home

Trends in the modern world. Global trends in the development of the world. Prices should be affordable to consumers

on the topic: "The main trends in the development of the modern world and its state in
paradigm of the general theory of war"
at the round table
"Problems of war and peace in the modern era: theory and practice of the issue"
November 22, 2011, Moscow, Institute of Economics RAS

Dear colleagues!

1. The World Today: A General Assessment of the Strategic Environment

In assessing the strategic situation, we will deliberately leave behind such basic components of modern geopolitical analysis as an assessment of the history, geography, economy and current policy of the country.

At the same time, as the main areas of analysis, we included the civilizational aspect of the existence of Russia and the world.

1.1 The content of the modern era and the main civilizational factors of the modern existence of mankind

An analysis of the main world events of the end of the last and the beginning of this century allows us to identify and assert that the world and Russia exist in fundamentally new conditions that allow us to define our era as an era of change, as an era of planetary vulnerability and the emergence of new forms and conditions for the existence of mankind.

These new conditions for the existence of Russia as a special civilization, superethnos and state, are manifested in a number of new factors of planetary existence, in many ways conditioned by the self-destruction of the Soviet-Russian great power in all its geopolitical, geo-economic, ideological and all other spiritual incarnations, as an aggregate Russian and Soviet geopolitical project, and as a potentially equal and, unambiguously, one-rank aggregate West, civilizational phenomenon and an independent planetary force that tried to shape its existence on the basis of its own basic values collective existence, and independently determining the goals of its own civilizational existence.

The collapse of the USSR was the largest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century and the largest national tragedy that gave impetus to the development of new trends in planetary development and the national development of Russia.

We believe, the main content of the modern era is that:

the further future of mankind and the main mechanism of planetary development will be determined by the struggle of civilizations as the main subjects of geopolitics, in the process of changing the technological way of being by Mankind;
these new civilizational factors in the development of mankind already give rise and will give rise to new contradictions and even new classes of contradictions of modern human existence, and they, in turn, give rise to a new dialectic of its development;
a new dialectic of human development will be formed in the most difficult conditions of changing the ideological and technical paradigms of its existence, the main role in the formation and consolidation of which will be played by war and military force.

1.2 Basic causes of war

We believe that a feature of the current state of relations between the leading civilizations of the world is their growing mutual incompatibility, associated with the general incompatibility of their value foundations, and which is clearly manifested in the growth of civilizational tensions in almost all points of their contact.

The mutual non-complimentarity of the main civilizations - Russian Orthodox, Islamic, Chinese, and Western - tends to aggravate their relations from competition up to direct confrontation. The reason for the growth of civilizational antagonism is the unprecedented, aggressive and forceful expansion into the world of values of Western civilization led by the United States.

An analysis of the modern development of world civilizations shows that the geopolitics and geoeconomics solved by the technologies the most important task of the West, the main content of which is to ensure one's own survival and development at the expense of the rest of the world with the ultimate goal of establishing one's own permanent world domination, can only be realized when the West:

Firstly, will be able to maintain indefinitely the state of "controlled turmoil" in the rest of the world;

Secondly, when this permanent turmoil does not touch at all or touches minimally its national territories and thirdly, when these territories and interests will be unambiguously and reliably protected.

Supertasks of the "rest of the world" different. They are determined both by the historical past and national genetics of peoples, and by the current level and world status of states. Practically the only point uniting the interests of the “rest of the world” is the rejection of the “prospects prescribed for them”, as well as the rejection of the “values” that are forcibly introduced, alien to their genetics, as undermining the foundations of their historical existence and the desire for the survival of their own peoples. It seems to us that this can become the main message of Russia's own geopolitical strategic game.

As an analysis of the current state and a forecast of possible prospects for the development of the world community shows, this new global collision of the "struggle of super-tasks" may become in the near future the main challenge to the survival of mankind.

Now it manifests itself on the one hand - as an artificially heated, seemingly easy and accessible "sweet life, like theirs", initiating the pursuit of nations for the specter of freedom and prosperity; and on the other hand, the strong resistance of the national and religious elites to this expansion, realizing that the "commercial system" implanted in them by the West, in the final analysis, is the "Trojan horse" that is "thrown" to them by their common enemy.

