Institution-formation theory and principles ofВ its construction. Globalization and the main mechanisms ofВ the development ofВ society
A. D. Orlov
A. L. Safonov
This monograph focuses on the study of the laws that govern the development of globalization and the establishment of the new age of post-globalization as well as the analysis of the reasons for the emergence of the crisis in the humanities. The result of research presented principles of building a new socio-philosophical theory, which will help forecast, with a high degree of probability, the development of the society and explain the processes that happen inside it.
Institution-formation theory and principles ofВ its construction
Globalization and the main mechanisms ofВ the development ofВ society
A.В L. Safonov
A. D. Orlov
© A. L. Safonov, 2021
© A. D. Orlov, 2021
ISBNВ 978-5-0053-8727-1
Created with Ridero smart publishing system
Authors: A.L. Safonov, D.Sc. inВ Philosophy, PhD inВ Technical Sciences;
A.D. Orlov, PhD inВ Technical Sciences.
ReviewedВ by:
Yana Vasilievna Bondaryova, professor, D.Sc. inВ Philosophy;
Makhach Mustafaevich Vagabov, professor, D.Sc. inВ Historical Sciences;
Vladislav Anatolievich Pesotsky, professor, D.Sc. inВ Philosophy.
Institution-formation theory and principles of its construction (globalization and the main mechanisms of the development of society): A monograph // Andrey Leonidovich Safonov, Alexander Dmitrievich Orlov – Yekaterinburg: Isdatelskie resheniya, 2020. xx pages (e-book).
This monograph focuses on the study ofВ the laws that govern the development ofВ globalization and the establishment ofВ the new age ofВ post-globalization as well as the analysis ofВ the reasons for the emergence ofВ the crisis inВ the humanities, whose conceptual base failed toВ help predict the direction ofВ the development ofВ the post-industrial society or explain its changesВ ex post facto. The result ofВ research presented principles ofВ building aВ new socio-philosophical theory, which will help forecast, with aВ high degree ofВ probability, the development ofВ the society and explain the processes that happen insideВ it.
All rights reserved. No part ofВ this book may be reproduced inВ any form without written permission from the authors.
The thirst for knowledge ofВ the essence ofВ things is given toВ humans as punishment.
В В В В Solomon
No one thing appears or disappears, but all things are composed or separated from the mix ofВ the existing things.
В В В В Anaxagoras
Introduction
The main goal ofВ social philosophy has always been toВ comprehend the leading tendencies ofВ historical development that determine the destiny ofВ society and the individual, inВ order toВ find aВ few key regularities. Its task has been toВ see the shape ofВ the emerging world inВ the chaotic events ofВ reality and toВ give guidance toВ individuals for the newВ era.
The key toВ understanding modernity is, ofВ course, globalization, which is an increasingly multidimensional process ofВ qualitative complication, acceleration, and integration ofВ human development.
Globalization is, first and foremost, aВ system ofВ qualitative social changes, consisting not only inВ the formation ofВ aВ single world market but also inВ aВ global social and informational environment, devoid ofВ spatial and political boundaries. Globalization generates unprecedented complications and acceleration ofВ socio-historical processes. It is characterized byВ global information openness, and the emergence ofВ new information technologies affects individual and mass consciousness directly and without inertia, inВ real time. This era is characterized byВ aВ qualitatively greater number ofВ contacts between geographically distant local communities and individuals, including those not mediated byВ the state and its institutions.
InВ more general terms, globalization can be defined as the process ofВ intensification ofВ the entire system ofВ social relations and the formation ofВ aВ global interaction system. As aВ result, not only global but also local social phenomena are formed under the influence ofВ distant external causes arising inВ different regions ofВ our planet. This leads toВ aВ comprehensive, worldwide connection ofВ social communities, structures, institutions, and cultures. InВ the process ofВ globalization, aВ qualitatively new system ofВ social relations and institutions is taking shape. Consequently, inВ the modern era, no phenomenon ofВ social being on aВ local level can be understood outside the comprehensive system ofВ connections with other parts ofВ the global system. Although the world was comprised ofВ aВ set ofВ relatively closed social systems not long ago, all local social and economic systems have become open today and cannot be studied outside the global context.
