. This phenomenon is happening all over the world. Prevention of the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is recognized by Russia, the United States and other countries as one of the main tasks of ensuring their national security. Security issues regarding armed conflicts and the solution of global problems are dealt with by scientists, politicians, non-governmental organizations. In the course of work, international and regional conferences, seminars and meetings are held, reports and collections of articles are published.

All global problems are permeated with the idea of the geographical unity of mankind and require a wide international cooperation for your decision. From the point of view of new political thinking, the achievement of lasting peace on Earth is possible only in the conditions of establishing a new type of relations between all states - relations of all-round cooperation. Hence the need for a multifaceted approach that meets the entire spectrum of problems, a new level of partnership both between states and between non-state structures, since the efforts of governments alone are not enough to solve any of the global problems facing the world.

Conclusion

Considering the questions posed in this work, the following conclusions can be drawn: - common sense world development can be seen as a parallel formation of two types of civilizations; - the choice of the path of development, familiarization with the western or eastern model of social order for modern Russia is of particular importance, in the aspect of the reformation of the country; - a renewed society is the embodiment of the achievements of world civilization and the historical creativity of the peoples of Russia; - global problems of our time are closely linked; - the solution of global problems should be complex; - without the application of appropriate measures, the threat to the security of the world may get out of the control of the world community.

So, which way should Russia go, which civilization should it choose? The answer is this: relying on global trends in social progress, Russia will perceive those features of civilizations that will contribute to progressive movement forward and will reject those that will hinder this.

The solution of global problems involves the creation of such a world order that would be based on the following initial principles: - recognition of the priority of universal human values, attitude to human life and the world as the highest values of mankind; - rejection of war as a means of resolving controversial issues, relentless search peaceful, political ways to resolve all conflicts and problems; - recognition of the right of peoples to freely and independently choose their own destiny; - understanding of the modern world as an integral and interconnected community of people.

Bibliography

1. Ed. prof. Dobrenkova V.I. Sociology - M.: Gardarika, 1999

2. Gadzhiev K.S. Political science (basic course): textbook - M .: Higher education, 2008

3. Ed. Klementeva D.S. Sociology. Textbook - M .: Philol. about-in "Word"; Ed. Eksmo, 2004.

4. Ed. Bogolyubova L.N., Lazebnikova A.Yu. Man and Society: Textbook on social science for students in grades 10-11. general education institutions. - 7th ed. - M .: Education, 2001.

5. Ed. Radugina A.A. History of Russia (Russia in world civilization): a course of lectures - M .: Center, 2001.

Introduction

Global socio-political problems. Negative Manifestations of the Arms Race and Disarmament Tasks

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

In the modern scientific world there are many interpretations of the concept of civilization. Its study has always attracted politicians, sociologists, historians and philosophers. Various theories of the formation and development of both global and local, individual civilizations have always caused controversy among scientists. An integral part of these disputes is the place of Russia in world civilization, its belonging to one or another line of development. Westerners, Slavophiles, Eurasians - there are many areas of discussion. But the purpose of these discussions is the same - to understand how original the civilization of Russia is. Some versions are built solely on historical facts, others are based only on ideology. But it must be admitted that a socio-political approach to the study of this problem is impossible without such independent sciences as history and philosophy. Let us try to give an objective analysis of the civilizational development of Russia in the context of the development of world civilization.

Introductory, to consider the second question of this work, we can take the definition of the political scientist V.A. Maltseva: “Global problems of our time are complex and comprehensive. They are closely intertwined with regional and national-state problems. They are based on contradictions of a global scale, affecting the foundations of the existence of modern civilization. The aggravation of contradictions in one link leads to destructive processes in general, gives rise to new problems. The resolution of global problems is also complicated by the fact that the level of management of global processes by international organizations, their awareness and financing by sovereign states is still low. The strategy of human survival on the basis of solving the global problems of our time should bring peoples to new frontiers of civilized development.”

The concept of civilization. Two historical lines and Russia's place in the stream of world civilizations

CIVILIZATION - a stage in the development of society; the level of social and cultural development, which is associated with the division of labor.

