The specificity of Russian reality lies in the fact that in the conditions of the transitional state of society, more and more groups appear at the junctions of different social classes.
Russian society is also distinguished by the fact that ideological and political factors play an important role in its formation. It is no secret that the radical democrats pursued a policy of rapid redistribution of property and the creation of new social groups that provided them with political support.
It is widely known that the new post-perestroika era has introduced fundamental changes in the social structure of Russian society. The peaceful revolution that took place essentially revived the system of former capitalist relations that was destroyed in its time by October and led to the coexistence of private property with state property, which was commonly called socialist. The result of this is the impact of the changes that have taken place not only on the class, but also on the socio-professional, socio-functional structure of society.
The political aspect of the new formations of the social structure is obvious. The political essence of the structure of society in the past was the main subject of social falsification in the interests of power. Party and state ideologists for a long time successfully masked the real position of the working class with myths about its leading role. In modern Russia, the social structure is rather unconsciously politicized by the cult of the "middle class", which hinders the realization of the real class polarization of our society and hides the aggravation of the contradictions between labor and capital.
What is the essence of qualitative changes in the social structure of our society? In the past, under a totalitarian system, a hierarchy of social groups was clearly (unequivocally) expressed, sharing the rights to use property while centralizing the function of "disposing" property and alienating the function of "owning" it. Now, in modern society, the structure is class-differentiated by the proportions of different types of property, including private property, and by the functions of not only disposing, but also owning it. social society stratification russian
Under the new conditions, the former status of social groups has changed. The upper elite and sub-elite strata, in addition to the traditional management groups, include large owners - the new capitalists. A middle stratum has appeared - relatively well-to-do and "arranged" representatives of various socio-professional groups, mainly from entrepreneurs, managers and a part of qualified specialists.
Basic, basic, by definition T.I. Zaslavskaya, the social stratum is the most numerous in Russia (60-65%). It covers all socio-professional groups of the population with limited property income and socio-political influence - from the mass intelligentsia (teachers, health workers, technicians, engineers, etc.) to numerous categories of people of physical labor. At the base of this cone in the "lower layer", mainly representatives of unskilled labor with the lowest incomes, and then at the very "bottom" - lumpenized desocial groups.
Such a "layer cut" does not exclude the accepted classical systems of social groupings - class, socio-professional and socio-functional. They are so deep that at one time they affected not only the entire complex of socio-cultural characteristics of groups, but even some anthropological and physiological features. "Layers" speak of the possibility of a certain blurring of traditional social boundaries, but do not "cancel" them. For example, workers stay workers. The recognition of "strata" does not violate, but only complements the accepted understanding of the traditional structure of society, emphasizing the well-known diffusion of its boundaries, both class and socio-professional, and socio-functional, associated with the distribution of power.
The class structure is based on the differentiation of property relations, the separation of its owners, managers, employers (direct or indirect) from the hired labor force - physical or mental, skilled or unskilled. The socio-functional structure, in contrast to the class structure, distinguishes groups not by socio-economic status, but by managerial status - power-order or subordination-execution. Most often, in the class of capitalists, ownership is combined with the functions of power-disposition, although such a direct combination is not necessary. The administrative functions of managers may not be combined with the functions of "ownership", but only be performed in the interests of the ruling elite groups of true owners.
An analysis of the social neoplasms of modern Russian society reveals the most unusual relations for us in the past, associated with the revival of the classical class structure, determined by the opposition of labor and capital, with which the distribution of power and, to some extent, prestige inevitably correspond.
Of course, the nature of labor and capital in modern post-industrial societies has changed significantly compared to the era of K. Marx. Along with the continuing traditional labor of the worker, complex, complex, highly skilled, largely creative labor is expanding, requiring knowledge, initiative and intelligence, which affects the social nature of wage labor. Capital, being in world competition, must take this into account and share the surplus product (surplus value) created by such labor with those who have mastered it. The more creative and large-scale such essentially intellectual work, the stronger the position of its owners in market relations and, accordingly, the more limited the possibilities of uncontrolled arbitrariness of capital.