InВ the process ofВ integrating the economic life ofВ individual countries, globalization is increasingly moving beyond the economy inВ whose terms it was originally defined. Interactions between various actors inВ society are beginning toВ take on aВ universal, total character, which has become impossible toВ describe with the help ofВ already known particular connections. All ofВ this generates unpredictable chaos, with diverse processes occurring inВ various spheres ofВ social life. As aВ consequence, these processes characterize the era as aВ holistic, yet internally contradictory and unstable system ofВ interrelationships. Globalization as aВ leading social phenomenon ofВ modernity is the formation, development, and qualitative increase inВ the connectivity ofВ the global environment. This applies, inВ particular, toВ the economic, political, informational, and social spheres. Globalization significantly intensifies interactions within society. Thus, it simultaneously strengthens both the integration and confrontation ofВ all social actors.
The modern era, which is a qualitatively new stage of historical development, is characterized by two developmental trends. The first is that globalization, by creating a single social and economic space, activates those processes that lead to progress in the development of society. The second developmental trend is that, due to the same universal connectivity of all spheres of life of individuals, local crises are transformed into global ones, which have a fundamentally different, more intense level. These crises, because of the peculiarities of globalization, are characterized by qualitatively larger scales than similar phenomena of previous epochs. Thus, globalization manifests itself in two forms. On the one hand, it appears as an era of the emergence of a single economic, political, and social space. The emergence of this phenomenon has led to an unprecedented development of technology and technological knowledge, and, as a consequence, has raised people’s standard of living. On the other hand, globalization manifests itself, in many ways, as an increasingly less stable system of mutually reinforcing crises and disasters in all spheres of existence, leading to a decrease in the stability of all structures and communities of society.
Chapter I
Comprehending globalization
1.1 The emergence ofВ globalization and the unified global economic system
In addition to its functional dimensions – economic, social, political, etc. – globalization also has a temporal dimension.
Globalization as aВ trend is not new: interstate, inter-civilizational, and trade relations and interactions have played an essential role throughout human history, which has gone through several globalization-localization cycles.
For instance, in the era of Hellenism and the domination of the Roman Empire, the tendency toward globalization (more precisely “ecumenization”, given the isolation from the interacting areas of the New World regions of Europe, the margins of Eurasia and Africa) prevailed. Meanwhile, the Middle Ages had regionalization and fragmentation of feudal and religious enclaves as the core tendency[1 - Safonov, A.L. Osevoe Vremya-2: vozvraschenie k istokam ili pogruzheni vo t’mu? // Vestnik Buryatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. #14 (Filosofia, sotsiologia, politologia, kulturologia). Ulan Ude, 2012, pp. 34—42.].
The Age ofВ the Great Geographical Discoveries was aВ new turn towards globalization, which included previously isolated territories ofВ the New World, Africa, and Asia inВ the global historical and economic processes. However, when it comes toВ the degree ofВ globalization involvement ofВ elites and local societies, including those inВ Europe, the trade was no more than aВ few percent ofВ domestic production up until the twentieth century. Transcontinental migratory flows also affected aВ negligible share ofВ the population. The depopulation ofВ metropolitan areas during the Spanish-Portuguese colonization ofВ the New World and the flows ofВ Spanish gold that poured into Europe represented aВ singular and exceptional phenomenon for that historical period.
The forerunner ofВ the modern age ofВ globalization was the age ofВ industrialism, which began with the creation ofВ the railway network, the steam fleet, the telegraph, etc., which qualitatively changed the artificial habitat ofВ the homo sapiens species, such as it was created under feudalism. The whole way ofВ life changed fundamentally.
Typically, the starting point ofВ globalization is traditionally considered toВ be the struggle ofВ colonial empires for the partition ofВ Africa, followed byВ the Anglo-Boer War[2 - Davidson, A.B. Cecil Rhodes and His Time. / Sesil Rods iВ ego vremya. M.: Mysl., 1984, 367В pp.], which opened the period ofВ aВ global struggle for the redivision ofВ the world, including the two World Wars. Thus, byВ the beginning ofВ World War I, the concept ofВ imperialism, initially directed against the dominance ofВ the British Empire, had been formed and had become aВ generally accepted political term.