Civilization as a large-scale socio-cultural community has its own hierarchy of ideals and values that represent society as an integral system and subject of world history. Each civilization, differing from others in its special forms of life, has an active influence on the content of all social processes. The combination of specific socio-cultural factors in their interaction forms the mechanism of the functioning of civilization, the features of which are manifested in the ethno-social, religious, psychological, behavioral and other ways of life of a given human community. In this regard, various types and forms of civilizations have existed in history and exist at the present time, the total number of which scientists determine within thirty. The following features contribute to the identification of types of civilizations: - common fundamental features and mentalities; - commonality and interdependence of historical and political fate and economic development; - Interweaving of cultures; - the presence of a sphere of common interests and common tasks in terms of development prospects.

On the basis of the features formed, two types of civilizations can be distinguished.

The second type is Western societies or Western European civilization, in many respects the opposite of traditional society, although it has rather deep historical roots. It was based on other values. Among them is the importance of science, the constant striving for progress, for changes in established forms of activity. Another was the understanding of human nature, his role in public life. It was based on the Christian doctrine of morality and the attitude to the human mind as created in the image and likeness of the divine and therefore capable of comprehending the meaning of being. Western European civilization is called differently: technogenic, industrial, scientific and technical. It absorbed the achievements of ancient culture, the Western European Middle Ages, the Renaissance. Due to the more severe natural environment, compared to the countries of the East, the intensive production that has developed in the European region required the utmost exertion of the physical and intellectual forces of society, the constant improvement of labor tools, and methods of influencing nature. As a result, a new system of values was formed. Gradually, active, creative, transformative human activity came to the fore. The ideals of civilization were constant renewal and progress. Scientific knowledge has acquired unconditional value, which significantly expands the intellectual powers, inventive abilities of man, his ability to transform the world. Unlike traditional societies, where collective forms of human coexistence are of paramount importance, Western civilization has put forward an independent, autonomous person as the most important value, which, in turn, served as the basis for developing ideas about inalienable human rights, about civil society and the rule of law.

What type of Russian civilization should be attributed to? Or maybe it is a special, third type?

This key problem was posed in the 1930s. 19th century Russian philosopher P.Ya. Chaadaev (1794-1856), who wrote: “They say about Russia that it does not belong to either Europe or Asia, that it is a separate world. So be it. But we must also prove that humanity, in addition to its two sides, defined by the words West and East, also has a third side. Over its more than a thousand-year history, the Russian state has gone through a difficult path of development, which was influenced by both internal and external factors.

How to find in Russia the common features inherent in this or that civilization? This question has been asked for a long time. His decision is of great importance for the methodology of the study of the development of Russia. But this is not just a historical and scientific, but a socio-political, spiritual and moral problem. This or that solution to this problem is connected with the choice of the path of development of our country, the definition of the main value orientations. Therefore, the discussion on this issue does not stop throughout Russian history. It should be noted that each of the concepts that determine the place of Russia in world civilization is based on certain historical facts. At the same time, a one-sided ideological orientation clearly shines through in these concepts. There are four points of view:

2. Russia is part of the Eastern civilization. This point of view is supported by many modern Western historians.

4. Russia is an example of a special Eurasian civilization. Supporters of this theory, which was in circulation in the 50s. XX century, relied on the geographical position of Russia, its multinational character and many common features of both Eastern and Western civilization, manifested in Russian society.

Similar works:

Coursework >>
... global problems, you can use the classification adopted by international organizations. one. Problems associated with the main socially- economic and political ...
Abstract >>
Merge global Problems into several groups (Yu.V. Irkhin et al. p. 444): international socially-political Problems: ... creating such socially-political conditions that will make it possible to practically solve global Problems. Most...

