To Issue Of Transformation Of Cultural And Civilizational Values Of Russian Society

Abstract

The article touches upon the issue of the new cultural policy of sustainable development of traditional cultures in the context of globalization. The article is also devoted to the system analysis of intercultural conflicts at the level of the necessary structuring of public consciousness in economic, political and aesthetic expression. The various forms of interaction between a person and society are shown. The transformation of such levels as the level of democracy, freedom, responsibility, a set of moral values leads to a change in social consciousness. The movement of time, which is considered to be a casual attribution of values, relies on them as a permanent category, correcting the uncertainty about the future of society, including the mechanisms of evolution of creative individuality along with historical and cultural processes. In addition, the article examines the spiritual value orientation of the functioning of traditional cultures in the formation of a new Russian cultural and civilizational picture of the world as “the integration of differences”. The relevance of national ideological and aesthetic originality is considered by the authors of the research as a dialectical, contradictory historical and cultural process. The authors of the article also argue that the return to universal spiritual values ​​is a real opportunity to confront the “alien” modern social myths under the conditions of systemic crisis of culture in the context of economic modernization

Keywords: Transformationvaluespublicconsciousness

Introduction

The functioning of ethnic diversity of any country, its development perspective is an eternal issue in its conceptual understanding. However, the events which took place in recent years in the Russian Federation in economic, political, and socio-cultural systems have called into a doubt this canonical formulation. The surprising thing is that; the media have never before touched upon the problem of the systemic contradiction of ethnic cultures at the level of the necessary structuring of public consciousness in economic, political and aesthetic terms in such an unambiguous form (Bozieva, 2013).

And in this regard, in the context of the current state of economic and political components of Russian society the role of the forms of interaction between a person and society is especially important, as well as the level of democracy, freedom, responsibility, the totality of moral values, the transformation of which leads to the change in social consciousness.

The movement of time, which is considered to be a casual attribution of values, relies on them as a permanent category, correcting the uncertainty about the future of society, including the mechanisms of evolution of creative individuality along with literary processes (Shaozheva, 2017).

It is the creation of social structuring of the unity of the peoples of Russia within their ethnic and confessional authenticity which will be the logical continuation of these processes.

Problem Statement

In this regard, it seems important to understand the evolution of traditional culture in the situation of economic and political modernization in the context of the values transformation of Russian society and structuring a new approach to the development of public consciousness Russian people.

Research Questions

The subject of the research is cultural and civilizational values of Russian society in the context of the evolution of traditional cultures under the conditions of globalization.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the research is to analyze new cultural policy of sustainable development of traditional cultures in the context of globalization and intercultural conflicts at the level of the necessary structuring of public consciousness in economic, political and aesthetic expression and to reveal the cultural and historical specificity of traditional musical culture as the reflection of universal and national concept sphere.

Research Methods

The methodological basis of this study is the attempt of integrated perception of interdisciplinary mechanisms and leading trends in the transformation of various forms of Russian modern public consciousness (economics, politics, and culture), etc. In this regard, the main research methods are as follows: cultural, which allows identifying the dependence of political processes on culture; normative-value, suggesting the investigation of significance of political phenomena for society and a person, based on ethnic values and norms; structural and functional analysis, revealing the relation between political, economic and ethno-cultural phenomena, and systematic approach, which allows considering the cultural and civilizational values as an integrated, complexly organized structure. The important role in the formation of the concept presented by the authors of this research was played by the fundamental studies of Luman (2017), McLuhan (2011), Sultanov (2005), Bigua (2011), Bourdieu (2003), Astafiev (2013), Vostryakov (2011), Avanesov (1997), Kagan (2015), Flier (2008) and others.

Findings

The events of the 90s of the last century were apparently considered as the manifestations of a certain temporary painful reaction of the periphery to economic, social and administrational chaos that reigned in the country. The fact that this periphery is national was secondary - centrifugal aspirations were evaluated only as a purely political exercise of ethnic elites. Nothing could shake the relic faith in “new historical community”. The declarative dominants of national policy of the USSR, and then of the Russian Federation, were based on the supposed mental unitarity of the country's population, taking into account the natural priorities of its Russian component (Vostryakov, 2011).