Lenin’s famous work Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1916)[3 - Lenin, V.I. Imperialism kak vyshays stadiya kapitalisma. M.: Lend, 2019, 128 pp.], which emerged from the Russian Marxist school of thought, was by no means the first attempt at constructing a “theory of imperialism”. It was created based on a polemic with the earlier work of Karl Kautsky[4 - Kautsky, K. Natsionalnoe gosudarstvo, imeprialisticheskoe gosudarstvo i soyuz gosudarstv. M.: Delo, 1917, 94 pp.]. It also contains references to earlier works by German, French, and British authors, in particular to J.A. Hobson’s Imperialism[5 - Hobson, J.A. Imperialism. A study. London: Nisbet, 1902, 400 pp.].
Evaluating this work post factum, a century later, we can state that Lenin, as a representative of the Marxist paradigm, was indeed successful in identifying the essential signs of the new stage of the development of capitalism, which are fully manifested today. These included more than just the tendency to monopolize markets, which had replaced “free competition” a century earlier, a notion that had become an ideological construct. Another factor was the leading role of financial capital, the flow of revenues from the real economy to the financial economy, the rapid development of capital exports, the transformation of metropolises into “rentier states” (Rentnerstaat), and the new role of banks as centres of economic management. The role of joint-stock companies and subsidiaries, which form, in the contemporary vernacular language, transnational networks, was emphasized. These structures later became one of the key phenomena that determined the development of globalization as a qualitatively new stage of socio-historical development of humanity.
Lenin also noted that German capital tended to be exported to the British colonies “over the head” of the metropolis, bypassing colonial affiliation, that is, the tendency of financial capital to jointly exploit third countries, which fully manifested after World War II, at the neocolonial stage.
As we can see, the theory of imperialism created within the Marxist paradigm of the early twentieth century already contained all the features typical of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, that is, it was able to define the main features of globalization a century before it happened. Only a chain of terminological innovations prevents us from seeing behind the “globalization” of the twenty-first century a direct continuation of the “imperialism” of Cecil Rhodes’s times[6 - Davidson, A.B. Cecil Rhodes and His Time. Sesil Rods i ego vremya. M.: Mysl., 1984, 367 pp.], which, as we are convinced today, was appropriately viewed by contemporaries from a theoretical standpoint.
However, at the end ofВ the twentieth century, the formation ofВ such aВ systemic phenomenon as globalization took place against the background ofВ the struggle ofВ socio-political systems. Some countries preferred capitalism. This implied that the society would develop with an emphasis on economic and social organizations, which acted separately from the state. Other countries preferred socialism, which implied the strengthening ofВ the state and largely planned development ofВ the national economy. Globalization as aВ phenomenon, which determined the further course ofВ social development, emerged, first ofВ all, based on the non-state economic structures ofВ Europe, the USA, and other countries that had close economic and political ties with them. Correspondingly, the ideological support ofВ this process emerged within the framework ofВ the scientific and ideological paradigms ofВ the Western world. As aВ consequence, the theory ofВ imperialism, which had emerged within the ideological paradigm ofВ Marxism, and had been quite established and quite adequate for social practice, was undeservedly forgotten. Globalization seemed something fundamentallyВ new.
Nevertheless, despite the first manifestations ofВ globalization, the impressive growth ofВ international trade inВ terms ofВ quantity and finance, nation states and regional blocs ofВ the age ofВ imperialism and industrialization generally maintained aВ closed-off economic, political, and informational space. InВ this situation, internal ties prevailed over external interactions. The state could be viewed as aВ closed, self-regulating system, with adjustments for foreign trade. The world, inВ this case, could be studied as aВ sum ofВ its parts, the description ofВ which did not require their consideration inВ the context ofВ aВ global supersystem.
The globalization threshold was reached at the moment when the leading states ofВ the world, preserving nominal sovereignty, de facto turned into open socio-economic systems. Their dependence on the global supra system, including international political and financial institutions, increased significantly and rose toВ aВ qualitatively new level. The influence ofВ these structures on the economic, social, and cultural life ofВ the population has become comparable with the influence ofВ national governments.