An important element of the subject field of PG are issues related to understanding the GSP. These problems became especially acute in the second half of the 20th century. The German sociologist W. Beck believes that global problems are the result of non-linear (transboundary) processes of world development and are distinguished by dynamism, complexity, interdependence, acuteness and hierarchy. GSPs grow mainly from political contradictions of a global scale, which impose specific restrictions on the direction and pace of development of the global political system, the nature and forms of cooperation and rivalry between different countries and their socio-cultural systems. Taken together, these contradictions form the content of the GSP. Let's single out the main reasons for the appearance global political issues:

1) uneven distribution of power between the global institutions of governance;

2) instability of the global political system;

3) gradual loss of political influence of traditional actors of world politics;

4) the crisis of the Westphalian system of international relations;

5) gradual de-sovereignization of nation-states;

6) instability of state political systems of both the center and the periphery global peace(including those associated with the lack of a developed political culture among the population);

7) uneven pace of development of political and economic globalization in developed and developing countries ah, etc. As the pace of political globalization accelerates, the concept of “global political problems of our time” is becoming increasingly relevant and attracts increased attention from researchers, politicians and the general public.

GSP and processes constitute the object of PG, which in this context acts as a field of study for GSP, processes and systems in their holistic impact on the dynamics of global development.

Obviously, the list of global political problems can include such generally recognized problems as, for example, the nuclear threat, the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, international armed conflicts, international terrorism, national separatism, and so on. However, the list of global political problems is not limited to these problems. Criteria of globality- quantitative parameters and qualitative signs, on the basis of which various problems are evaluated in terms of their distribution on a planetary scale and the level of threats that they pose to all mankind.

When it comes to political issues different levels as a concrete expression of the philosophical categories "general", "special" and "individual", then private political problems (problems of political development selected countries) act as singular, local; regional political problems (problems of political development and functioning of certain regions of the world) - as special, and global political problems - as problems of the development of the global political system as a whole (universal).

1) those political problems can be recognized as global, which in geographically correspond to the concept of "general planetary". Geographic criterion has a quantitative expression, so it is also called quantitative or spatial.

2) is supra-regional, i.e. relevant for any region of the planet. Otherwise, we will talk about the problems of one or several regions or even territories of a smaller scale. All global problems are at the same time regional (that is, they manifest themselves at the regional, local level). But not all regional problems (that is, those specific to a given region) are global.

3) affect the interests not of individual people and countries, but the interests and fate of all mankind.

4) to overcome which the combined efforts of the entire world community are required.

5) their unresolved may lead in the future to serious and even irreversible consequences for the global political system and all of humanity.

So, global political issues:

These are the negative consequences of the impact of global political processes on the sociosphere and on the global political order (including the IR system);

They are an objective factor in global political development as a set of interrelated and co-evolving global political processes and systems;

Caused by the instability of the global political system, as well as the uneven pace of political and economic globalization;

Have a planetary character;

They have the quality of universality, since they require for their resolution the coordinated actions of all subjects of world politics, regardless of their political structure, economic, social and cultural differences;

They reveal the need to improve global mechanisms (institutions) for resolving contradictions in the system of international relations.

GPP feature: in the modern period, all political problems are closely intertwined, interconnected, and with their exacerbation, both the integrity and the "fragility" of the global world are clearly revealed at the same time. GSPs are developing in a complex manner, strengthening the global interconnection and interdependence of regions, countries, nations, peoples and individuals. It should be noted that most of the existing classifications of global problems do not single out GSP into a separate species. The first attempts to systematize global problems were made in the early 1970s. in the framework of the studies of the Club of Rome and the work of a whole galaxy of scientists - F. Feriks, V. Bazyuk, Y. Skolnikov, G. Brown, S. Chase, A. Gabu, E. Fontela and others. In the Yearbook of World Problems and Human Potential , published in 1976, there were more than 2.5 thousand "universal problems". In 1979, the US Congressional Forecasting Center named 286 problems common to all mankind, singling out 32 of them as the most important.

In Russia, the point of view of I.T. Frolova and V.V. Zagladin, according to which all global problems, depending on the degree of their severity and the priority of the solution, as well as on what cause-and-effect relationships exist between them in real life are divided into three large groups:

1) problems that are characterized by the greatest generality and relevance. They stem from relations between different states, as well as the largest social communities (socio-economic systems, international political unions and their member countries). Such problems are called "international": the elimination of war from the life of society and the provision of a just peace; establishment of a new international political/economic order.

2) problems associated with the "man-society" system - are related to the quality of human life on the planet. Demographic problem, problems of healthcare, education, social security, preservation of cultural diversity.