In the general paradigm of national relations of the USSR and the Russian Federation there was absolutely no subjectivity of these very relations. The presence of ethnic groups was not taken into account in the sum of the interests of the state. The current speeches of public figures are much more politically correct, and the most popular phrase of television and other media is “national politics”. In the conditions of Russia, the absence of stated positions in this area for any individuals or parties is an inevitable rating downgrade before the elections. It is also correct, because it is probable that the analysis of issues of social or economic organization in most cases will lead us to conclusions about the future development of the Russian Federation.

A considerable part of the “experts” in this area do not have any concerns, since for many people the categories of ethnicity have migrated to the sphere of populism. The logic of the “defenders” of a strong side is eternally simple: a hierarchical approach in determining the status of the peoples of Russia. At the same time, it is the installations of this kind that are safe from the point of view of electoral prospects. The vast majority of potential voters in Russia prefer to rest on the laurels of their civilizing mission, perplexed at the non-recognition of such and irritated by the manifestations of ethnic otherness.

The sovereign persons often talk about the absence of a coherent national policy and the need for its formation in the country. In discussions of the political beau monde and the “guardians” who joined it, the priority of the interests of the state-forming people was proclaimed.

The frequent submission of large and minor incidents in which the opposing parties are designated ethnically or confessionally is hardly the pure result of media speculation on deliberately disturbing issues. The authors of the research doubt that the fury of verbal battles on numerous television talk shows is reasoned by the exceptional desire of the speakers for high ratings. There is a desire to believe that some of them are really concerned about the fate of the country. The issue of religious, ethnic institutionalization of the Russian Federation has escalated, everyone understands this fact.

What are the basic provisions, based on which, it is supposed to build a big house of universal happiness and equal opportunities - if we are talking about a democratic country? There is no shortage of sentences, but, for unknown reasons, they boil down to several verbs of the imperative mood, such as: to limit, to reduce, to forbid, to prevent, etc.

What is it? The war of civilizations, about which all progressive humanity spoke for so long and has it reached Russia?

This conclusion follows from the arguments of supporters of the national hierarchical approach. In fact, secular society follows the path of development of a Western-style democracy, with the prevailing mentality of ethnos, which constitutes the overwhelming majority of citizens of the country, with well-established norms of everyday behavior. In this respect, is the visible and perceived foreign culture expansion within this established system possible and acceptable? The answer is known in advance, and it is categorical - there are no mutual victories in wars.

Therefore, the essence of the current discussions is not an attempt to find some reasonable compromise between ethnicity, democratic ideology and the effective functioning of a democratic society. The discussions are reduced to the search for acceptable measures of tolerance. The argument is generated situationally and is very convincing each time, and at the same time it fundamentally contradicts the accepted moral and ethical standards.

It is hard to comprehend the problems due to their incorrect formulation. The first, the main and perhaps the only question: ethnic groups and their identification. Bolshevism provided for the eradication of nations as such, and, judging by some articles by V. Ulyanov, in the first place, the Russian. But he did not succeed in this. A sufficient definition of the “Russianness” of a person, besides linguistic, that has not lost its relevance for the Russian Federation even today, is very simple - Orthodox.

In modern assessments of economic and ethno-political state of the country, introduced by the entire power of the mass media apparatus, the national originality that lies outside the Russian (Orthodox) field has transformed into a threat to the essential foundations of society. The image of the Asian, Caucasian ‘barbarian’ is replicated and firmly embedded in the collective consciousness of the population. “Ethnic” explanations, explicitly declared or implied in any conflict situations in TV interpretations, have an obligatory dual model of opposition: “we” - “they” (foreigners, national minorities, Muslims, etc.) invading the stable traditional Russian space nation, violating its lifestyle and opposing their incomprehensible and indigestible customs and norms of behavior generally accepted among the absolute majority of the population of the Russian Federation.

A mythologem is so familiar that with its help even quite sensible people are brought into a state of intellectual stupor. The sequence of actions of the opposition parties, reasons, motives, consequences, results - all of this is considered from different points of view, but the essence of the situation is unequivocally interpreted - a clash of Russian and other ethnicity - confessionalism. (Thagazitov & Shaozheva, 2016)

The aggression of marginal thinking towards manifestations of ethnic authenticity is quite understandable and does not require an explanation. So its references to the need to “modernize” society can even be perceived as an act of care. Another thing is unclear - why in a huge number of cases of conflicting contact between marginal and national consciousness, the status of “Russian” is necessarily attributed to the first?