This led to the formation, on almost all continents, of zones of civilizational tensions, and the "clash of civilizations" is already manifesting itself in a general increase in violence in interethnic (interethnic) relations, in violent interethnic and religious conflicts, which, in the future, can lead to suicidal civilizational wars.

Fifth, the coming "era of change" will not only be an era of planetary instability, but will inevitably become an era of war as a direct armed struggle.

That is why the issue of war and peace in the national strategy as a science, practice and art of government is the main one today.

1.4 Basic prerequisites for war as an armed struggle

Historical background and evidence

An analysis of the history of the last hundred years allows us to conclude that the West solved the problems of its own survival and development at the expense of the rest of the world, but mainly at the expense of Russia.

In 1910-1920- due to militarization, the First World War, resources and energy of the collapse of the Russian Empire.

The crisis of the 30s of the last century- due to militarization and the formation of the prerequisites for the Second World War (democratic cultivation of Nazi Germany, assistance from the USSR)

The Second World War- due to militarization, resources and the historical future of the USSR

The crisis of the 90s of the last century- due to militarization and the collapse of the USSR

The modern crisis of the capitalist system and the US itself- it is planned to overcome at the expense of the collapse and resources of modern Russia.

Generally.

We see that the only way to resolve their systemic crises, the West and its leader the United States has always carried out through the war and the formation of the necessary architecture of the post-war structure based on its results, with its undoubted leadership.

Current situation

We are convinced that the current strategic situation can be defined as preparation for a world war.

We believe that this preparation is being carried out by the USA, the leader of Western civilization.

The purpose of the war- Preservation of oneself as the only and uncontested world leader, ready to prove by force its superiority and the right to use the resources of the rest of the world.

In the interests of preparing for war, the United States is taking the following strategic actions.

Strengthening your own combat power- annual six hundred billion state military budgets, the creation of a national missile defense system and ensuring the security of the country's national territory.
Preparation of theaters of war- creation of the main bases of military-political control of the world: in space; in the sea; In Europe - (Kosovo); in Asia - Afghanistan.
Weakening strategic opponents
The rest of the world- power expansion of their civilizational beginnings; involvement of the whole world in solving the problems of their own survival and at its expense;
Europe- the transfer of their own economic crises and national crises to Europe and the world; encouraging the formation of bridgeheads for other civilizations; practical liquidation of the national armed forces.
China- limited access to the resources of Africa, Asia and Russia; creation of springboards for "democracy and radical Islam".
Russia- creation of conditions for self-destruction of the country; deception of public opinion by "reset"; ""buying at the root of the national elite and the targeted destruction of national science, culture, education and the capacity of the main institutions of the state, the depopulation of the country; practical liquidation of the country's national defense system.
Creation of a system of complete control space, air, sea and information and interactive spaces.

Thus, if the main event and the main global social catastrophe of the 20th century was the self-destruction and collapse of the USSR, then it may turn out that a new world war could become the main catastrophe of global significance in the 21st century.

This means that the war of the West against Russia has never been interrupted, its armed form is literally "on the nose", but Russia is not ready for this war either organizationally or mentally, neither economically nor in terms of military proper.

All this requires its assessment and adequate strategic decisions, which the political leaders of Russia are not able to make, since neither their own mentality, nor public opinion, nor the passivity of the nation, nor the lack of a modern and necessary theory of state administration, as well as the lack of national strategy as such, complete professional incompetence and their own personal greed.

2. About the theory of war as new knowledge and new
nation existence paradigm

In the modern era, one of the most important problems of mankind is war, which, as a phenomenon and part of the existence of society, accompanies a person throughout his history.

Unfortunately, this significant factor in the life of mankind and Russia is not fully appreciated, since the understanding and approaches to war were historically formed only from the practice of armed struggle, which, in our opinion, is already insufficient.

We are convinced that the absence of a modern theory of war hinders the development of Russia and makes its foreign and domestic policy inflexible, and state activity inefficient and uncompetitive.