3) problems that arise as a result of the interaction of society and nature. Providing people with energy, fuel, fresh water, raw materials, etc. + environmental problems and problems associated with the consequences of the development of the oceans, lithosphere and outer space.

These groups of global problems to some extent have a political component. Thus, the problems of education, health care, energy supply, protection environment etc. directly or indirectly related to public policy individual countries and political decisions of global institutions political power and governance, as well as with the transformation of the global political system at a certain stage of global development.

At the end of the twentieth century. the most authoritative researchers defining state of the art post-industrial theory, P. Drucker, J. Galbraith, F. Fukuyama, L. Turow, M. Castells, the most prominent specialists in management problems and the theory of the modern corporation - L. Edvinsson, T. Stewart, C. Handy, T. Sakaya, and also the most famous experts on environmental security and relations with the "third world" - A. Gore, D. Meadows, R. Reich, P. Pilzer, E. von Weizsäcker and others identified the most pressing global problems of our time. Their most conceptual articles were included in the collection "The New Post-Industrial Wave in the West" published in Russia. Later, a report by E. Weizsacker, E. Lovins and L. Lovins was published as a separate book. The views of the authors of the anthology largely determined the most relevant research in global studies, which are aimed at solving the following problems:

Restoration of a healthy ecology, formation new policy to protect the environment from chemical pollution of the planet, greenhouse effect, loss of ecologically productive land per capita, limited resources on the planet and limited renewable ecosystems, concentration of carbon dioxide, extinction of species and destruction of biological diversity, the problem of toxic and non-toxic waste, the problem of carbon dioxide storage in the deep ocean, waterlogging and overfishing;

Solving the problem of armaments and armed conflicts, converting military production into civilian production;

Overcoming the economic gap between the "North" and "South", between the center and the periphery of the global world, solving the problem of food shortages;

Optimization of demographic dynamics and regulation of consumption growth;

Increasing the degree of manageability both on a national scale and at the global level, focusing on consensus on an international scale, etc.

By content: political, economic and social global problems. GSP as an independent class or species can be identified based on the fact that they arise precisely in the political sphere of global development. Such structuring is rather conditional, since in reality global problems are closely interconnected not only within a separate group, but also between different groups. In fact, there is an integral system of global problems with a multi-level structure that characterizes the relationship between various actors in world politics (whose activities can affect both the "society-man" and "society-nature" systems).

Being a negative consequence of the impact of non-linear GSPs on the development of the global political system, GSPs turn out to be the key impulses of its evolution and contain potential bifurcation points. Each of the GPPs is conditioned by many deep, both objective and subjective factors, however, their action in specific historical conditions and in different geopolitical regions is not constant and depends on the nature of the flow of global political processes.

In PG, the study of GSP is especially relevant in the context of the general patterns of the historical development of the global political system, taking into account qualitatively new processes of world political dynamics, in particular, globalization processes in the political sphere of the life of the world community. Globalization processes- processes under the influence of which the structural transformation of the entire world order takes place; they are aimed at removing obstacles to exchanges, as well as at increasing the number and variety of various actors and increasing interdependencies between them in the field of economy, politics, culture, etc. In this regard, we consider PG as a global dynamic non-linear political process of strengthening and complicating the interdependence between all elements of the global political system.

The complexity and inconsistency of GHG as a development process should be emphasized. Simultaneously with the trends contributing to the rapprochement of individual countries and regions of the world, there are processes leading to a divergence in the status of its leading subjects. For example, the gap between countries in the political, economic, social, and technological fields is widening. Being an extremely controversial process, political globalization is constantly changing its specific forms, mechanisms and methods of implementation. The forms of manifestation of global political contradictions are also changing: new ones arise and old global political problems are transformed. It can be assumed that in the XXI century. GHG studies will mainly focus on developing strategies to address the following GSPs:

– overcoming the gap in the levels of development of the political systems of developed and developing countries, reducing the economic and political “distance” between the center and the periphery of the global political order;

– formation and improvement of the quality of the global governance system;

– formation of mechanisms and ways to achieve political consensus in the MOD;

– formation of more effective approaches to peacekeeping global and regional international organizations;

- non-proliferation of nuclear weapons;

– prevention of military, ethno-political and ethno-confessional conflicts;

– counteraction and prevention of global terrorism and transnational crime

Socio-political conflict, as it were, combines social and political conflicts, each of which arises on different grounds and solves “its own” problems. In addition, in these conflicts, parties (subjects) that differ in their qualitative characteristics are confronted. The main differences between social conflict and political conflict are as follows.