However, one can legitimately talk about globalization as a leading trend in world development only starting from 1991, from the moment of the collapse of the Soviet Union. At that time, the forms of social life that were characteristic of Western civilization received an impetus for spreading globally. The crucial importance of that year lies not only in the political elimination of the USSR but also in the fact that the countries that appeared on the territory of the Soviet Union and its former allies became involved in the “global community” and the global market economy (which significantly strengthened the connectedness of the world system).
From that moment onward, a wave of similar and almost simultaneous liberal economic reforms took place both in the West and in developing and post-socialist countries. The reforms included the privatization of crucial state monopolies – railways, energy, communications, education, and medicine. That was the beginning of the crisis and the dismantling from above of the classical industrial-era bourgeois state and its social institutions. The stage of “privatization of the welfare state” and the strengthening of the role, the “revenge”, of the elites began. During this period, the state lost its role in the economic and social sphere of social life and, increasingly, became a tool that served the situational interests of large economic entities.
Up toВ aВ certain time, there was no unified socio-economic environment inВ the world, but only some large and, as aВ consequence, politically, ethnically, and culturally heterogeneous states (including empires) with comparatively closed economies. They were included inВ aВ rather limited number ofВ local or regional trade and economic systems.
At the same time, any imperial-type state, be it the Roman Empire or Genghis Khan’s state, the Arab Caliphate or China, aimed at maximum possible spatial expansion and the acquisition of new subjects. They sought to reach the natural geographical limits of territorial growth – the seas and low-productivity mountainous and desert areas devoid of population and communication routes. Sooner or later, however, empires reached the peak of their expansion, after which there was a political crisis caused by limited internal ties, fragmented imperial elites, and growing borders in need of military protection.
The crucial change in world history came at the turn of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the age of the Great Discovery. Since then, an increasing number of western European countries (first Spain and Portugal, then England, France, and Germany) have been guided by economic considerations. As Europeans established a monopoly on direct maritime communications with other continents, a system of world trade relations began to develop, gradually embracing the whole known world of the time. The dominant positions in this global trading system were taken by those who created it, namely the Europeans. They were the ones able to extract, from trade operations with Asian, African, and American countries, not just profits but super-profits due to the non-equivalent, i.e. unequal nature of this trade exchange. Thus, a phenomenon that had never existed before in human history – the global economic system (also known as “the global capitalist system” or simply “the modern world system”) – emerged.
From the point of view of the systemic approach, the end of the modern era represents nothing less than the first signs of the emergence and development of the world (global) economic system. The most important feature of the global economic system is that, firstly, it functions precisely as a market, i.e. as a system of trade exchange, and secondly – and this is particularly important – it does not relate to any external social systems. At the same time, local economic and social systems, while continuing to retain their subjectivity, are becoming increasingly open to external factors, rather than being self-sufficient. In other words, the global economic system is a system of economic entities whose development is less and less limited by geographical, political, and legislative frameworks, and unrestrained by political regulations of the state.
Globalization differs from the earlier periods inВ the formation and presence ofВ aВ single economic space. As aВ result, one ofВ the objective trends inВ the development ofВ society is the general commercialization and digitalization ofВ the entire world, including the commercialization, mechanization (industrialization), and unification ofВ all areas ofВ social life that were not involved inВ market relations inВ the past.
1.2 The emergence and development ofВ globalization
The modern stage of economic globalization is characterized by the widespread commercialization and privatization of state monopolies (housing and utilities, energy, transport, the military-industrial complex, etc.), which are carried out according to the same template across the entire world. Commercialization and privatization have also affected other initially non-commercial areas and institutions of social life (education, science, medicine, culture). At the same time, even today, at the peak of corporate globalization and “privatization of the welfare state”, the objective tendency of expansion of capital and relations that are based on commodity and currency is not absolute and is always restrained by certain limits of a non-economic order.
These limits can be physical (space and resource limitations), political (state organizations and structures, borders, etc.), technological (transport, communications, etc.), the requirements ofВ social stability (social stratification is simply the reverse side ofВ the concentration ofВ capital), security, and the long-term needs ofВ modernization and infrastructure construction, which require long-term investment.