One of the main objectives of this work is an attempt to give harmony and scientific solidity to the outstanding achievements of military thought, scattered today over the centuries and the works of great commanders, strategists, politicians and scientists, and to create on this basis a relatively complete, but certainly not complete, modern theory. war.

The need to create a modern theory of war is caused by:

the absence of a developed, coherent, relatively complete and complete theory of war (the theory of war is not included in the list of military theories as such and is not taught as a subject of study even in the system of professional military education) and the need to create its new universal conceptual apparatus;
new trends in the development of mankind and significant new factors of its modern existence;
current military events of our time, requiring a new understanding;
the need to introduce a new scientific apparatus of the theory of wars into the political and military practice of states;
the need to create on the basis of the theory of war an independent theory of national strategy and the theory of state administration;
the need to identify new trends in political life and the development of military affairs, and their clarification in the interpretation of the concepts of the new theory of war;
the need to develop such a theory of war that could be effectively used not only by nations disposed to expand their interests, influence and values, but also by peoples who are satisfied with their state borders and worry mainly about security and the preservation of their way of life;
the need to create an integral theory of wars, which would be built not on the absolutization of any opportunistic postulates of a nation that is considered “strong” today, but on a non-opportunistic theory built on a new common sense, and in this respect interesting and useful to all objects of society, as well as the theory, which would be a solid basis for the further development of military affairs within the framework of the positive development of mankind;
the need to summarize the practical and scientific experience of mankind in the field of wars, as well as the extreme need to formulate and introduce it into modern scientific life;
a certain impasse of military thought, associated with the insufficiency of the existing scientific apparatus of this most important sphere of human activity, as well as with the obsolescence or revealed inaccuracy of its important postulates and parts;
the extremely high activity of a large mass of modern military experts and writers, arbitrarily interpreting the military sphere of human activity, which they poorly understand, whose work introduces additional disorganization (vulgarization and simplification) into the understanding (rethinking) of military affairs as a whole;
the need to introduce a new theory of war into scientific circulation, the educational process of institutions of higher education, as well as into the political and military practice of modern Russia.

It seems that the solution of precisely these problems can form the main directions of research and development of the modern theory of war.

An analysis of the history of Mankind allows us to draw several conclusions about history itself, which, as you know, "does not teach anything", but bitterly punishes for not learning its lessons, and which always turns out to be the absolute truth.

It seems to us that these conclusions will not cause misunderstanding or rejection among our readers, since they are made both on the basis of the experience of human existence and relate to its most general aspects, and from the professional experience of a military man and a strategist.

It seems to us that these conclusions can be formulated in several axiomatic statements.

First. History really has its own laws, like the laws of the development of human society, which are universal in nature and are valid for all parts and levels of society.

Second. The basic laws of development will determine the ultimate superiority of society's morality over its strength.

The third. The laws of history as the laws of the development of society are most fully reflected in the laws of war, which, as a process of struggle for existence, constitutes the main and objective outline of the development of mankind.

Fourth. The laws of war are valid for the entire sphere of existence of society at any level and can serve as a canvas for the formation of the theory and practice of government as a system, structure and level of society, capable of developing these laws, introducing them into state practice and using their fruits.

Fifth. The level of knowledge (foresight, guessing) of the laws of war by national elites, as well as their compliance with the adopted national strategy, directly determines the model of the historical behavior and national existence of the nation and its ultimate historical success.

Probably, the formulation of theses of such a plan can still be continued, but today it can already be firmly asserted that the mistakes of the great powers in choosing a national strategy as a model of historical behavior and national existence, in the final analysis, always ended in their national (geopolitical) collapse.

Depending on the period of its historical existence, this process, that is, the process of national collapse as a result of the mistakes of its own national strategy or even its general moral and strategic depravity, took from several decades to several centuries.

An example of the correctness of this statement is the history of mankind itself, in which the emergence, development and death of all empires - from the Empire of Alexander the Great to the collapse of Nazi Germany and the USSR was predetermined by the mistakes of their national strategies.

Today, such a striking example is the United States, which is also approaching its own national collapse, due to the moral depravity and mistakes of its own national strategy.

This means that there is an objective law of History - ignorance of the laws of war and strategy, as well as their arbitrary interpretation and application, always leads the nation to collapse, and (as in the criminal code) - do not relieve national elites, governments and societies from their responsibility for the historical fate own nations and peoples.