The trend towards the formation of a "middle class" does not remove the re-creation in our society of the traditional class structure with the interweaving of state and capitalist property, and the further, the more obvious the opposition of labor and capital, and at the same time a deep socio-functional differentiation of power and labor.
If in 1990 no more than 7% of those employed in the economy were employed in the private sector, then in 1997 already half of the workers and specialists were concentrated here, and this growth continued in subsequent years. In 2000, 24.4 million people were employed in the public sector and 27.9 million in the private sector.
A very peculiar social "revolution" took place. Usually the revolution claims that "those who were nothing become everything." In this case, the official nomenclature - the most successful of those who were almost "everyone", have already become them completely and unlimitedly. It is no coincidence that the party-state apparatus, according to R.V. Ryvkin, "initiated perestroika" when opportunities for this already opened up in the 80s. Those who in the recent past were at party-economic or social-command heights rose even higher, and most importantly acquired a new quality - they became capitalist owners, thereby obtaining a legal opportunity to consolidate their dominant positions in society and provide for themselves and their relatives, heirs "up to the seventh generation" suddenly acquired property, including the means of production. According to V.I. Ilyin, as a result of these changes, the "marketization of the apparatus" took place and favorable ground was created for its "merging with the shadow economy."
State-owned enterprises in the new system, with the exception of some relatively profitable abroad, predominantly raw materials industries (primarily oil production), for the most part, were in a deplorable state. They, regardless of inflation, were poorly financed by the state, they were not compensated, and their salaries were often paid with great delays. In the private sector, wages, although they often lagged behind the previous pre-perestroika norms, were nevertheless significantly higher than in the state sector, and were paid much more accurately.
Naturally, relatively more men and young people were concentrated in the private sector, as it was more profitable, while highly qualified specialists, especially the elderly, lost their former advantage. The main thing for them now remained a flawed state source of income. This development of the economy was clearly painful for the country as a whole, if only because private property was primarily established in the profitable consumer industries at the expense of many manufacturing industries. It is no coincidence that gross industrial output dropped sharply in the 1990s. Agriculture has also suffered greatly, now free from "organization", and most importantly from the supply of machinery, fertilizers and largely deprived of orders, forced to compete with Western importers.
As a result, there was a noticeable impoverishment of large sections of the population.
In Russia as a whole, “the social and cultural polarization of the “tops” and “bottoms” has intensified many times over: the “Zone of Poverty” has expanded from 18% to 40-50% since the end of the 80s. People working in the field of culture especially suffered from low wages , education, science, which remained only on state support. Many industries that could not withstand unusual market relations were in a bad situation. The advantages of not the production, but the consumer sector in the economy affected the sectoral and socio-professional structure of the population. In the private sector, there was a sharp the population employed in trade and the service sector increased, where the state sector was reduced to a minimum and remained mainly in industry, partly in transport, and essentially monopolized the sphere of culture, where, accordingly, beggarly wages prevailed.
The changes were reflected in the socio-professional structure of the population. The number of workers employed in the manufacturing industries has decreased markedly, which is reflected in the generational structure. In the new generation, the share of managers, who were often associated with capital, and the group of service personnel, recorded in the categories of low-skilled mental work, increased. Fundamental changes in the social structure are, of course, organically linked to the property status and incomes of the social groups of the transformed society.
The socio-economic reasons are partly understandable. According to official data in the Russian Federation, at least 1/3 of the population lives below the subsistence level. This is most often the low-skilled and elderly population. In the country, 1/4 of the population are pensioners, the vast majority of whom are in dire need. But they cannot be the cause and subject of a social explosion.
More problematic are social, in many respects socio-political reasons. In the past, for active groups of the population, they were to a certain extent removed by the mass consciousness of open opportunities for social mobility at all social levels, the availability of high social positions in society, the “people of the elite”, which was really formed not from privileged caste groups, but from the widest sections of the population.