1. In a social conflict, the confrontation takes place between social subjects (individuals, groups, social organizations, movements and institutions), in a political conflict - between the subjects of politics (political parties, political (state) institutions, states). In the course of the development of both social and political conflict, the transformation of social subjects into political ones and vice versa is not excluded.

2. The object of social conflict (in the narrow sense) is social interests, needs, values, social statuses, etc., and the integral object of political conflict is political (state) power and power relations.

Since the socio-political conflict combines both social and political conflicts, social and political subjects can simultaneously interact and counteract in it. The subject of such a conflict can simultaneously be social and political interests.

So, a socio-political conflict is a confrontation between two or more social and political subjects (sides), the causes of which are incompatible socio-political interests, goals and values that are directly or indirectly related to political (state) power. This is any social conflict that affects political relations and (or) for the solution of which it is necessary to use political methods and means. For example, if during the strike of workers of a large enterprise or an entire industry it is not possible to solve the social (economic) problems underlying the conflict, then the strike can be transformed into a political action with already political demands (for example, the resignation of the governor, government, president). However, this action can acquire a political character only if it "forces" state structures to solve the problems that have arisen by political methods.

Most often, one of the conflicting parties in the socio-political conflict is represented by large social groups (labor collectives, pensioners, youth, residents of the region, ethnic groups, etc.), as well as public and those in opposition to the authorities. political institutions(parties, trade unions, social and political movements). The other side in such a conflict is usually the ruling political regime or its individual institutions and social groups that support this regime.

A common object for the conflicting parties in a socio-political conflict is political power. But the subject of the conflict for each of the parties may be different. So, for the subjects of politics (the state and its institutions, political parties), the object of the conflict is state power, and the subject is the limits of power. For the ruling regime, the main goal in the socio-political conflict is the retention of political power, the preservation (strengthening) of power, giving the political regime the appearance of efficiency and legitimacy. For social subjects, political power, as a rule, is not an end in itself (subject) of the conflict. Power (state bodies, officials) is considered here only as the cause of the social problems that have arisen and (or) as a way (means) to achieve the desired social goals. But under certain conditions social actors can transform into political and also claim political power.

By the scale of the problems being solved, by the quantitative composition and level of the warring parties, the following types of socio-political conflicts can be distinguished:

Regional - occurs in a separate region of the Russian Federation. During

development of such a conflict, social actors make claims to the regional political authorities. Thus, on January 30, a rally of many thousands (from 9 to 12 thousand people) gathered in Kaliningrad demanding the resignation of the governor of the region, G. Boos; cha-

Regional, which in the course of its development “reaches” the federal level (“forces” the federal authorities to solve the problems that have arisen). An example of such a conflict is the above-mentioned conflict in the city of Pikalevo (repeated appeals of residents to the regional authorities with demands for payment of wage arrears and the resumption of stopped production did not give a positive result);

Federal (national). Such a socio-political conflict can be divided into two subspecies: 1) local, which has arisen in one or several regions, but in its consequences is of national importance;

2) large-scale - covering most regions of the country and "forcing" the federal authorities to make nationwide decisions. An example of such a conflict is the mass demonstrations of people dissatisfied with the monetization of benefits;

Regime. Large social strata of the country's population are participating in the overthrow of the hated political regime of power.

If a regime socio-political conflict involves profound qualitative transformations in all spheres of the life of society and the state, then it is called a social revolution. Examples of such a conflict can be: the Great October Revolution of 1917 in Russia; the Islamic Revolution in Iran (January 1978 - February 1979), which resulted in the overthrow of the pro-American regime of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi;

International. Unlike an interstate conflict, such a conflict is essentially socio-political: firstly, both political and social actors are involved in the conflict confrontation; secondly, the reasons for its occurrence are the clash of political, social, economic and other interests.