For example, in Kabardino-Balkaria, where the people, fortunately, appreciate “alien” ethnic and confessional identity, there is no interethnic conflict. The most surprising thing is that our Orthodox are astonished by the adhan or the the mass namaz, and the Muslims consider religious ceremonies as the norm regulated by law for the Russian population. Tolerance and a sense of self-sufficiency and significance, reinforced by the importance of non-invented spirituality, are typical of a nationally and religiously designated consciousness.

However, it is clear that, nowadays the resources of ethnic authenticity remain just resources. The mechanisms of marginalization of Russian and other peoples of the Russian Federation have been launched for a long time. A social outcast is absolutely indifferent to the fate of any people, more precisely, to all forms of ethnicity, inevitably pointing to his personal inferiority. It is they who most often act as initiating elements of various conflicts, forming an ideological and informational environment in which people and authorities worry about Lezginka (a dance) on squares and streets of Russian cities much more than about the absence of Baryn or Kamarinskaya on the same squares and streets. Hiding behind the slogans of “modernization”, they are very aggressive in taking any (even purely presentable) signs of a real modernization of ethnic communities.

In other words, a social outcast is always an adaptive; he does not recognize value orientations, binding to traditions, moral imperatives or strong family ties. All of them are either ethnic or religious. In the absence of an external reaction, he is guided only by considerations of short-term benefit and comfort of existence. And in the existential paradigm of people there are gaps in the form of uncultivated fields, abandoned farms, collapsing factories and plants, financial organizations that exist due to the primitive or veiled expropriation of state funds.

The events taking place in the systems of presentation and introduction of social standards in public education, literature, art, show business, and the mass media is a real catastrophe.

And in this regard, nowadays there is a situation when the channels of exchange of cultural information are broken and have come to a complete decline, and the primary task is to re-create them in those forms that can be effective in real economic conditions. And, despite the fact that in our time there are a number of innovative opportunities for information exchange, we must state that our national aesthetic thinking based on enduring values continues to be the main mediator between different cultures. (Thagazitov & Tolgurov, 2015)

For example, nowadays a traditional musical culture is in the process of retardation, fragmentation and destruction of traditional mechanisms of its translation and methods of comprehension. The formation and modeling of cultural space, the improvement of its socio-cultural components, led to the interest of Russian society in ethnic music, contributing to the investigation, preservation and development of traditional ethnic culture. As a result of globalization, the introduction of new information technologies, the increasing influence of biased mass culture, the refraction of ideas and research methods, this process can result in the loss of national musical identity, moral concepts, ethno-confessional ideas, mentality and value orientation systems.

Currently, when considering the traditional musical culture and “musical text”, it is necessary to emphasize that this is a complex unity of items of different musical and language levels having semiotic character as a correlative sign and meaning (concept / content). In this regard, the identification of contradictions and correspondence, the question of decoding and analyzing is as an important process for modernity should probably be projected in two modes — oral and written, thereby covering all the levels of communicators (behavioral, verbal and ethnic). This reculturalization will allow preserving musical culture as one of the constants of a person’s life meeting the criteria of authenticity and representativeness of ethno-musical culture.

Refusing to go into the essence and details of the current situation in all its components - from the publishing house of politics to the dominance of marginal aesthetic stereotypes - we just note that the classical formula “individual creativity - individual success - a fact of culture” is outmoded today.

Can we expect today the victory of the lone creators in the fight against a practically unlimited system, the goals of which are the same for the overwhelming majority of its components? The experience of “developed democracies” leads in this sense to sad thoughts and pessimistic forecasts. The best Russian writers will face the future of their Western colleagues - a narrow circle of elite readers, mindful of a dozen Nobel laureates, and complete obscurity among a wide national audience, who prefer questionable opuses to not prolific celebrities (Khakuasheva, 2013).

Currently we are talking about Russian writers. The narrowing of the readership from tens of millions of people to two millions is of course very alarming fact. But it is not fatal. But the circulation of the republican peripheral publishers, which do not even go up to 5 hundred copies, means the death of national literatures. Above all this is insignificant impact on the mindset of people. Then the prestige and status of the title of a “writer” decreases. After that, a natural decline in aesthetic, artistic quality of national literature. And we already see the results of such a literary policy on the example of all North Caucasian literatures without exception. On the one hand one of the reasons for the current state of affairs is to consider the actual isolation of talented representatives of culture and literature, proceeding from their own understanding of the universe, and, on the other hand, the coordination and synchronization of actions of market-oriented writers. The last ones have already built an all-encompassing system of production – promotion of their “works” and the perspective formation of the recipient they need, and this system may kill any national culture.