With the development of private property, the mechanism of social movements changes significantly. The “curtailed” economy shows less and less demand for labor. Therefore, for the first time in the entire "post-October" history, it was in the last post-perestroika years that mass social mobility began to narrow.
Age differences began to noticeably affect employment and careers. But even in youth groups, the intensity of mobility has somewhat decreased.
From a social point of view, it is important to note the fundamental differences today in social mobility in the public and private sectors of the economy. Unconditional advantages were found in the private sector, since here they staked on more capable young and active groups. Entrepreneurs are particularly mobile.
The working class is no longer synonymous with manual laborers. Rather, it is those who in the base layer - workers, peasants and the mass intelligentsia - belong to the army of wage labor. Such a transformation of classes is inevitable when the industrial foundations of production change and the integrated type of labor and engineering labor expands, which has much socially in common with the occupations of the mass intelligentsia. All wage labor, including the mass intelligentsia, is a source of undivided surplus value. They objectively oppose the class of employer-capitalists and the state "trustees" who have grown together with it.
The transition of social systems, their elements and structures, connections and interactions from one state to another is understood. The most important factors of social change are:
According to their nature and degree of influence on society, social changes are divided into evolutionary and revolutionary. Under evolutionary Gradual, smooth, partial changes in society are understood, which can cover all spheres of life - economic, political, social, spiritual and cultural. Evolutionary change often takes the form social reforms which involve the implementation of various activities to transform certain aspects of public life.
Evolutionary concepts explain social change in society endogenous or exogenous reasons. According to the first point of view, the processes occurring in society are considered by analogy with biological organizations.
Exogenous approach is represented primarily by the theory diffusion. those. "leakage" of cultural patterns from one society to another, which becomes possible due to the penetration of external influences (conquest, trade, migration, colonization, imitation, etc.). Any of the cultures in society is influenced by other cultures, including the cultures of the conquered peoples. This counter the process of mutual influence and interpenetration of cultures is called in sociology acculturation.
Revolutionary refers to relatively fast (compared to social evolution), comprehensive, fundamental changes in society. Revolutionary transformations are spasmodic in nature and represent the transition of society from one qualitative state to another.
It should be noted that the attitude towards the social revolution of sociology and other social sciences is ambiguous. For example, Marxists considered revolution as a natural and progressive phenomenon in the history of mankind, considering it to be the "locomotive of history", "the highest act of politics", "a holiday of the oppressed and exploited", etc.
Among non-Marxist theories it is necessary to single out theory of social revolution. In his opinion, the damage caused to society by revolutions always turns out to be greater than the probable benefit, since a revolution is a painful process that turns into total social disorganization. According to elite circulation theory by Vilfredo Pareto, the revolutionary situation is created by the degradation of the elites, which has been in power for too long and does not provide normal circulation - replacement by a new elite. Relative deprivation theory Theda lappa explains the emergence of social tension in society by the gap between the level of people's requests and the possibilities of achieving the desired, which leads to the emergence social movements. And finally modernization theory considers the revolution as a crisis that occurs when the processes of political and cultural modernization of society are carried out unevenly in different spheres of life.
In recent years sociologists have paid more and more attention to cyclical social change. Cycles are called a certain set of phenomena, processes, the sequence of which is a cycle for any period of time. The final phase of the cycle, as it were, repeats the initial one, only under different conditions and at a different level.
Among the cyclical processes, there are changes in pendulum type, wave motion and spiral. The former are considered the simplest form of cyclic change. An example is the periodic change in power between conservatives and liberals in some European countries. As an example of wave processes, we can cite the cycle of technogenic innovations, which reaches its wave peak, and then declines, as it were, fades away. The most complex of cyclic social changes is the spiral type, since it involves change according to the formula: “repetition of the old at a qualitatively new level” and characterizes the social continuity of different generations.
