The article discusses some aspects of globalization that define a new paradigm of socio-cultural development. The essence of the modern stage of globalization is that it is an actively unfolding and rapidly accelerating process of overcoming the natural and artificial borders between peoples and states, forming a single and integral space of terrestrial civilization, ensuring the expansion of freedom for the movement of people, material and spiritual values, communication and interaction in planetary habitat. The consequences and transformations initiated by globalization, which affects all spheres and levels of society, are very ambiguous and diverse. In this regard, the conceptualization and philosophical understanding of social transformations under the influence of multidimensional globalization is an urgent problem of modern social philosophy. According to the authors, modern civilization is a changing system, and globalization as a complex process transforms, changes all the components of collective existence. In the context of globalization, the current sociocultural situation takes on the character of non-linearity, which is expressed in the rejection of traditions, the dominance of the innovative layer in culture. Actually, the imbalance between tradition and innovation indicates the entry of culture into the crisis phase and meets the laws of cyclical dynamics. In the framework of philosophical understanding of the phenomenon of globalization, it is necessary to analyze the problem of its transformational influence
Keywords: Globalizationculturesociocultural transformationssocietyunificationidentity
The concept of “globalization” enters into circulation and is widely used in connection with the discussion among scientists, politicians, and journalists of the 1997–1999 crisis, and discussions about the prospects for the development of the world and individual countries. Among those who study globalization, opponents, “skeptics”, hyperglobalists, and supporters of the “transformation theory” stand out. An important point for determining the essence of globalization was not only the identification of its technical, technological and technical and organizational component, but also the financial and economic aspects. In the future, along with transnational processes and deepening interdependence in economics and politics, the focus of researchers was on qualitative changes in the worldview of subjects involved in globalization processes. A distinctive feature of the new period of development of mankind is the global crisis, which has seized all spheres of public life. It is initiated by many factors, but mainly modern processes of globalization, growing in social life. In modern discourse, there are various approaches to the analysis of the social consequences of globalization: as to the “world of fluid modernity” (Bauman, 2008), the “era of new uncertainty” (Habermas, 2002), and the “elusive world” (Giddens, 2004), “the end of a familiar world” (Wallerstein, 2003). Globalization is not so much a change in the movement of people and things, but a way of identifying events and phenomena by participants in the world system. In the most general form, globalization is understood as a process that leads to a comprehensive, worldwide linking of structures, institutions and cultures (Archer, 1991).
The era of globalization, as a rule, is regarded by the scientific community as “our time”, as what is happening to us at the moment. Due to the lack of “historical distance”, the scale and novelty of the changes for humanity as a whole, which is already in the name of the era, the search for its essential characteristics brings to the discussion not only current, but also emerging and expected problems, in extreme terms – the problems of posthuman existence. At this stage of human development, the socio-humanitarian and sociocultural aspects dominate, scientific and technological progress, the information and communication component of globalization play an important role. Despite the fact that the processes of globalization are objective, recently there have been trends in the manifestation of its subjective nature, which is reflected in the formation and dissemination of the concepts of globalism, anti-globalism and alter globalization. The socio-humanitarian aspect of globalization leads to the need to consider the problem of modern social transformations in the context of its axiological aspects and determines the particular relevance of the problem. In this regard, an important and urgent task is to identify the nature and characteristics of modern social transformations taking place under the influence of globalization.
The research question is the content and characteristics of social transformations in the conditions of the modern stage of globalization.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study is to identify, through philosophical reflection, the main trends, forms and specifics of modern social transformations in the logic of the influence of the globalization process on them.
The theoretical and methodological basis of the study consists of general philosophical principles and methods, principles of consistency, synergy, axiology.
Socialization globalization means changes in the structure of employment. In the management aspect, globalization is defined as a set of unpredictable processes (turbulent) in their development. This means that it is practically uncontrollable. According to the famous English sociologist R. Robertson, the global cannot be opposed to the local, the universal to the private. Local is an aspect of globalization; global creates local. Globalization is institutional in nature. The traditional activities, which are characteristic of local societies, disappear; other activities that are far from these local contexts come in their place. Therefore, Robertson, Featherstone, and Lash (1995) suggests replacing the term “globalization” with “glocalization” for more accuracy. It is composed of two words – “globalization” and “localization” – to emphasize their mutual implementation at the present time.
It can be stated that at present, under the influence of globalization, which has a multifactorial character, sociocultural transformations are underway. Modern civilization is a transforming system, and globalization, as a complex process, reformed, changes all the components of social life: sociocultural norms and boundaries are being eroded, new structures and elements of the social system are emerging, many areas of sociocultural being intertwined more and more, a global sociocultural space is being formed, a holistic world system. Acting as a megatrend, globalization initiates fundamental changes in society. Rapid, numerous and rather deep transformations in each area of social life contribute to significant sociocultural shifts.
The processes of globalization begin to take over consciousness, affect cognition, in a specific way contribute to the formation of the worldview of a modern person and, as a result, have an impact on its formation and development.
The appeal to the question of the formation of a person’s personality in a globalizing world is associated with aggravated problems of preserving the person himself, his identity, culture, spirituality, in connection with innovative cultural, social, technological and technological impacts on people that are parallel to the processes of globalization.
Of course, globalization has caused an identity crisis. Identity is understood as the integration of a person and society, their ability to realize self-identity and answer the question: “Who am I?” Identity is opposed by multiculturalism – cultural diversity, interpreted in the spirit of role theory. Identity and multiculturalism can be represented as natural self-identity (in the first) and diversity (in the second), as well as a policy of maintaining these principles.