Therefore, economic globalization with its ultra-liberal economic model should not be seen as an irreversible process, as neoliberal thinkers typically do, but as aВ reversible and even cyclical shift inВ the balance ofВ power and interests among various elites and other social groups.
The objectivity ofВ economic laws does not mean that restrictions ofВ aВ non-economic order must be abolished since it is the non-economic limitations ofВ law that allow human societies toВ exist. The presence ofВ aВ permanent tendency does not mean the abolition ofВ forces opposed toВ it, either objective or subjective. For example, the objectivity ofВ the law ofВ universal gravitation affects evolution, but byВ no means does it impose aВ ban on terrestrial life forms that exist inВ the constant struggle with the force ofВ gravity.
Liberalization and commercialization cause the degradation of vital – especially in the long term – non-commercial spheres of social life (science, culture, education, marriage, and family relations), which constitute an essential part of human existence.
Probably, the crises inВ the world economy and the domestic politics ofВ individual states caused byВ liberalization, commercialization, and deregulation will inВ the future lead toВ the opposite movement, namely toВ aВ natural deliberalization and regionalization, and the reincarnation ofВ such social institutions as nation states and nations.
At any rate, we have the example of Roosevelt’s New Deal, which replaced the decade of post-war liberalism of the 1920s. Moreover, there are many other examples of successful deliberalization and deprivatization, most notably the creation of the European model of the “welfare state”[7 - Erhard, L. 50 years of thoughts / Polveka razmyshlenii. Translated from German by A. Andronov, V. Kotelkin, T. Rodionova, N. Selezneva. M.: Nauka, 1996, 606 pp.] and the construction of a range of viable models of socialism and compromise social models based on several civilizations and cultures.
InВ the economy, there have been global changes linked with the emergence and growth ofВ transnational corporations (TNCs) and globalized banking and financial structures.
Manufacturing has long ceased toВ be only national; it is increasingly transnational as individual countries are responsible only for certain stages ofВ producing aВ product, which travels aВ long way from raw material toВ being ready for use through the production cycles ofВ many countries. This is the type ofВ production carried out byВ TNCs, but they do not focus on aВ single industry or product.
Thus, in the 1990s, the combined sales of the world’s 500 largest TNCs accounted for more than a quarter of global GDP, more than a third of global manufacturing exports, three-quarters of trade in goods, and four-fifths of trade in technology. At the same time, about 40 per cent of world trade happened in the trade flows within TNCs[8 - Lisichkin, V.A., Shelepin, L.A. Globalnaya imperia Zla. M.: Krymsky most-9D, Forum, 2001, 448 pp.].
However, these same figures show that, when taking into account national markets, including some sectors ofВ the economy that are purely local yet quite large (housing and utilities and infrastructure) and the presence ofВ aВ fairly significant natural economy, no more than 30 per cent ofВ the economy is globalized. At the same time, its knowledge-intensive and technological part, which is not connected with the necessities, and the financial sector with its specifics are globalized.
The limited natural resources of the world have led to the formation of a vertical structure of the world system, divided into a “core” and a “periphery” both spatially and socially. This leads to the strengthening of the power of elites and desocialization of the “middle class”. Similarly, the unevenness of development increases in all spheres of life, both globally and locally. The growth of disparity, including social differentiation, is both the cause and the result of increased competition for all kinds of resources.
The global economic system consists of fundamentally unequal interacting components, which are the “core” and the “periphery”. The “core” of the global economic system consists of countries that benefit from economic interaction with other states (these are the so-called “developed countries”). The “periphery”, on the other hand, consists of states that lose out in economic cooperation with countries that are part of the “core” economic system. These components finally took shape in the twentieth century.
Over the past two centuries, the average per capita income of 20 per cent of the world’s population, i.e. for the inhabitants of the “core” or “golden billion” countries, has risen in real terms by a factor of about 50. At the same time, 80 per cent of the population saw it grow in the best case three to five times, and in some cases remain at the level of the Middle Ages or even decrease, compared with what it was before the emergence of the global economic system[9 - Borlaug, N. Green revolution // Ecologia i Zhizn, 200, #4, pp. 37—42.].