True, such an understanding of the laws of history and war has become possible only in the last 50-60 years, since only now has national military thought and strategy risen to such heights.

Unfortunately, the national strategy, as a rule, is formed not by those representatives of the national elites who "rose to the heights", but by those who, guided by the "instinct of power", rely on the fact that in "their time" they are not threatened with collapse and they will be able to to survive in it, which is just another example of a delusion that only exacerbates strategic mistakes and worsens their nations' chances of survival and a decent history.

At the same time, even a superficial analysis of the existence of mankind in relation to the main issues of the survival of our earthly civilization, namely the issues of war and peace, puts modern political science and military thought in a dead end, since these problems do not find their systemic explanation today, and, moreover, do not have a visible intelligible solution.

These problems are increasingly obscured by the abundance of new trends in the development of mankind, despite the fact that there are practically no positive and clear development trends (or they have not been identified as such), but almost each of them carries a direct Challenge to the existence of mankind or the grain of the end of its modern history.

Today, political science and military thought is anxiously and actively rushing about in search of explainable (or at least acceptable) forecasts and pictures of the future, and is trying to see the fabric of times, but all these searches are not yet reduced to at least somehow understandable model.

We explain this fact not so much by the complexity of the problem as by the absence of a systematic basis for searches.

The main thing here, in our opinion, is the need for other approaches to the problem, topics, theory and practice of the fundamental concepts of human civilization, the concepts of "war" and "peace", as well as understanding the new relationship between war (and armed struggle, which is not the same g) and rapidly changing human society.

In this regard, a gratifying fact is only the unconditional interest of researchers in the topic and the concept of "civilization".

It seems to us that the civilizational approach to the analysis of the modern existence of mankind is absolutely correct, since, in our opinion, it is civilizations that are only now beginning to realize themselves as the basis of all planetary interactions that will determine the development itself and all collisions of the immediate and future history. humanity.

Modern researchers today are vigorously discussing the creative heritage of Karl von Clausewitz, sometimes agreeing with his interpretations of the war (for example, General of the Army M. A. Gareev in Russia), then protesting against them even more violently and with arguments (for example, the Israeli historian Martin van Creveld). but the strangest thing about this process is that none of them offers anything fundamentally new.

At the same time, for some reason, all experts agree that modern war has a different nature than war in the time of Clausewitz.

In our opinion, this is a fundamental mistake, since the nature of war is violence, and this is its absolute constant, which always remains unchanged, at the same time, the very content of the war, its goals, criteria, technologies of conduct and operational means have radically changed. .

Fundamentals of the General Theory of War

The author proceeds from the assumption that the theory of war is based on the essence of several basic postulates, which in turn are based on the basic laws of human existence and its own logic of axiomatic statements.

2.1 Basic postulates of the theory of war

We proceed from the assumption that the theory of war is based on the essence of several basic postulates, which in turn are based on the basic laws of human existence and its own logic of axiomatic statements.

The presented postulates of the theory of war follow from the logic of the laws of being - the historical development of society, and will be further disclosed in detail in the course of work.

2.1.1 The first postulate of the theory of war

The first postulate of the theory of war - A new state of society is formed by war.

It has the form (consists of) the following series of statements.

1. The basic law of the development of human society is the law of the complication of its structure. The action of this law leads to the fact that the existence of mankind becomes more complicated, and its social time (the degree of complication of the existence of society per unit of time) accelerates.

2. The development of society takes place, and the manifestation of the basic law of its development is formed as a result of the actions of the laws of "competition" and "cooperation", the interaction of which forms a new, different and for each time - the current state of society.

3. The formation of a new state of society occurs through the war of its main subjects at the levels: personality, peoples, nations, great and small powers, and civilizations.

4. War not only solves the problems of society, but with the help of war, society controls its own world and determines the direction of its development.

5. Each new and relatively long-term state of society is determined and fixed by the results of the victory of its individual parts in the war.

6. Victory in the war, as a fixed manifestation of a new social (political) reality, is the main factor certifying the change, development and current state of human society.

