Modernization

In the theory of modernization, two directions can be distinguished: liberal and conservative. The liberal theory of modernization considered the process of modernization as a transition from traditional to modern society, that is, as a kind of process of “westernization”. Representatives of the liberal trend proceeded from the universal picture of social development. In their opinion, all countries are developing according to a single scheme and model. Its main features should be a market economy, an open society, new information technologies, developed communication networks, social mobility, rationality, pluralism, democracy, freedom. From the point of view of the liberal approach to the analysis of modernization, one can distinguish between “primary” and “secondary” modernization. The liberal theory of modernization has been criticized from two sides: from the radical and conservative. The radicals pointed to the obvious ideological nature of the theory, the expansion of Western values ​​and models, unsuitable, in their opinion, for other civilizations, the dependent nature of development. Representatives of the conservative trend focused on the internal contradictions of the modernization process, the conflict of political participation and institutionalization, the preservation of political stability and order (as conditions for successful socio-economic development), the correspondence of the nature and orientation of development processes to the national and historical characteristics of developing countries, including the CIS countries ^[2] .

As Dr. East noted. B.I. Marushkin, in bourgeois historiography, the Marxist provision on the regular change of socio-economic formations is opposed to the alternativeness of the final results of the development of the same social system in different countries (which contradicts all the experience of world history, Marushkin believes), and this theory is largely based on the theory of "modernization", which considers socialism as one of the options for economic and social modernization of society (although the opposite of two systems m - socialism and capitalism - is a self-evident reality, - he adds) ^[3] .

A modernized society has a set of interconnected features, which are often regarded as separate processes of economic, political, social and cultural modernization.

Economic modernization provides for the intensification of the process of economic reproduction , which is achieved due to the growth of differentiation of labor , production energy equipment, the transformation of science into production (economic) power and the development of rational production management.

Its components are ^[4] :

• Replacing the power of a person or animal with inanimate sources of energy, such as steam , electricity, or atomic energy , used in production, distribution, transportation, and communication;
• Separation of economic activity from the traditionalist environment;
• Progressive replacement of tools with machines and sophisticated technologies;
• The growth in quantitative and qualitative terms of the secondary (industry and trade) and tertiary (service) sectors of the economy while reducing primary (production);
• The growing specialization of economic roles and clusters of economic activity - production, consumption and distribution;
• Providing self-support in economic growth - at a minimum, ensuring sufficient growth for the simultaneous regular expansion of production and consumption;
• Growing industrialization .

Modernization has become a factor in the creation of economic forms and institutions that contribute to the development and dominance of commodity-money relations in production, consumption and forced labor, which led to the development of capitalism . This, in turn, entailed the development and spread of market relations, the formation and development of national and transnational markets . The use of the achievements of science in business contributed to the scientific and technological revolution and the transformation of science into one of the important production forces. Economic modernization also involves the continuous improvement of economic management methods and production technologies, which contributed to the emergence of rational bureaucracy, management and economic science.

Political modernization involves the creation of certain political institutions, which should facilitate the real participation of the population in power structures and the influence of the masses on the adoption of specific decisions.

Its components ^[5] :

• Approaching a differentiated political structure with a high specialization of political roles and institutions;
• The evolution of the political system towards the creation of a modern sovereign state;
• Strengthening the role of the state;
• Expanding the scope and strengthening the role of the legislative field, uniting the state and citizens;
• An increase in the number of citizens (persons with political and civil rights), an increase in the involvement of social groups and individuals in political life;
• The emergence and growth of political bureaucracy, the transformation of a rational depersonized bureaucratic organization into a dominant system of management and control;
• The weakening of traditional elites and their legitimacy, the strengthening of modernizing elites.

Political modernization began with the advent of the first national centralized states in Europe, the deepening of political modernization in Europe and America led to an increase in the number of centralized states, the establishment of a constitutional system, a parliamentary form of government, the introduction of the principle of separation of powers , the formation of political parties and movements, universal suffrage, legal state development of democracy and the introduction of parity democracy. At the same time, it led to the regional and global expansion of centralized bourgeois states, the formation of world colonial empires (beginning of the 16th century), and in the 19th century. - to the development of imperialism as the highest, systematic way of such expansion, aimed at dividing the world into dependent territories and zones of influence.

