“Today & Tomorrow.Azerbaijan in Focus”.-2008.-¹ 3(10) March.-P.12-23
Doctor of philosophy, professor
The discussion of present problems
1. First of all, it is the basic geopolitical factor rendering crucial influence on the course of world processes as a whole and on change of political, economic and cultural scripts of the development of separate countries. We mean the globalization imperiously influencing the character of modern models of life of societies and states of the world.
2. Then it is necessary to discuss
such important paradigm of the modernity, as social-cultural models of
development, adhering to frameworks of processes of modernization with
3. The reference in modern conditions to the social-cultural problems shows that the standard division of culture on material and spiritual not only insufficient, but also interferes with the practical realization of theoretical installations of models of interrelation of a cultural tradition and a social development.
4. Such situation demands urgently the introduction of the concept of social culture into the discussed discourse, in which this lack is eliminated partly. Namely in this foreshortening it is possible to determine which social-cultural model (in the context of the approaches of Max Weber’s “Protestant ethics” /1/) is preferable for the optimum development of the Azerbaijan society and for the activities of its individual – the bearer of the certain cultural tradition.
5. The last will demand our
reference to Francis Fukuyama’s ideas (2) centered on the so-challenged “Great
split”. It is important to establish, when one of variants of “Great split”
started to be carried out in
6. Finally, we shall pay attention to the general condition of the spiritual and cultural searches united at a world outlook level by the concept of postmodernism, which has destroyed a habitual classical picture of the world, having replaced the world of objects (and subjects) by the world of sporadic challenge arising networks of mutual relations between them. As against natural processes, man constantly designs processes of a social reality (T. Lukman) and it creates uniqueness of environment in which people exist.
Expecting inevitability of fair objections and valuable suggestions, I want to note that the suggested scheme is absolutely open both for criticism, and for development. Besides, consistently considering the declared themes, I shall bring to a focus more on problems demanding answers, than to recipes of their solution. Thus, the arrangement of problems assumes a subsequent discussion.
* * *
For the last decades the world has undergone system changes generated distinct sensation that the mankind has escaped from habitual dynamics of historical time and has directed to full uncertainty.
The challenges the majority of the modern countries of the world faces, are unique, they are formed under universal pressure of a new world phenomenon - process of globalization. The mankind has entered an epoch of globalization, which consequences are for the present difficult for predicting, however it is obvious that the world during the life of one generation of people has become considerably more interconnected, uniform and continues to be unified promptly; a complex, inconsistent, substantially spontaneous process of formation of universal values has started. At that, the tendency to decrease in spiritual needs of the person, in which system of values material well-being gets an increasing importance, is obviously traced.
The judgment of how processes of globalization operate, will influence character of cultural development of separate peoples, develops in conditions of deficiency of time given for it. Consequences of a sharp technological leap at absence of the conventional world outlooks and values cause the proved fears, as change of mentality necessary at it does not get ready with so sharp transformation of sphere of a technologies and information boom. A prompt rolling up of a cultural variety looks even more disturbing generation of globalization. Are processes of unification, radical cut of distinctions between cultures inevitable? Is it so necessary that this be preceded with dying off of variety of languages and folding of uniform language of dialogue between peoples and cultures? Will the mankind come to uniform standards of culture and what can be lost at that? These and other, not less acute problems, raise inevitably a question on ways of preservation of the vital attributes of cultures of different peoples, many of which are at times deprived of opportunities to solve this problem independently.
Globalization destroys promptly various borders, erected by history and dividing peoples, but at the same time it increases threat of slow disappearance of variety of cultures and peoples. The solution of these uneasy problems is possible only in the democratic community, working pluralism of which demands to recognize the general, universal and absolute character of the rights and freedom not only of the separate person, but also of whole peoples. The world for a while is far from this ideal condition.
The epoch of globalization bears in
itself the greatest threat to those peoples and states, which culture is
marginal and synthesizes in itself variety of cultural directions by virtue of
historical reasons. Social-cultural formations developed on the conjunction of
two and more civilizations, and their cultures by virtue of the heterogeneity
first of all are subject to influence of processes of the globalization capable
to wash away a cultural identity ultimately.
Realities of globalization have
At all uncertainty of forecasts for the future one thing is clear: globalization – a self-developing system, consequences (positive and negative) of which will grow on, that is why every country should master technology of the control and the prevention of threats of this process for itself. It is especially important, as today globalization, in essence, is let to run itself. Political and social-cultural preconditions for acceptance of these ideas by peoples are absent, there are no influential world centers engaged in formation of the policy, leaving space for the development of peoples and their cultures; the number of research and scenarios of cultural dynamics of separate peoples under globalization is not great either.