2.1.2 The second postulate of the theory of war

The second postulate of war defines the essence of the concepts "war" and "peace".

"War" and "Peace" - there are only stages (cycles and rhythms) of the existence of mankind and society at any level.

"Peace" - is a way of fulfilling the roles of the subjects of society, formed by the last war, it forms the potential for change.

"War" is a way of structuring, that is, a way of transitioning to a new model of the architecture of society (the world) and managing it, a way of redistributing the old and obtaining (conquering) new places, roles and statuses of the subjects of society (states).

War redistributes the roles and statuses of its participants, it realizes the potential for change, it redistributes it.

"War" is the same natural state of civilization as "peace", as it is only a phase of the cycle of its existence, a certain result of the world and a procedure (method) for structuring the world and the formation of its new architecture, changing existing paradigms, roles and resources, including the resources of global (regional, state) management.

War is a social process characterized by a purposeful struggle of the subjects of society (geopolitics) for the approval of their victorious part in a new role and status (for confirmation of the old ones), and for the possibility of their formation of a new structure and picture of the world and its subsequent management.

2.1.3 The third postulate of the theory of war

The third postulate of the theory of war defines the foundations of the dialectic of the conflict basis of human existence, as the basis and basic causes of war.

As a hypothesis, we accept the following axiomatic statements.

First, at the heart of any war lies the desire of people and their communities:

to survival;
to improve the quality of one's own life;
to the satisfaction of their own individual and group vanity.

Secondly, the essence of any war is violence.

Thirdly, the war is not limited to the actual armed struggle.

2.1.4 The fourth postulate of the theory of war

The fourth postulate of the theory of war - The logic of being gives rise to and ensures war as a phenomenon of the existence of society.

The postulate concerns the formation of the prerequisites for war as a social phenomenon, its causes, reasons, conditions, and so on, and is based on the logic of the statements of its logical series.

1. The world develops through the desires, thoughts of people and their work.

2. Violence is a desire brought to an absolute and a way of its realization.

3. Desires are realized by violence, the embodiment of which is war.

4. Individual desires, like the desires of a unit, are socially insignificant.

But the organized desire of many social units - nations and

states, this is the huge force that generates:

the need for organized violence (for the realization of desire);
the need to control it (this is how the state appeared);
the ability to manage this organized violence in the interests of those who plot and wage these wars.

5. With regard to the theme of the theory of war:

"desires"- materialize in finding the causes and pretexts for war, substantiate its conflict basis;

"thoughts"- form the ideological and theoretical foundations of war, expressed in the development of the principles and theory of war, the determination of its most successful strategies and methods of preparing and waging war;

"work"- ensures the creation of material prerequisites and means of war, determines its technological level.

2.1.5 Fifth postulate of the theory of war

The fifth postulate defines war based on its main content.

The essence and content of war throughout the history of mankind have not changed, and they are still violence (coercion).

Violence is always social and political in nature.

War is a process of purposeful organized violence carried out by some subjects of society against other subjects of society, in order to change in their favor the foundations of their own existence at the expense of the resources and capabilities of the opposite side.

In the war, all (any) and extreme measures of violence (coercion) are used, from changing the national psychology, up to the threat of destroying the enemy and his physical elimination.

Any purposeful violent (forced) change in the state of society, with the aim of using these changes to the detriment of itself and in the interests of the organizer and initiator of violence, is military action.

An organized, purposeful, direct or indirect implementation of measures of violence (coercion) into practice and life by one subject of society against another subject, carried out on an initiative and unseen basis - is aggression.

Determining the criteria and indicators of aggression in various spheres of the existence of society is an urgent task of the state, military and other types of political sciences.

2.1.6 The sixth postulate of the theory of war

The sixth postulate of the theory of war determines the general trends in the dialectic of the development of military affairs.

1. Analysis of the growth of violence reveals the general trend of its dialectic:

the time for the realization of desire is condensed;
the densification of the time for the realization of desire is carried out by war as organized violence;
the densification of social time leads to an increase in the scale of violence, to the use of more and more modern means of violence and to the development of more and more hidden forms of its implementation, that is, to the emergence of new means and types of wars;
the role and importance of military affairs on a national and international scale is growing to the level of the main cause of peoples and nations.