In addition to cyclical changes occurring within the framework of one social system, sociologists and culturologists distinguish cyclical processes covering entire cultures and civilizations. One of the most integral theories of the life of society is cyclic theory created by a Russian sociologist N.Ya. Danilevsky. He divided all cultures of the world into “non-historical”, i.e. incapable of being genuine subjects of the historical process, of creating an “original civilization”, and “historical”, i.e. creating special, original cultural and historical types.
In his classic work "Russia and Europe" Danilevsky, using historical and civilizational approaches to the analysis of public life, singled out 13 cultural and historical types of society: Egyptian, Chinese, Indian, Greek, Roman, Muslim, European, Slavic, etc. The basis for distinguishing “original civilizations” is a peculiar combination of four main elements in them: religion, culture , political and socio-economic structure. At the same time, each of these civilizations goes through four main phases in its development, which, relatively speaking, can be called the birth, formation, flourishing and decline.
The German sociologist argued similarly Oswald Spengler. who is at work "The Decline of Europe" identified eight specific cultures in the history of mankind: Egyptian, Babylonian, Indian, Chinese, Greco-Roman, Arabic, Western European, Maya and the emerging Russian-Siberian. In his understanding, the life cycle of each culture goes through two stages: ascending ("culture") and descending ("civilization") branches of the development of society.
Later his English follower Arnold Toynbee in his book "Comprehension of history" somewhat modernized the cyclical model of the historical process. Unlike Spengler with his "patchwork of individual cultures", Toynbee believes that world religions (Buddhism, Christianity, Islam) combine the development of individual civilizations into a single process. He connects the dynamics of the historical process with the operation of the "law of challenge and response", according to which society develops due to the fact that it is able to adequately respond to the challenges of emerging historical situations. Toynbee is an opponent of technical determinism and sees the development of society in the progress of culture.
Cyclic theories also include sociocultural dynamics of P. Sorokin, which gives a very pessimistic forecast for the development of modern Western society.
Another example of cyclic theories is the concept of "world-economy" I.Wallerstein(b. 1930), according to which, in particular:
Currently, sociologists are criticizing the notion of the unilinear nature of social processes, emphasizing that society can change in the most unexpected way. And this happens in the case when the old mechanisms no longer allow the social system to restore its balance, and the innovative activity of the masses does not fit within the framework of institutional restrictions, and then the society faces a choice of further options for its development. This branching or bifurcation associated with the chaotic state of society is called social bifurcation, meaning the unpredictability of social development.
In modern domestic sociology, the point of view is increasingly asserted, according to which the historical process in general and the transition of society from one state to another in particular always presupposes multivariance, alternative social development.
Sociology highlights the social and cultural changes taking place in modern societies.
Social change includes shifts in social structure:
We observe a special group of changes in the political field:
Social change also includes cultural change. Among them:
The concepts of "" and "" are closely related to the problems of social change. Social development is understood as a change in society that leads to the emergence of new social relations, institutions, norms and values. Social development has three characteristic features:
Social progress presupposes such an orientation of social development, which is characterized by a transition from lower forms to higher ones, from less perfect ones to more perfect ones. In general, social progress is understood as the improvement of the social structure of society and the improvement of human living conditions.
A process opposite to progress, is regression, it means return to the previous level of development of society. If a progress regarded as global process characterizing the movement of mankind throughout the social development, then regression is a local process, affecting a particular society in a historically short period of time.
In sociology, two of the most general criteria have usually been used to determine the progressiveness of a society:
Concluding this question, we note that modern theories of progress draw attention to the fact that in order to save civilization, a human revolution is necessary in the form of a change in a person’s attitude towards himself and others, the formation cultural universalism(N. Berdyaev, E. Fromm, K. Jaspers and others). Prospects for the development of modern civilization will be positive only if the focus in the XXI century. There will be people, not cars. Promising can be recognized such changes that contribute to a true harmony between the individual, society and nature.
social structure is a stable connection of elements in a social system. The main elements of the social structure of society are individuals who occupy certain positions (status) and perform certain social functions (roles), the association of these individuals on the basis of their status characteristics into groups, socio-territorial, ethnic and other communities, etc. The social structure expresses the objective division of society into communities, roles, layers, groups, etc., indicating the different position of people in relation to each other according to numerous criteria. Each of the elements of the social structure, in turn, is a complex social system with its own subsystems and connections.