Social modernization involves the formation of an open society with a dynamic social system . Such a society arose and developed on the basis of market relations, the legal system governing the relations of owners, and a democratic system, possibly not quite perfect. Democracy in such a society is necessary in order to be able to quickly make changes to the rules of the game in a changing environment and monitor their implementation ^[6] .

Its components ^[7] :

• Creation of a society with an open stratification system and high mobility;
• The role-based nature of the interaction (people's expectations and behavior are determined by their social status and social functions);
• The formal system of regulation of relations (based on written law, laws, regulations, contracts);
• A complex system of social management (branches of the institute of management, social government and self-government)
• Secularization (entry of secular attributes);
• Highlighting various social institutions .

Social modernization has contributed to the emergence of previously modern and modern nations, mass and civil society and the social state .

Cultural modernization involves the formation of a highly differentiated and at the same time unified culture, based on a comprehensive paradigm of progress, improvement, effectiveness, happiness and the natural expression of personal opportunities and feelings, as well as the development of individualism .

Its components are ^[5] :

• Differentiation of the main elements of cultural systems;
• Literacy and secular education;
• Growing faith in science and technology;
• Creation of a complex, intellectual and institutionalized system to prepare for the implementation of specialized roles;
• The emergence of new individual orientations, habits, and characteristics that reveal themselves in a greater opportunity to adapt to ever wider social horizons;
• Expanding areas of interest;
• The realization that the reward should correspond to the contributions of the individual, and not some other of his features;
• An opportunity to develop a flexible institutional structure that can adapt to ever-changing problems and needs.

In Western countries, cultural modernization led to the Reformation and Counter-Reformation , the important stages of cultural modernization were the late Renaissance , the era of Humanism , Enlightenment . Cultural modernization is associated with the development of modern natural science (from the 17th century), humanitarian science (XIX – XX centuries), the emergence of theories of nationalism , socialism and communism. Due to changes in the cultural paradigm in the XVIII – XX centuries. there was a decrease in the role of traditional values ​​(family, religion, morality), the decline of traditional authorities, the liberation of sexual behavior from the power of traditions ( sexual revolution ), the emergence of mass culture and the differentiation of national macrocultures into subcultures.

There are two types of modernization - organic and inorganic.

Primary, organic modernization took place in those countries that were innovators along this path, and unfolded thanks to internal factors, in particular, radical changes in the sphere of culture, mentality, and worldview. Its formation is associated with the emergence of national centralized states, the emergence of bourgeois relations, in particular capitalist cooperation and manufacture, the formation of previously modern nations, and the rise with the first industrial revolution , the destruction of traditional inheritance privileges and the introduction of equal civil rights, democratization, the formation of national sovereign states and etc.

Secondary, inorganic modernization occurs as a response to an external challenge from the more developed ones and is carried out mainly under the influence of borrowing other people's technologies and forms of organization of production and society, inviting specialists, training personnel abroad, and attracting investments. Its main mechanism is imitation processes. It does not begin in the sphere of culture, but in economics and / or politics, and in the latter case it is defined as catch-up modernization or “modernization with a delay”. According to Schmuel Eisenstadt , such modernization is a kind of “challenge” to which each society gives its own “answer” in accordance with the principles, structures and symbols laid down in the achievements of its long-term development. Therefore, its outcome is not necessarily the assimilation of the social achievements of the West, but the totality of the qualitative changes in traditional society, to one degree or another adapted to manufactory or industrial production ^[8] .

Most often, the term “catch-up modernization” is used to refer to former colonies and semi-colonies after they gained political independence. It was traditionally assumed that developed industrial countries have already tested a certain model of transition from traditional to modern society. This, in turn, turned modernization into a kind of globalization - that is, the interaction of civilizations , by which we can distinguish “advanced” or “progressive” societies, and those who imitate them. In the latest concepts, the measure of such inheritance is no longer regarded as a complete copy of the experience of the West, but is determined by the implementation of a number of mandatory measures while maintaining significant national specificity.