2. The need for a quick victory and the short duration of the armed phase of the war, the achievement of the goals pursued by the strategy without destroying the infrastructure (resource) wealth as a prize of the war and its additional (desired, desired) resource, as the strategic effects of the war, led to:

to the need for a technological separation of the "strong" from the rest;
to ensure the security of their national territories and the transfer of hostilities to the territories and spaces of enemy states;
to the transfer of military operations from the territories and spaces of states into human consciousness;
to the creation of the foundations and conditions for guaranteed victory, as the conquest of the future.

2.1.7 The seventh postulate of the theory of war

The seventh postulate defines war in its highest form as a war of meanings

The highest form of war is the war of civilizations, it is a war of meanings.

In the war of meanings, it is not the side that wins the space, or even comes to control, that wins, but the one that captures the future.

In order to win the war of meanings, one must have and carry within oneself one's own Meaning.

Capturing the future can be done by methods- a solid and self-sufficient self-sufficiency of the nation in Truth and its own being, in the conviction that "God is not in power, but in Truth!", as well as expansion into the world of its civilizational beginnings by personal example and the feat of its own improvement and the historical success of the nation .

2.1.8 The eighth postulate of the theory of war

The eighth postulate of the theory of war defines culture as the main factor of Victory or defeat in the War of Meanings.

Russia as a civilization has five foundations

Faith - Orthodoxy
People - Russian
Russian language
State - Russia
Semantic matrix - Russian culture

Russian culture - is:

the basis of national identification and Russian civilization;
basis of the nation's strategic matrix;
the main factor of Victory or defeat in the War of Meanings, since in such a war the one who loses his culture loses.

For victory in the war of meanings, the ability of a nation (its creative minority and power) is important - to have an anticipatory reaction not to the event itself, and not even to the Challenge itself, but to its probability.

2.1.9 The ninth postulate of the theory of war

The ninth postulate defines the basic logic of the hierarchies of nation building and war management, which are carried out in the basic logic of the following statements.

national idea, based on the ideals, historical values and shrines of the nation, defines its Mission and Purpose as the Meanings of the existence of the nation in the history of mankind and forms a national ideology as a philosophy of national existence and a system of basic goals of the national strategy.
Ideology as Philosophy of National Being- defines the field of state roles and national preferences, and also formulates the main ones as common basic goals, development paradigms.
Geopolitics- reveals their interconnections and spatial and political correlation, and together with the strategy - reveals the theaters of war and the composition of possible opponents and allies.
Strategy- indicates the directions and goals of the war, and also determines the basic algorithm of the state's actions and manages the war.
Politics- translates this algorithm into the ideology of the current existence of the nation and the practical activities of state institutions, into the budget process, designing the future, as the implementation of the goals of the national strategy, and the implementation of these projects;
Army- reinforces these actions with its presence, readiness and determination, and, if necessary, realizes the right of the state (its claims) to a new role in the world, by achieving victory in the actual armed struggle and keeps it (the state) in its new status.

It is this hierarchy of concepts that seems to us extremely important, since there is an (in our opinion, erroneous) idea that politics (and politicians) develops and manages strategy, while politics only pursues the goals of the national strategy, realizing them in its own current real state practice.

2.1.10 Tenth postulate of the theory of war

The tenth postulate of the theory of war defines "mobilization" as the basic condition and specificity of war.

In the theory of war, "mobilization" is understood as the ability of a nation to the utmost concentration of efforts in all spheres of its existence, in order to achieve victory in the war and ensure its own survival and development.

War can neither be prepared nor waged without the mobilization of all the resources of the nation.

A nation's capacity for war and victory in it is largely determined by its ability and readiness for great mobilization efforts, historical patience with the inevitable difficulties of war in the name of ultimate victory.

2.1.11 Eleventh postulate of the theory of war

Behind all and any manifestations of war there is always armed force, as the last and most weighty argument of the national power and determination of the nation, the basis of its viability and sovereignty.

2.1.12 The twelfth postulate of the theory of war

Knowledge is always Strength, Power and Future.