The social structure of Russian society has changed significantly over the past 15 years, as the statistical collections of the Goskomstat of Russia from 1994 to 2009 clearly show us.
Problems of the social structure constantly attract the attention of Russian sociologists. Most of the studies are combined methodologically, we will conduct our own analysis based on data from statistical collections and journal articles.
First of all, it is necessary to analyze the numerical composition of the population of Russia, which makes up our society. From 1994 to 2009, there has been a decrease in the population:
1994 - 148366 thousand people.
2002 - 143954 thousand people.
2008 - 132,000 thousand people
In accordance with the statistics, in Russia as a whole, the urban population has prevailed for many years. If the urban population decreases, then the number of rural residents also decreases by approximately the same number of people.
The gender distribution of Russian society is as follows 47% - men, 53% - women.
These figures have not changed over the past 15 years: they exceed the feminine principle by 6%.
The economically active population of Russia is more than 65% of the inhabitants. According to statistical collections, the level of economic activity of the population aged 15-72 changed in the following direction:
|
1992 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
|
The average annual number of people employed in the economy of the Russian state by industry is as follows:
|
1990 |
2001 |
|
|
Total (thousand people) |
75325 |
64710 |
|
Industry |
||
|
Agriculture |
||
|
Forestry |
||
|
Construction |
||
|
Transport |
||
|
Wholesale and retail trade, Catering |
||
|
Housing and communal services, non-production types consumer services |
||
|
Health care, physical education, social Security |
||
|
Education |
||
|
Culture and art |
||
|
Finance, credit, insurance |
||
|
Control |
||
|
Other industries |
From where it can be seen that our society - the population of Russia - is most of all employed in industry, at the beginning of the 21st century the number of people employed in trade, healthcare, and financial services is increasing.
If we consider the number of people employed in the Russian economy by form of ownership, we can distinguish several groups (indicators for 2001):
1) state and municipal - 24.2%
2) private - 30.8%
3) property of public and religious organizations - 0.5%
4) mixed Russian - 7.5%
5) foreign, joint Russian and foreign - 1.7%
Despite the increased attention of the Russian government to divorce issue and the adoption of a number of measures, such as: strengthening the position of demographically oriented programming in the country, the adoption of the presidential program to stimulate the birth rate, the law on maternity capital and others, the divorce statistics are still disappointing. In 2007, according to the State Statistics Committee, there were 54 divorces for every 100 marriages. In 1992, 60% of divorces were registered, in 2000 - 69%.
Over the last two years number of officially registered marriages increased noticeably. But the number of divorces continues to skyrocket.
For comparison, we can give approximate data on divorces in other countries.
The percentage of divorces relative to registered marriages is:
In Ukraine 55%,
In Belarus 62%,
In England 42.6%,
In France 38.3%,
In the USA 45.8%,
In Canada 48%,
In Japan 27%,
In India, only 11 out of 1,000 marriages, that is, 1.1%, end in divorce.
According to the results of sociological surveys conducted in 2007, it turned out that women are more often the initiators of divorces. Among the reasons that prompted dissolve the marriage the following were named: dissimilarity of characters and different views - 33.4%. Drunkenness, alcoholism or the use of psychotropic substances were identified as the main reasons for divorce by 13.5% of women; treason - 8%; the presence of another family - 7%; irresponsibility in relation to the family, unpreparedness for family life - 6.5%.
There are 87 billionaires in Russia with a combined capital of $471.4 billion. Russian billionaires pay the lowest taxes in the world (13%), which their counterparts in France and Sweden (57%), Denmark (61%) or Italy could not even dream of (66%). 1.5% of the population of the Russian Federation own 50% of the national wealth.