Increase of rigid confrontation between supporters and opponents of globalization demands new approaches to formation of the universal values acceptable for all peoples and integrating cultural experience of inhabitants of the most different regions of the world. Otherwise there is a danger of irrevocable disappearance of this experience already before the mankind will reveal the most viable, "non-polluting" types of life culture and will include these valuable elements in the universal cultural heritage.
Unique experience of cultural pluralism and synthesis of various cultural directions can serve as a good model for creation of the mechanism of a harmonious unification of phenomena of culture on the global scale. And experience of generations of people, during centuries living on crossing of power fields of western and eastern civilizations seems in this connection very valuable.
It is especially necessary as the majority of political doctrines, economic models, social-cultural concepts and norms of law, not keeping up with dynamics of real life, have hopelessly become outdated, have ceased to correspond to challenges of today. The crisis periods repeatedly arose and in the past, however, the scale of the present emergency having embraced all spheres of the public life, testifies that the situation has found an essentially new character, which overcoming is possible only on the way of a cardinal break of developed stereotypes of thinking, behavior, attitudes.
* * *
The choice of the model of modernization of the state and society becomes a determinative of steady development in modern conditions. By virtue of the above-mentioned reasons every such model should take into account the cultural tradition being formed during a long historical time. In other words the right choice of a modernization model is possible only if an effective social-cultural model capable not only to encourage, but also to produce those styles of the human life and society which are favorable for their steady development, is taken as its system-making element.
The problem of modernization in itself is the central problem of development, and under globalization its influence grows repeatedly: modernization turns into a dangerous tool marginalizing culture; that is into the form of cultural colonization and is perceived by a significant part of the society as a cultural shock (see 4), caused by a prompt collision of different types of cultures. Heat limit of a cultural shock is observed in transitive states and societies trying to change rapidly the situation and consciousness of people at the cost of accelerated modernization. Modernization as a borrowing of other’s experience, leads to disorganization, destruction and chaos in the society being late in forming new public institutes and the elite, capable to tame negative consequences of modernization.
Hence, the accepted variant of modernization introduced into the space of the basic social-cultural model of the state and public development, though unable not to lead to transformation of the given model, at least, should not destroy vital bases of the cultural tradition. At abundance of theoretical concepts of modernization, almost everywhere we see failures of their practical realization. And one of the reasons of this in the post-Soviet countries, in my opinion, is in the character of judgment of a culture phenomenon.
* * *
Concepts on culture taking it as a certain appendage of the economic basis have desperately become outdated. Today culture is considered, first of all, as a unique system capable at treating it to reproduce the most predictable scenario of the future development. In this foreshortening culture especially functioning in critical phases of its development on synergetic principles, must be considered as permanent creativity, as an opportunity of break in new spiritual space, as continuous navigation in the world, mainly deprived of maps and reference points. Culture – is a phenomenon, allowing to influence the future development of human nature substantially dependent on the character of the person’s creative activity.
The person’s activities are triune - it simultaneously or in parallel generates culture, forms of socialization and a civilization, therefore crises of culture regular in history are explained by contradictions and collisions of spiritual and technological developments, becoming considerably aggravated in the epoch of globalization. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of existing interpretations of culture bears in itself mainly a positive estimation challenged to reflect a "heroic" opposition of human reason, the person’s permanent extending activities - to the “wild” nature, its unrestrained elements. In our century of audit of old values, solving of the hardened stereotypes the time of revision of also prejudices developed around understanding and interpretation of culture has come. The type of culture, which has been reigning during a number of centuries, has a direct relation to occurrence of numerous catastrophes threatening the mankind. As a developed system, culture during separate periods can and experiences stages of painful growth, decline and abnormal development.
However, the greatest wane of old
ideas on culture is that it continues to be considered as a phenomenon limited
to the person’s material and spiritual activities on transformation of the
world. Meanwhile, already: «… in the first half of XX century there was
introduced trinominal partitioning of culture on material, social and
spiritual. The material culture was understood as everything that belongs to
mutual relations of the person with his habits, satisfaction of his
requirements, securing of his further existence, the technological side of
life. The social culture was understood as people’s attitude to each other,
systems of statuses and social institutes. The spiritual culture - subjective
aspects of life, ideas, values and ways of behavior guided on them” (5).