In modern warfare, the right strategy always takes precedence over its technologies, and strategic military thought gains undeniable superiority over the technological perfection of weapons.

2.1.13 The thirteenth postulate of the theory of war

The theory of war is the philosophical, methodological and organizational basis of the National Strategy of Russia, as a theory, practice and art of government.

2.2 Categories "war" and "peace" in the interpretations of the author

It seems to us that the search for answers to the main questions of the theory of war, which determine the essence of the theory itself, should be based on approaches of a general philosophical nature, that is, those very approaches that classical and modern and military science have not developed.

In formulating his own interpretations of the concepts of "war" and "peace", the author proceeded from the obvious facts and observations of contemporary political history.

Such a main observation is the facts that speak about and prove the fact that - "war", it is not then (not only then) when "airplanes are bombed, tanks fire, explosions thunder, soldiers kill each other, troops of the parties, sowing death and destruction "move the front line" until the victory of one side, and so on, today this is all completely different

Modern warfare is like radiation: everyone knows about it, and everyone is afraid of it; but no one feels it, it is not visible and not tangible, and it is as if practically non-existent; but the war goes on, because - people are dying, states are collapsing and peoples are disappearing.

First of all, those states and peoples disappear from the history of mankind, which, even dying in it, stubbornly do not notice or do not want to notice the war being waged against them. That is how the USSR perished, and Russia can still perish.

In political everyday life and modern political thought, the terms "hot war" and "cold war" are widely used, which reflects the current common understanding of the problem, while "hot war" is understood as a war waged by armed means proper, and "cold war" - as a war waged by non-military means, but this does not fully reflect the specifics of the war.

The general theory of war considers war in its unity, in which its "hot" and cold phases can take place.

Answers to these questions "what is war?" and "what is the world?", formulated on the basis of the conducted research, is proposed to be preceded by the following the basic theses of the proposed working hypothesis, based on a number of axiomatic statements.

The being of a civilization is its natural development in the rhythm of "war - peace", moreover, each of the phases of this "great rhythm" has its own philosophy and its own specifics, but at the same time, a single object of application is its own being.

The main task of human civilization is the survival of mankind as a species and its development.

The main task of the state is its survival and development as a subject and part of civilization.

If the survival and development of civilization implies, first of all, the search for new resources that ensure its viability and better management of their distribution, then the survival and development of states, in addition, implies the search and finding of such a place, role and status in the system of states and in civilization, which would provide better conditions for its survival and relatively sovereign development.

Thus, the following logical chain or sequence of higher certainties of any state, and even more so of a power, is built:

survival depends on viability;
viability - from the availability of resources (access to them) and the quality of government, and resource flows;
all of the above directly depends on the place, role and status of the state in the world, in the region and in civilization.

The dialectical connection of all these components is also quite obvious in the reverse order of their pronunciation.

An important place in this regard is occupied by the question itself: "what does the world do as a state of civilization or state in time without war?" (or "what is peacetime forging?"), as a phase of the civilizational cycle "peace - war", and the answers to it.

The results of the conducted research allow us to define the state of the world (peacetime) as a state of accumulation of national, state, civilizational and all other potentials (similar to the "charging cycle"), during which prerequisites are created for improving the quality of the state and, almost simultaneously, searching for a new (other) role of the state in the system of existing world relations and the formation of a claim to improve the place, role and status.

Since these places, roles and statuses of states are already quite rigidly determined by the existing, that is, once formed, world order, and as a rule, there are not many who want to radically change it, and if they exist, then their potential is compared with the previous winners, which control the world, as a rule, is insignificant, then its new appearance and architecture of the world can be changed (according to the experience of the previous development of civilization) only by "overcoming" this "unwillingness", by transferring the state of peace into a state of war and through it.

This means that the world forms the potential for change and this is its work and its "work", and the war realizes the potential for change, redistributes it and this is its "work" and its "work".

Thus, the whole logic of such reasoning allows us to propose the following definition:

"war", is a part of the civilizational rhythm, or historically the main rhythm of the existence of the human society "peace - war" and one of the forms of civilizational existence:

"war", is a way of structuring, that is, a way of transition to a new model of world architecture and its management, a way of redistributing the old and obtaining (conquering) new places, roles and statuses of states.