Usually catch-up modernization creates islands, enclaves of modern life, for example large cities such as São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, Moscow and St. Petersburg in Russia, differ significantly from the province in their way of life and state of consciousness. Such enclave modernization, breaking tradition, puts society before a lack of a spiritual perspective. It creates obvious inequality by promising equal chances (which traditional society did not do), but since these chances are not real for everyone, social discontent grows, which stimulates the attachment of the broad provincial masses to an alternative ideology - to communism in Russia, to fundamentalism in Turkey, and in Mexico and some other countries - to the uprisings of peasants and traditionalism ^[9] .

The problems of countries that have embarked on a path of independent development are that they apply the modernization model more efficiently, more economically, and more rationally, transfer it to national soil by combining its own traditions and resources and certain external assistance. Now the “reference” approach to modernization has been supplanted by views on modernization as a national project implemented by countries to reduce uneven development levels and as a means of overcoming the colonial state.

Another typology recognizes three types of modernization:

• Endogenous, which was carried out by countries on their own basis (Europe, USA, etc.);
• Endogenous-exogenous, carried out by countries on their own basis, as well as on the basis of borrowing (Russia, Turkey, Greece, etc.);
• Exogenous (in its imitation, imitation-simulation and simulation versions), carried out on the basis of borrowing in the absence of its own foundation ^[10] .

Exogenous is characteristic of most former colonies, while endogenous-exogenous occurs predominantly in the belt of countries surrounding western ones.

Anthony Parsons , the British ambassador to Iran in 1974-1979, when the Shah overthrew the 1979 Islamic Revolution, wrote in his memoirs: “I told the shah that angry indignation and general disagreement with the regime is a natural result of fifteen years of pressure and strangulation in the development of his “modernization” programs. The implementation of these programs exacerbated inequality, a split in society, and class contradictions ” ^[11] .

As noted by a team of historians led by Alexander Danilov , there are very few examples of modernization of Islamic countries, one of the most successful is the example of the Soviet republics of Central Asia ^[12] .

Georgy Plekhanov noted: “... the Europeanized Russian“ society ”was like a European colony living among barbarians. That was quite true. But for the better, the plight of a foreign colony abandoned on Wednesday by Russian barbarians could only be a social phenomenon: the Europeanization of the barbarians. ” ^[13] .

As professors George Derlugyan and Immanuel Wallerstein formulate: “All Russian problems and proposed solutions are built along a scale where ideological values ​​and cultural practices of a certain generalized West are taken as the highest level. This historical scale is usually called modernization ” ^[14] . They also note that "Russian modernization - whether in the Petrine era or in the time of Witte - always had to rely on imports and the rapid assimilation of advanced foreign technologies and organizational models." At the same time, as Loren Graham , a leading specialist in the history of Russian and Soviet science, notes: “Throughout its history, Russia has tried to modernize, having received the latest technology . But this is not enough. ” So, he believes, “there were no problems with Soviet science and technology. The problem was in society itself ” ^[15] .

Sergei Zemlyanoy believes that “the Stalinist five-year plans were a perverse form of accelerated, and from the turn of the 1920s and 1930s, enforced modernization,” which is evidenced by the fact that “over this period, Russia is from a country with an overwhelming predominance of agriculture, rural culture and rural image life became an industrial country, where, on the contrary, urban culture and urban lifestyle prevailed ” ^[16] . Arnold Toynbee saw the Stalinist five-year plan as an attempt to westernize, overshadowing the activities of Peter the Great ^[17] . Isaac Deutscher noted that the Stalinist regime pursued the revolutionary goals of modernizing Russia ^[18] . According to the sociologist Leonty Byzov (2009), “in the memory of modern Russians, Stalin is the only leader of the country who successfully coped with the historical task of modernizing Russia. Let it be at the cost of incredible losses and efforts, ”and although Leonty Byzov himself believes that“ the success of the Stalinist modernization is largely a myth, ”he notes that“ the worse things are for the modern authorities, who cannot do anything with the help of market relations new modernization, the more people pay attention to the figure of Stalin ” ^[19] . According to Konstantin Krylov , “the ostentatious anti-Stalinism of the current leadership of Russia is an excuse for the leadership’s reluctance to modernize” ^[20] .