A special place in the possible cultural interchange is occupied by the issues of transitivity of the semantics of literary texts. The studies show that even highly-qualitative translations of the works of national authors suffer either from an interpretative modification of the meanings of original texts or the secularization of them. The point is not in the lack of professionalism of translators. As for the authors of the KBR, neither K. Kuliev, nor A. Keshokov could complain about it. We face not only a purely literary, but also an ethnological problem that requires thorough work in order to collect, systematize and correctly interpret national cultural archetypes, sustainable universals, correlated with current or past vital practices.

In our opinion the appearance of an accessible database in this area, would dramatically expand the possibilities of transmitting authentic information from an aesthetic text and, in the end, would clarify the positions of the authors of Russia both at national and international levels.

Conclusion

As the result, the essence of the actions of a multinational democratic state in the field of building inter-ethnic relations should be reduced not to indirect assimilation within the framework of “secular society”, but to the creation of conditions for equal opportunities for every ethnicity, people and culture.

In order to achieve this, we must at least remember the basic principles of identification on the values and moral tenets of Christianity. No one can deny it. Customary law, ritualism, emotiveness, vital strategy - all these components for a thousand years of the inviolability of Orthodoxy were assimilated by it, forming a special mental type that can be characterized as ethno-confessional. It is impossible to reject the religious constitutionality of the country, the national constitutionality of the majority of the population. These aspects are also determined by religious parameters.

The recognition of this fact will finally reform our society. The recognition, at least, of the main religions as one of the main constituent components of the Russian statehood, will automatically entail serious changes in the structure of public education, youth education, the formation of informational space and value systems of the population and national literature. The rational and logical continuation of this process will be presented by the creation of mechanisms for social accompaniment of citizens within the boundaries of their ethnic and confessional authenticity.

To conclude with it is necessary to state that only after this, the discussions on national policy will find real ground. After that, the state will finally be able to turn to the community of Russian peoples..

References

1. Avanesov, G.A. (1997). The dynamics of culture. M. Dialogue - MSU.
2. Astafiev, O.N. (2013). Cultural policy: theoretical aspects and implementation practices. Modern science: Actual problems of theory and practice. Retrieved from: http://www.nauteh-journal.ru/index.php/ --gn-13-01 / 717.
3. Bigua, V.A. (2011). Abkhaz literature and literature of the peoples of the North Caucasus. Moscow. IMLI RAS.
4. Bozieva, G.D. (2013). Ethnic culture of the peoples of the CBD in the context of modern transformations. Nalchik. KBIGI.
5. Bourdieu, P. (2003). Political anthology of Martin Heiddegera. Moscow. Praxis.
6. Flier, A.Ya. (2008). Multiculturalism. Culture Observatory, 2, 22–26.
7. Kagan, M.S. (2005). On the substance, structure and functions of culture. Theory and practice of culture: almanac, 3, 23-38.
8. Khakuasheva, M.A. (2013). In search of lost meaning. Nalchik. Elbrus.
9. Luman, N. (2017). Social systems: a sketch of a general theory. St. Petersburg. The science.
10. McLuhan (2011). Understanding of Media. UnderstandingMedia. Moscow. Kuchkovo field.
11. Sultanov, K.K. (2005). The ideal, overturned into the past. The image of the Caucasus in the literature of the North Caucasus diaspora. Literary abroad. Persons Books Problems, 3, 63-85.
12. Thagazitov, Yu.M., Tolgurov, T.Z. (2015). Topological formants of ethical and aesthetic consciousness of Kabardians and Balkarians. Humanitarian, social - economic and social sciences, 11, 365-369.
13. Thagazitov, Yu.M., Shaozheva, N.A. (2016). To the problem of the holistic study of the traditional cultures of the peoples of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic (touches to the societal methodology). Theories and problems of political research, 5, 82.
14. Shaozheva, N.A. (2017). To the question of the functioning and transformation of traditional values in the conditions of modern society in the context of synergistic methodology. Proceedings of the Kabardino-Balkarian Scientific Center RAS, 5 (79), 95-102
15. Vostryakov, L.E. (2011). State cultural policy: from paternalistic to affiliate model? Management consulting, 4, 140-155.