The features of the socio-political conflict are:

1) publicity and open nature of the manifestation of the confrontation of the parties. Realpolitik is the sphere of resolving contradictions between large social groups. Therefore, the socio-political conflict involves the appeal of the parties to social groups and to the general public;

2) universal significance. As already mentioned, the socio-political conflict directly or indirectly affects the interests of large social groups, social strata, classes, society as a whole. Therefore, the subjects of a socio-political conflict (the state, political organizations, elite institutions and individual leaders) always act on behalf of a certain social community (social stratum, class, ethnic group, interest group, the whole society);

3) conditionality by power (power relations). The main (integral) object in the socio-political conflict is political power;

4) the ideological nature of the conflict motivation. Socio-political conflict, as a rule, has certain ideological grounds. The political ideology is spiritual education, specially designed for the target and ideological orientation of the social and political behavior of citizens. It performs the functions of organizing, identifying and mobilizing subjects and participants in a socio-political conflict;

5) institutional organization of the subjects of the conflict. In order to really claim power and authority in society or in the international arena, the subjects of a socio-political conflict must be institutionalized - represent public organization, a political party, a state institution or be a legitimate representative of these bodies;

6) "symbolic" identification. An essential role in the identification, organization and mobilization of the masses in the socio-political conflict is played by ideological symbols. For example, the red banner is considered the main symbol of the proletarian revolution; in the presidential elections in Ukraine (late 2004 - early 2005), the pro-government bloc led by Yanukovych chose blue as its symbol, while the opposition led by Yushchenko chose orange. Symbols are used as a way and means of self-identification and opposition of parties in a political conflict;

7) conflict of mutual intentions of the parties. If goods and services compete and "conflict" in the ordinary market, then in the political field - ideas, slogans, programs, statements. Competing and conflicting parties offer "goods" and "services" that cannot be adequately assessed, weighed or tasted. In a socio-political conflict, it is not the quality of the product itself that comes to the fore, but the effectiveness of its advertising - political PR technologies, political marketing;

8) presence of legitimate leaders. Political confrontation, as a rule, transforms into confrontation between political leaders, and the leaders themselves often become symbols of the socio-political movement and guarantors of the fulfillment of these promises. Therefore, opponents seek by any means to discredit not so much the opponent's ideas and programs as the "carrier" and guarantor of these ideas;

9) legal conflicts. The institutionalization of a socio-political conflict is one of the most important conditions for its settlement and resolution, and in this respect it is in many ways similar to a legal conflict. However, if a narrow circle of professional lawyers is supposed to be involved in the settlement of a legal conflict, then the opposing sides of the socio-political conflict seek to enlist the support (involve in the conflict) the maximum possible number of “uninitiated”. Here, in essence, we are talking about the correlation (collision) of such concepts (categories) as "legality" and "legitimacy"; the first one appeals to the legal norms of law, the second - to social (political) justice;

10) one-sided "legality" of violence. The use of violence in a socio-political conflict is considered legal only by the ruling regime. In other cases, it is perceived as a deviation and is prosecuted by law. However, in regime conflicts, the opposition side can ignore the existing rules of political struggle, demand their change, act by "illegal" methods, incite broad sections of the population to mass demonstrations and disobedience to the authorities;

11) national and socio-cultural characteristics. History and everyday practice show that in developing the theory of socio-political conflict and in its practical application, it is necessary to take into account the "local" and "temporary" characteristics of the country and the level of political culture;

12) the possibility of tragic consequences. A large-scale socio-political conflict is capable of completely destroying the political and social structure of society and plunging the country into the abyss of "Time of Troubles", which has happened more than once in the history of Russia. Social revolutions and world wars lead to the death of tens of millions of people, colossal destruction and material costs.

Causes of occurrence:

K. Marx believed that relations of ownership of the means of production underlie the social class conflict. L. Koser believed that all types social conflicts due to a lack of resources. From the point of view of R. Dahrendorf, the main cause of conflicts in society is the struggle for power.

R. Garr considers relative deprivation as one of the main causes of political conflict.

According to L.N. Timofeeva, the conflict is hidden in the very nature of political power, designed to harmonize and coordinate the various interests of people. She identifies the following sources of political conflict:

1) social relations themselves are relations of inequality;

2) divergence of people in basic values and political ideals;

3) identification of citizens (social, religious, political, etc.);

4) shortcomings, errors, distortions in the technology of political communication;

5) socio-psychological properties of political subjects fighting for power.