The publicist A. A. Zinoviev , as his widow noted, “considered the early Soviet secularization , that is, the forcible incitement of atheism , persecution of the church and priests, as brutal, but inevitable for the modernization of the country” ^[21] .

VV Sogrin , characterizing the modernization of Russia in the 80-90 years. XX century, notes three ideological approaches to modernization: formational (the concept of democratic market socialism), liberal-democratic (civil society, private property, political pluralism, the capitalist market), civilizational (Russia is a special civilization and only selective borrowing of individual liberal democracies is possible values) ^[22]

Modernization is criticized, mainly because it is often mixed with westernization ^[23] . This model of modernization of society requires the destruction of the culture of indigenous peoples and its replacement with a more Western culture . Proponents of the theory of modernization usually consider only Western society as truly modern, arguing that other societies are primitive in comparison. This point of view reduces non-modernized societies to inferior ones, even if their standard of living is not inferior to the level of Western societies. Opponents of this point of view argue that "modernity" does not depend on culture and can be adapted to any society. Japan is cited as an example by both sides. Some see it as evidence that modern lifestyles can exist outside of Western society. Others argue that Japan has become noticeably more western as a result of its modernization.

In addition, modernization is accused of Eurocentrism , since it began in Europe with the industrial revolution , the French revolution and the revolutions of 1848–49 , and has long been regarded as having reached its most advanced stage in Europe (by Europeans) and outside Europe (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.).

• Гавров С. Н. Модернизация во имя империи: социокультурные аспекты модернизационных процессов в России текст книги в формате pdf М.: Эдиториал УРСС , 2004, 2010. 352 с. ISBN 978-5-354-00915-2
• Гавров С. Н. Модернизация России: постимперский транзит М.: МГУДТ , 2010. 269 с. ISBN 978-5-87055-116-6
• Ефременко Д.В. В поисках модернизационных ориентиров в эпоху междуцарствия модерна // Политическая наука. – М.: ИНИОН РАН, 2012, №2. – с. 10-32.
• Канарш Г. Ю. Опыт и уроки советской модернизации. Часть I // Информационный гуманитарный портал « Знание. Понимание. Умение ». — 2016. — № 2 (март — апрель) (архивировано в WebCite ) .
• Канарш Г. Ю. Опыт и уроки советской модернизации. Часть II // Информационный гуманитарный портал « Знание. Понимание. Умение ». — 2016. — № 3 (май — июнь) (архивировано в WebCite ) .
• Крадин Н. Н. Проблемы периодизации исторических макропроцессов. Раздел «Теории модернизации» . С. 166-200.
• Линник, Елена Викторовна. Модернизация общества как фактор глобализации : Сравнительный анализ и типологизация : диссертация … кандидата философских наук : 09.00.11. — Ростов-на-Дону, 2005. — 177 с.
• Межуев В. М. Ценности современности в контексте модернизации и глобализации // Электронный журнал « Знание. Понимание. Умение ». — 2009. — № 1 — Философия . Политология (архивировано в WebCite ) .
• Побережников И. В. Переход от традиционного к индустриальному обществу: теоретико-методологические проблемы модернизации. М.: РОССПЭН , 2006. 240 с.
• Травин Д., Маргания О. Европейская модернизация . М.: Изд-во АСТ, 2004. 1237 с.
• Gavrov, S. , Klyukanov, I., 2015. Modernization, Sociological Theories of . In: James D. Wright (editor-in-chief), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Vol 15. Oxford: Elsevier . Pp. 707-713. ISBN 9780080970868
• Mergel, Thomas: Modernization , EGO - European History Online , Mainz: Institute of European History , 2011, accessed Jul 11, 2012.