Introduction of the “social culture” concept is a revolutionary step, allowing
to say that a new paradigm removing restrictions, interfering to transformation
of abstract theoretical constructions into effective models determining in
practice specificity of mutual relations of the cultural tradition and the
development for a concrete society (state), has ripened in the structure of
social sciences and the humanities. Really, by means of social culture material
and spiritual culture of the society get definiteness and coherence, they start
to be traced clearly in the system of social relations and institutes, the
political and economic organization. As a matter of fact, a social-cultural
model of development uniting the dynamics of culture and modernization in a
uniform concept, finds practical sense at involving of the paradigm of social
culture only. And here one has to specify an extremely important judgment of
culture, which should be mastered by every society: “In the rich, free and
plural society developed in the
A bit later, by the example of
* * *
Weber investigated “Protestant
ethics”, laid down bases of the western liberal system. How do matters stand
The ethnos forms a traditional community with hierarchical relations and structure; groups developing together with the growth of the ethnos into phenomena of regionalism.
A nation is formed in the state
considering all people as equal in rights citizens. Let’s ask ourselves in this
connection: has the process of the formation of the Azerbaijani nation ended?
Let us remind that we want to receive an answer in terms of politics, instead
of culture, and in this case it is negative: not only all the ethnic groups,
but also even the leading ethnos of the country still has not consolidated into
the nation, the formation of the statehood has not finished yet, let alone a
legal state and a civil society. Thus, the Azerbaijani nation as the subject of
political history is in the stage of formation that relates it to “the late
nations” with all pluses and minuses of such condition (however, as well as the
majority of peoples, which have earlier been in the structure of the USSR). The
last explains partly why till now we do not have the concept of national
self-awareness, as, however, also why the known model of the beginning of the
century: “Turkism, Islamism, Modernization” - cannot be accepted as a basis of
such concept. It is an ethnic, instead of national model, which cannot incorporate
completely a modern political and cultural state of
Let's focus on the situation from which we have started and continue moving to independence. Our movement fell on the end of the 20th century and was carried out in the geopolitical space formed by mainly western political values.
At the same time Azerbaijanis with
expressed east (Soviet) mentality are formed into a nation under conditions of
unique transition from the totalitarian dictatorship to democracy, from the
planned economy to the market. In
It could not be otherwise, as all of us are the children of totalitarianism only trying on clothes of democracy, considering that an external form is more important than an internal content. Today these delusions are veining overcome both by an internal enlightenment, and an external compulsion.
The big problem facing the national
self-awareness, is in overcoming of its marginality. It is paradoxical, the
Azerbaijani culture could synthesize in itself all the best of external
influence, processing it in its own national tradition, but similar plasticity
of culture as if has been hindering the development of a political maturity and
complicating the movement to an independent state.
It is known that absence of
statehood reduces identity to especially language unity, therefore a struggle
for the restoration of the language status is an inevitable stage for all
national movements striving for independence. However, after achievement of
independence in order to turn the language into an original element of national
dialogue and statehood, it should be filled in with a new political content -
it must become a language of a civil society and a legal state. It is typical
that together with the transition to Latin in
Terms “Azerbaijanis” and “Azerbaijanism” are a result of the historical development, it is a fact, which must be accepted, instead of to discuss from moral or spiritual positions: history has taken us to this, as well as to independence and made our life a reality. But an absolutely other point is a transformation of these terms into carrying constructions of a social-cultural model of Azerbaijan’s development demands a wide discussion and research of “anatomy and physiology” of Azerbaijanism, which do not yet go beyond the framework of a terminological discussion.
A special point is the place of religion in the secular state. Religion should be integrated into culture, but not in politics, it should diversify the tradition, turn into a factor of spirituality and a norm of moral values. We must generate our own ‘ethics” promoting a dynamic and steady development. But at that the new cultural self-identification should help mastering of the western political values as it has taken place in Japan and some countries of Southeast Asia that is in the form of own tradition. In the terms of the western political science this process looks as follows: “The precondition of the basis of the modern liberal state was an idea that in interests of the political peace the government would not begin to support any moral requirements on the part of religion and traditional culture. The church and the state should be separated from each other; the pluralism of opinions concerning the most important moral and ethical questions concerning the final purposes or the nature of good is necessary. Tolerance should become the basic value. The place of a moral consensus was to be occupied by clear laws and public institutes providing the political order” (7).