In Russia, only officially registered: - invalids - more than 12,000,000 - alcoholics - more than 4,580,000 - drug addicts - more than 2,370,000 - mentally ill - 978,000 - tuberculosis patients - about 890,000 - hypertensive patients - over 22,400,000 people, - HIV infected - at least 960,000 people.
Such is the structure of Russian society. Over the past 15 years, there have been big changes, and few. There are different approaches to the study and consideration of social processes and changes. The chosen path - the study of statistical collections - most accurately and clearly showed the social structure of Russian society. It is difficult to talk about the change in indicators after 15 years and about its causes, because. the psychology of people is changing and the population is only decreasing over the years. An important role in the social environment is played by political processes both within Russian society and in external state changes.
Under the social (stratification) structure is understood the stratification and hierarchical organization of various strata of society, as well as the totality of institutions and relations between them. The term "stratification" originates from the Latin word stratum - layer, layer. Strata are large groups of people who differ in their position in the social structure of society.
Scientists agree that the basis of the stratification structure of society is the natural and social inequality of people. However, on the question of what exactly serves as a criterion for inequality, their opinions differ. Studying the process of stratification in society, K. Marx called the fact that a person owns property and the level of his income as such a criterion. M. Weber added to them the social prestige and belonging of the subject to political parties, to power. P. Sorokin considered the cause of stratification to be the uneven distribution of rights and privileges, responsibilities and duties in society. He also argued that the social space also has many other criteria for differentiation: it can be carried out according to citizenship, occupation, nationality, religious affiliation, etc. Finally, supporters of the theory of structural functionalism suggested taking into account the social functions performed by certain or other social strata in society.
In modern society, three stratification levels can be distinguished: the highest, the middle and the lowest. In economically developed countries, the average level is predominant, giving society a certain stability. Within each level there is also a hierarchically ordered set of different social strata. These usually include the following stratum blocks:
1) professional administrators;
2) technical specialists;
3) entrepreneurs;
4) intellectuals engaged in various types of mental labor;
5) skilled workers;
6) unskilled workers, etc. A person occupying a certain place in this
Structure, has the ability to move from one level to another, while raising or lowering their social status, or from one group located at any level to another located at the same level. This transition is called social mobility. In the first case, they speak of vertical mobility, in the second - of horizontal. A high rate of vertical social mobility, other things being equal, is considered an important evidence of a democratic society.
The qualitative changes taking place today in the economy of modern Russian society have led to serious shifts in its social structure. The social hierarchy that is currently being formed is distinguished by inconsistency, instability and a tendency to significant changes. The highest stratum (or elite) today can include representatives of the emerging bourgeoisie, the state apparatus, as well as intellectuals employed in the financial business (they make up about 3-5% of the population). The creation of the so-called middle class in Russia today is just beginning (it is assumed that it will mainly belong to the entrepreneurial class, as well as highly skilled workers and knowledge workers). At the moment, according to sociological research, the number of people belonging to this stratification level ranges from 10 to 15%. Finally, the lowest stratum in modern Russia is workers of various professions, employed in medium and low-skilled labor, as well as clerical workers (approximately 80% of the population). It should be noted that the process of social mobility between these levels in Russia is limited. This may become one of the prerequisites for future conflicts in society.
The main trends observed in the change in the social structure of modern Russian society:
1) social polarization, i.e. stratification into rich and poor, deepening social and property differentiation;
2) the erosion of the intelligentsia, which manifests itself either in the mass departure of individuals from the sphere of mental labor, or in the change of their place of residence (the so-called "brain drain");
3) the process of erasing the boundaries between specialists with higher education and highly skilled workers.
Everyone has heard of such concepts as the industrial age and industrialization, but few can succinctly characterize them. Well, let's try to figure it out.