EAT. Babosov considers the causes of political conflicts to be:

Relations of domination and subordination, which divide people into those who rule and those who obey;

Fundamental differences in political ideals and preferences, value orientations of individuals, social groups and communities;

A set of factors associated with the processes of identification of citizens, their awareness of their belonging to political, social, ethno-national, religious, subcultural communities;

The conflict of the political system itself, which inevitably gives rise to state-legal conflicts.

According to B.V. Kovalenko, A.I. Pirogov and O.A. Ryzhov, political conflict is based on various types of political crises:

An identity crisis caused by the collapse of the ideals and values that dominate the political culture of a given society;

The crisis in the distribution of material and cultural wealth, which consists in the inability of power structures to ensure a steady increase in the material well-being of the population;

The crisis of participation - due to the low level of involvement of citizens in governance;

Crisis of "penetration" - aspiration ruling class implement their decisions in all spheres of public life;

The crisis of legitimacy is the discrepancy between the goals of the regime and the mass ideas about the norms of its functioning.

All the variety of reasons for the emergence of intrastate political conflicts can be reduced to three main ones:

1) infringement of the basic socio-economic and political interests of a significant part of the country's population. This may be due to the emergence of the following types of political conflicts:

The conflict of the legitimacy of power, which is based on: a) socio-economic reasons, for example, the distribution of the social product between different social classes and strata (for example, in Russia the income gap between the poor and the rich (decile coefficient) is 17.5); b) political and legal reasons (for example, violation of political rights and freedoms of citizens).

Infringement of basic needs can be caused by both objective and subjective factors.

Objective factors:

The crisis of the natural socio-economic development of society (for example, the crisis of the USSR in the 1980s);

Difficulties associated with a radical reform of the socio-political system of society;

Unforeseen circumstances (natural disaster, global financial crisis, external wars, etc.).

"Subjective factors:

Explicit miscalculations in socio-economic policy (incompetence);

The unwillingness of the ruling elite to take into account the fundamental interests and needs of the subservient classes and social strata;

Awareness (perception) by the subservient social strata and classes of the existing political system of distribution of resources (including power) as unfair and illegal (crisis of legitimacy).

If a significant part of the country's population does not find its place in the existing socio-political structure of society and cannot satisfy its basic needs within the existing socio-political institutions, then it will seek to destroy or radically change these institutions. The mass socio-political protests that took place in Russia at the end of 2011 - the first half of 2012 are a clear example of the dissatisfaction of a significant part of Russians with the state of affairs in the country;

2) differences in assessments, value orientations, goals, ideas about the political and socio-economic development of society (differences in political cultures). Yes, filed sociological research, at the beginning of 2011, 43% of Russians believed that Russia was on the wrong path of its development, 47% believed that Russia was on the right path. These data indicate that Russian society, in its ideas and value orientations, has split into two approximately equal parts, between which conflicts are possible;

3) the struggle between different interest groups (clans, elites, blocs, etc.) for power and resources in society. Such a struggle is the most common reason for initiating socio-political conflicts "from above". On this basis, the following types of conflicts may arise:

Conflict caused by the struggle for power and resources within the existing political system. The causes, goals and objectives of these conflicts are usually veiled and not very clear to most citizens. The victory of one or another political group in such a conflict, as a rule, does not change anything in the conditions of life of the population. Examples of such conflicts are the "color revolutions" that took place at the beginning of this century in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan. The danger of such “clan” conflicts for society lies in the fact that in order to achieve their individual and group interests, political groups and leaders seek to win over large social groups to their side, which can lead to violence and civil war;

The conflict caused by the struggle between the opposition and the ruling political elite for a radical change in the socio-political (economic) system. Gorbachev's "perestroika" (late 1980s) and Yeltsin's "liberalization" (early 1990s) can serve as examples of such conflicts;

Identity conflict, the essence of which is that people are divided according to certain characteristics (social, ethnic, political, etc.) into “us” and “them”.