In turning points of history the cultural tradition is used as a form of adaptation to new conditions of vital activities. It was especially brightly showed in the failure of attempts of direct tracing principles of the western democracy on the post-Soviet ground, rather different in separate republics. In the West, and now also in a number of the countries of the East, these principles are treated widely and freely enough in order that it would be possible to deduce a certain universal “formula of democracy”. Formation of the nation and its self-consciousness is possible on the way of the consolidation of a legal state and a civil society which models, however, should carry a national - cultural form. Hence, much depends on a cultural and general dynamics of changing the culture and ideas about it in the world.
* * *
So, what are the features of the Azerbaijani cultural tradition?
It is necessary to recognize that in the Azerbaijani public consciousness an art reflection still prevails over a theoretical reflection, the world of culture still pushes the world of politics to the shadow, meanwhile, all over the world the historical development has been supported by the movement of self-consciousness from literature to philosophy and from them to a real life, politics. The majority of our modern problems are neither art, nor philosophical, they – are political so far as we resist to the life in the world of a real politics.
19-20 centuries therefore have an
exclusive value for
We have lost or for the present have not found the point of rest in history, of counting out of our culture, statehood, mentality, not that this point is absent in general, on the contrary, they are many and we cannot stop on a system of their ordering. Our last hundred years are more or less clear, but not lived over. The Middle Ages, origin and turning of capitalism, the epoch of socialism (including also as new feudalism), quasi-return to the beginning of the century, with all heavy problems and tests of that time, today's transitive untimeliness have merged in them. Our 1000-years - blockages of myths, fragments of historical events, dissociation and autonomies of development, finally covered not only by philosophical, but also an art reflection. But here there is a question: is it because there was no necessary prosaic reflection, or philosophy was cosmopolite appendage of culture, reflection above the history of others? Our thought often goes on a circle: to search in "another's"-, - “own”, to reduce “own” to "another's"?
A new problem has arisen today -
globalization, with all small pluses big minuses following from here for
The Soviet intelligentsia, which has survived the epoch has failed to become the people’s intelligentsia, capable to put problems of the national development, therefore it has not created the program, it has headed neither art, nor philosophical movement, it has not at all gone to the world of politics and has not led the people after itself. Do we need a new intelligentsia and is it possible at us? The mission of intelligentsia is “simple”: to generate in Azerbaijanis the feeling of statehood, an interest to the political, to remove from family (but to not withdraw at all) in the society, where the formation of both the Azerbaijani nation, and statehood is possible only. Probably, we are expected, first, the formation of a new intellectual elite, and then - becoming of the nation. The fault of the old, becoming obsolete intelligentsia is "escape" from life, closeness in everything and from everything, attempts to run away from the truth of life. It is necessary to rise from the area of "unconscious" development of the reality to the realized world of contradictions - to face the reality, to look at the eyes of our own destiny.
For now autonomy, dispassionateness
of culture from life, its plasticity, skill to force others’ models to work in
own tradition are characteristic for us. It is known that real time and space –
are closed categories for eternity, therefore a chronotopic model of the
The mission of the new intellectual elite – is to connect literature to philosophy, to refuse a permanent stand on another's, to become moral, to cease to create modern myths and eposes, to tell itself the truth, to remove “curtains of decencies ", to cease to rob itself and thus to justify larceny as a national phenomenon, to cease to be afraid of history. To develop the Azerbaijani language as a conceptual system, as a communicative system of politics and society, to cease to count Baku as Azerbaijan only, to generate a uniform sight at Azerbaijan, his history and people, to move with the mankind remaining the people and the nation.
Pluralism in the approach to cultures has become a sign of approaching of new time not only in the science about cultures, but also both in politics, and in ideology, which by themselves also are phenomena of culture, displays of certain social-cultural norms and values. Therefore modern political and social transformation of societies and states of the transitional period must be estimated as an attempt to develop a new cultural role.
* * *
Now let’s return, as we’ve declared
earlier, to the consideration of the phenomenon of the Great split submitted in
works of American researcher
Let’s make a small deviation here for better understanding by us of the presented term. In due time the theory of information based on ideas concerning the organizational order, has introduced into the discourse (Leon Brullien) a concept of neg- entropy, challenged to become opposition to the concept entropy - measures of disorganization of a system and a degree of dispersion of stocks of its energy. Drawing an analogy in the world of social relations, it is possible to say that the social capital – is “potential energy” of the society, “social neg-entropy”, capable to overcome problems arising before the society. That is why, on Fukuyama’s idea, the social capital is connections of trust and the social complicity promoting the organizations and advance of interests and ideas of certain groups, it is even simpler – Alex Tocquille’s expression – “the art to get united” (today to say more precisely, "to self-organize"), that is why it has a close link with the civil society professing in constant struggle with the state the idea of self-management.