An increasingly distinct tendency towards blurring the lines between traditional cultures, “dissolution”, their more significant and developed in the political, economic and sociocultural aspects of “universals” is revealed, which, despite the preserved historical title, is, in fact, supranational units. At the same time, the absolute homogeneity of mankind is fundamentally unattainable. On the contrary, the preservation of a certain level of its diversity is a necessity for the preservation of such a significant source of development – a certain degree of social conflictogenicity, as well as for its existence as a stable system. So, gradually, mankind creates an integrated system of social relations conquering spatial boundaries. Moreover, local transformations are due to the impact of events occurring at a considerable distance. Conversely, local coverage factors can cause irreversible global consequences.
Transformations in the social sphere are particularly acute, since they relate to the life of any person, modify the social structure of society, its existential-spatial order.
The integration dominant of the globalization process is the intensive development of information and communication technologies, the expansion of interactions between countries and civilizations, the internationalization of the financial and economic sphere. All this deepens the trends of differentiation and diversification. In accordance with this, the processes of interaction of cultures in the world are determined by various predetermined attractors.
Coexistence of multidirectional trends of integration and differentiation characterizes the contradictory nature of the globalization process. It can be considered as a complex form of integrity, when the indicated duality is present on the basis of the principle of complementarity and manifests itself both at the global and local levels. Any culture and ethnos, in its own way and in its own rhythm, enter global processes, preserving the general social and specifically local cultural identity.
A sign of self-development of culture is the development of new forms. The processes of globalization form in many ways a new environment for the development of modern cultures, as a result of this, today, ethnic (traditional) cultures are not free from borrowing.
In order for globalization processes to become possible, leading to the achievement of civilizational synthesis while maintaining the diversity of peoples and cultures, a new paradigm for the development of mankind, a qualitative transformation of the system of values and practices of culture are needed.
In the new paradigm, the concept of completeness should replace the concept of integrity. In a living open system, completeness is unattainable, and plasticity, characteristic of integrity, is necessary. Without this, it is impossible to reconcile the processes of isolation and interdependence of the components of the modern world, it is impossible to combine the inseparability of the whole and the independence of the parts. In a rigid structure, unity leads to totalitarianism.
In the nonlinear world there are a number of sociocultural contradictions. During the development of the world market, specialization and the international division of labor are deepened, needs are aligned; the influence of democratic principles is growing; information becomes widely available, new forms of communication are consolidated; social indicators are being improved in many regions, considerable opportunities for choosing life strategies are being revealed. But, at the same time, the global economy is becoming less stable, interdependent and vulnerable; the gap in the economic and social sphere between developed and developing countries is growing; migration flows are increasing, TNCs are strengthening their economic and political influence on various states; the problems of interaction between the state and civil society institutions are deepening; the spread of mass culture threatens cultural diversity. In addition, all this is exacerbated by the growing environmental crisis. Strengthening transnational dimensions leads to the fact that the unique cultural and semantic space and the existential world of man become less popular. Many regions and states begin to build similar historical vectors, close landmarks in socio-economic and political development, unifying and standardizing human life. Often global processes in traditional cultures come to life in very aggressive forms. All the more indisputable in this sense is the movement of peoples and cultures towards the search for their identity and originality. The spiritual sphere of being is less susceptible to the trend of globalization. Astafeva (2002) believes that “the national-cultural mentality and artistic and aesthetic activity retain their essence, remaining the channels for the manifestation of cultural identity through which national identity and attitude are expressed” (p. 63).
The formation of the external and essential boundaries of any society, any civilization, occurs, as a rule, from the material of general global integrity at the stage of its reconstruction and reconstruction. The result of this reconstruction will depend on how clearly the understanding of existing contradictory, often mutually exclusive development strategies takes place and how consistently the society, its political and intellectual elites implement their own scenario of globalization, proceeding from maintaining the prospects and civilization and other status of society, as well as its life space. It is obvious that it is the maintenance of the diversity of cultural forms and practices that determine the parameters of socio-cultural development. One of the modern points of view is that in order to resolve a conflict situation, it is necessary to implement the idea of a multipolar community of countries, peoples and cultures, as opposed to its mirror version – “confrontational polycentrism”. Humanity can unite, relying on the coordination of interests and interpenetration of the values of the coexisting now technogenic and traditional societies. Therefore, it can be argued that the idea of a dialogue of cultures that is expressed in the search for a new without destroying the old, in conjunction with the rest, in the pursuit of mutual understanding and recognition of equivalence for all cultures, is of fundamental importance at present.
- Archer, M. S. (1991). Sociology for One World: Unity and Diversity. Int. Sociol., 133.
- Astafeva, O. N. (2002). Globalization: a synergistic approach. Moscow: Izd-vo RAGS.
- Bauman, Z. (2008). Flowing modernity. Saint-Petersburg: Piter.
- Giddens, E. (2004). The elusive world. How globalization is changing our lives. Moscow: Ves Mir.
- Habermas, I. (2002). Future of human nature. Moscow: Ves Mir.
- Robertson, R., Featherstone, M., & Lash, S. (1995). Glocalization: Time-Space and Homogeneity-Heterogeneity. Global Modernit., 30.
- Wallerstein, I. (2003). Konets znakomogo mira: Sotsiologiia XXI veka. Moscow: Logos.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
31 October 2020
Print ISBN (optional)
Sociolinguistics, linguistics, semantics, discourse analysis, translation, interpretation
Cite this article as:
Yurevna, K. O., Nikolaevich, G. V., & Valentinovna, G. E. (2020). Globalization As A Factor Of Socio-Cultural Transformations. In & D. K. Bataev (Ed.), Social and Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern Globalism» Dedicated to the 80th Anniversary of Turkayev Hassan Vakhitovich, vol 92. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 3047-3051). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.10.05.405