This era is characterized by this type of social relations, which are based on the division of labor, and industry is able to provide people with a comfortable life. It is an intermediate option between traditional and information (post-industrial) society.
Despite the fact that historians call the modern way of life post-industrial, it has many "industrial" features. After all, we still ride the subway, burn coal in boiler houses, and the cable phone sometimes reminds us of the industrial Soviet past with its shrill call.
The entry of European society onto the path of progress is a gradual process characterized by a change from feudal to capitalist relations.
(the era of industrialization) is the period from the 16th to the 19th (beginning of the 20th) centuries. Over these three centuries, European society has come a long way of development, covering all spheres of human life:
The process of gradual innovation is called modernization.
The transition to an industrial society is characterized by:
As mentioned earlier, an industrial society is characterized by industrialization. We list in turn the countries of the Old World in which this process took place:
1. England is the first European country to take the path of progress. Already in the 16th century, the flying shuttle and the steam engine were invented. The 17th century can generally be called the century of inventions: the first steam locomotive made its way from Manchester to Liverpool. In 1837, the scientists Cook and Winston created the electromagnetic telegraph.
2. France "lost" a little in the industrialization of England because of the strong feudal order. However, the past revolution of 1789-1794 changed the situation: machines appeared, and weaving began to develop actively. The 18th century is notable for the development of the textile and ceramic industries. The final stage of French industrialization is the birth of mechanical engineering. Summing up, we can say that France became the second country that chose the capitalist path of development.
3. Germany lagged far behind the pace of modernization of its predecessors. The German industrial type of society is characterized by the appearance of the steam engine in the middle of the 19th century. As a result, the pace of industrial development in Germany gained impressive momentum, and the country became the leader in production in Europe.
These two fundamentally different ways of life have the same features. Traditional and industrial society are characterized by:
Compared with the agrarian relations of the Middle Ages, the modern economy was more productive.
How is the economy of an industrial society characterized, what distinguishes it?
A precondition for major economic change was a division of labor that boosted productivity.
The English economist Adam Smith described it beautifully. He gave an example with the production of pins, in which one can clearly understand what the "division of labor" is.
An experienced craftsman produces only 20 pins per day. If, however, the production process is divided into simple operations, each of which will be performed by an individual worker, labor productivity will increase many times over. As a result, it turns out that a team of 10 people produces about 48 thousand pins!
The industrial society is characterized by the following features that have changed the daily life of people:
What characterizes an industrial society, apart from capitalism and industrialization? she is an integral part of it.
Keeping pace with Recording technology, cinema, radio and other media appeared - they combined the tastes and preferences of most people.
Mass culture is simple and understandable to all segments of the population, its goal is to evoke a certain emotional response from a person. It is designed to satisfy fleeting requests, as well as to entertain people.
Here are some examples of popular culture:
The genres of literature indicated in the last paragraph are traditionally referred to as mass culture. But some social scientists do not share this view. For example, "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" is a series of detective stories written in artistic language and having many meanings. But the books of Alexandra Marinina can be safely attributed to mass culture - they are easy to read and have a clear plot.
Western sociologists have introduced such a concept as an information (post-industrial) society. Its values are knowledge, the development of information technology, the safety of people and care for our big home - the wonderful green Earth.
Indeed, knowledge plays an increasingly important role in our lives, and information technology has touched almost any person.
But, despite this, industry continues to work, cars burn gasoline, and potatoes are harvested 100 years ago in the fall, and they are harvested. The industrial type of society, as mentioned earlier, is characterized precisely by industry. And the collection of potatoes is an agriculture that arose in time immemorial.
Therefore, the name of today's era "post-industrial" is a beautiful abstraction. It is more logical to call our society industrial with features of information.
Industrial society is characterized by many useful discoveries and man's visits to the Cosmos.
The store of knowledge accumulated today is enormous; another thing is that it can both benefit humanity and cause harm. We hope that a person will have enough intelligence to apply the accumulated potential of knowledge in the right direction.
.jpg)