The conclusion made by
The theory of management, that is the theory of the organization and maintenance of the order in the society (state), knew one productive scheme - hierarchy of imperious relations, however, it has recently been supplemented with a new scheme - a network based on different types of connection ("horizontal", instead of "vertical") of elements of the system and movement of information between them. In a foreshortening of the synergetic approach networks (as against hierarchies) possess ability to the spontaneous self-organizing, producing the order in not hierarchical ways.
Emphasizing the difference between these types of management, the author writes: “Other solution of the problem of coordination of strongly delegated organizations is a network – a form of a spontaneous order, which results from actions of decentralized agents, instead of being created by any centralized authority. In order to make networks really capable to succeed in creation of the order, they inevitably should depend on informal norms occupying the place of a formal organization – in other words, on the social capital” (12).
However, recognizing the role of
network systems in management,
Not pressing in the further details,
it is necessary to determine what values and norms can make the base of the
formation of a new social capital in
The globalization destroying the old "classical" world of the mankind rests on the new methodological pillars. The general condition of spiritual and cultural searches of mankind of this and subsequent periods is united at the world outlook level by the concept of the postmodernism undermining a habitual classical picture of the world. Really, the condition of postmodern is experienced by culture, science, philosophy, all the mankind. The circle of problems of the new “philosophy of life” is curious: is knowledge, science legitimate (J-F Lutar), aren’t they built in hierarchy of ordinary imperious relations far from democracy (M. Fouko), and in general, has the person aligns with a reality" (Z. Bodriar); what depressing result waits the theoretical idea at carrying out of the deconstruction of literary and even scientific texts (Z. Derrida), and do we understand correctly the phenomenon of the unconscious? (J. Lakan) – here is a list far from being full, of questions and problems inverted to the newest time.
Gradually, the world, the person disappear; the object and the subject are switched no more; isn’t it a new world in which the traditional person should disappear or adapt to the simulation of life? The person, to live further, must accept in himself death of the subject, the individual, the person, the personality, say, destruction of the uniform beginning conformable to unity of the world (which is rejected by postmodernism too).
Hasn’t the mother of "exact" sciences - physics - passed from physics of things to physics of relations after wreck of the classical outlook? So, why not replace sociology of the person with sociology of relations? In fact, in the reality we have a whole number of identities, distinguished from each other, generated by local historical and cultural events. And if it is so, what can know, more precisely, what truly new can know the "subject" of postmodern itself, how far “into depth” is it capable “to read” itself? Thus, a curious picture is made by postmodernism: a certain infinite network of relations instead of the real world (socium), any cell of which can be taken as (but to not be!) the center.
Monism, having waved good-by, has proclaimed the termination of the era of the world unity, making way for pluralism, omnivorous and willing up to any statements attacking universalism and rationalism of the postmodern existence of the mankind, destroying any systems applying for completeness. And minus these systems, by the way, there is nothing more left!
And in general – down with (any - from philosophy up to politics) hierarchies! The essential item is continuous democracy struggling with any kinds of totalitarianism, recognizing cultural pluralism, equality of any philosophical and scientific doctrines.
The network, thrown on the nature, is ready for socium also, now are already important not institutions and organizations, but riches of the network of relations between them.
Postmodernism turns quickly from a theoretical foundation and methodology of philosophy into daily practice and a valuable dominant of politics. But if the philosophical postmodernism is really democratic, really asserts pluralism of values and methodologies, then, in the political aspect postmodernism is more selective, if not to say, - biased. The epoch of a democratic recognition of value of all cultures and religions, pluralism of multiculturalism, postmodernist basis of philosophical anthropology began to be exposed to revising with the beginning of the globalization "successfully complimented with the concept of “clash of civilizations”, and after September, 11, 2001 they have been under the threat of a radical revision. Politics takes from postmodernism only what corresponds to its offensive spirit.
The epoch of postmodernism has left a deep trace in humanitarian research if not to say, that it has revolutionized them. So, from the middle of the 20th century there has started the formation of new directions, which not going in the frameworks of separate disciplines, apply for wide areas of knowledge of both natural-scientific, and humanitarian character. These directions simultaneously embrace methodological, world outlook and general philosophical problems. For a short time interval they have made essential changes to the settled perceptions about the world, the generated civilization and styles of knowledge of the person. It is possible to relate global and social ecology, synergetic, culture of the world, gender, the theory of globalism, the concept of "alive" history, the theory and practice of informal movements, etc. to number of such directions. All these directions are united with a new sight at democracy, as they themselves have become "spokesmen" of democratic principles for they base entirely on methods of pluralism and the postmodernist vision of the world. Alongside with it, they demonstrate superbly all the limitation and narrowness of the totalitarian and authoritative thinking depriving the person of his right of a creative choice. In their totality these directions have laid down bases of new consciousness and new thinking, which confirm permanently effectiveness of democratic principles, necessity of becoming-to-be of a steady civil society and a legal state, freedom of informal movements not only in science, but in practice of the social life too. The concept of relations and networks is a prominent feature of the methodology and the world vision of these directions. Spontaneously organized networks take the place of structures and hierarchical organizations already not only in the theory, but in practice as well.
For example, gender – is a difficult social-cultural phenomenon, - determining distinctions in roles, behavior, mentality and emotions of men and women. Gender in its founders’ reflections is deprived of concreteness or consumerism, more likely, it – is a composition of interlacing sex-role relations, presented in formal and informal networks of the society. The gender discourse demands from the researcher to think by relations, procedurally that characterizes all the named new directions of knowledge also. Natural-scientific and humanitarian thinking agreed one point - postmodernist vision of the nature and the society. We live in the world alternately created and destroyed by our paradigm of culture. That is why, as Ionin marks, in the modern society “the naive belief in objectivity and pre-definiteness of public processes disappears, and it means that the society itself changes. Objectively significant systems of stratification disappear, compulsorily obligatory ways of life vanish, the place of traditions is occupied by styles, vital forms are chosen freely, a postmodernist arbitrariness dominates in an explanation so also in behavior. Social changes receive basic cultural motivation. All these phenomena testify that the culture adopts progressive functions of the motor, the mover of a public change and development” (15).
Comprehension of the new realities
of the society and the state under globalization demonstrates on what grandiose
challenges of the modernity
1. Âåáåð Ì. Èçáðàííûå ïðîèçâåäåíèÿ. Ì., Ïðîãðåññ, 1990, Ïðîòåñòàíòñêàÿ ýòèêà è äóõ êàïèòàëèçìà, ñ. 44 -344.
2. Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ. Ì., ÀÑÒ, 2003.
3. Èîíèí Ë. Îñíîâàíèÿ ñîöèîêóëüòóðíîãî àíàëèçà. Ì., 1995.
4. Èîíèí Ë. Îñíîâàíèÿ ñîöèîêóëüòóðíîãî àíàëèçà…
5. Èîíèí Ë. Îñíîâàíèÿ ñîöèîêóëüòóðíîãî àíàëèçà, ñ. 24-25.
Let's pay attention, that Ionin
presenting trinomial partitioning of culture, refers to the book (Kroeber A.,
Kluckhohn C. Culture. A critical review of concepts and definitions/Cambridge,
6. Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ, ñ. 29.
7. Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ, ñ.21-22.
8. Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ, ñ. 28.
9. Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ, ñ. 30.
11. « All societies have some reserve of the social capital; real distinctions between them are connected by that it is possible to name «radius of trust » … Obviously, that in any case family - is an important source of the social capital ». Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ, ñ. 31.
12. Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ, ñ. 270.
13. Ôóêóÿìà. Ô. Âåëèêèé Ðàçðûâ, ñ. 303.
In the society there are two processes, developing in parallel. In the political and economic sphere history is progressive and linear, and at the end of 20th century liberal democracy as a unique viable choice for technologically developed societies became the culmination of it. In the social and moral sphere, however, history, apparently, is cyclic, and the social capital decreases and grows during the life of numerous generations. There is nothing that would guarantee growth of the social capital in a cycle. The unique basis for hope is very powerful internal human abilities to a reconstruction of the social order. On success of this process of the reconstruction depends, whether the arrow of History will be directed upwards » (pp. 383-384).
15. Èîíèí Ë. Îñíîâàíèÿ ñîöèîêóëüòóðíîãî àíàëèçà, ñ.5.