With this level of generalization, it seems not fundamental, both the spheres themselves, the scale, methods, methods and technologies of wars, and the arsenal of means involved in them, since any change in the established order and roles of any subjects of any relationship is war, and armed struggle, it is only its particular manifestation and its specific form.

Thus, war is the same natural state of civilization as the world, since it is only a phase of the cycle of its existence, a certain result of the world and the procedure for the formation of its new architecture, changing existing paradigms, roles and resources, including the resources of the global (regional , government controlled.

War is not an alternative to peace, it is a process of realizing its potential.

War and peace are only the stages of being of the subjects of human society (for example, humanity and powers) that exist in the paradigm (basic scheme) of world-military existence.

At the same time, war itself, as a struggle for a new role and status, is a time that exceeds the time of peace, although peace itself (peacetime) is longer than the time of actual armed struggle (which is only one of the forms of military operations), and in its essence, there is only a "respite phase" in the war.

If we consider that progress itself is the result of a capable management of a system (civilization, state), then war is either bad management (war out of desperation), or it is a correction of management shortcomings, or it is the imposition and consolidation of roles as part of management. In any case, war acts as a process and form of self-government of the system, as its corrector.

Obviously, civilization, like any other metasystem, can exist more or less comfortably only in a state of relative dynamic equilibrium. It is also obvious that the accumulation of "potential for change" in peacetime cannot but lead to certain "disagreements" in it and cause its imbalance.

Therefore, an important goal of the war is to find and establish a qualitatively new equilibrium state of the system or introduce certainty into the mechanisms (architecture) of its functioning, or eliminate destabilizing factors.

The basic goals of war, by definition, must coincide with the national interests of the power and be strategically and morally feasible for it.

The aims of war should not be so much just(including in connection with the means of waging it, as well as in connection with the obvious subjectivity of the very concept of "justice", although the obvious justice of a war is always the basis for agreement in society about its waging), how much is appropriate and in general (or look like) a project (or its proposal) for a more effective (fair) post-war governance of the world (state), in which "everyone will find a worthy place."

In particular, the principle of "benefit of war" is the main principle of finding and attracting strategic allies and forming the necessary coalitions.

Thus, it turns out that the natural state of a civilization (state) is a continuous permanent war, and if the ancient thinkers bequeathed to us the wisdom "remember the war", then today, the thesis "remember the world" can be considered modern and quite correct wisdom.

Generally:

war and peace - there are only stages (cycles and rhythms) of the existence of mankind (and powers);

peace- there is a way to fulfill the roles shaped by the last war, he forms the potential for change, and this is his job and his "cause";

war- there is a way of structuring, that is, a way of transition to a new model of the architecture of the world and its management, a way of redistributing the old and obtaining (conquering) new places, roles and statuses of states. War redistributes the roles and statuses of its participants, it realizes the potential for change, redistributes it, and this is its "work" and its "business".

Thus, war is the same natural state of civilization as the world, since it is only a phase of the cycle of its existence, a certain result of the world and a procedure (method) for structuring the world and establishing its new architecture, changing existing paradigms, roles and resources, including number and resources of global (regional, state) management.

War- this is a social process characterized by a purposeful struggle of the subjects of geopolitics for the approval of their winning part in a new role and status (for confirmation of the old ones), and for the possibility of their formation of a new structure and picture of the world and its subsequent management.

War, there is - purposeful organized violence of one subject of society over another.

War, is - a state of direct or retaliatory purposeful organized violence against the society that opposes it.

War implies the presence of a formed goal and plan of war, as well as real actions of the nation (society, state) for its preparation and conduct.

The world, as a state of society developing in a natural way, can be assessed as its post-war or pre-war state.

The world is purposeful only then when it is an indispensable and necessary condition for the development of a nation that plans (projects, and not only predicts) its development and existence, and, regardless of the outcome of the war, effectively uses the possibilities of its post-war state.

The actual armed struggle is only an extreme, extremely violent form of war.

The purpose of the war- not the destruction of the enemy, but the forceful redistribution of the role functions of the subjects of society (for example, states) in favor of a strong one, capable of forming its own model of post-war management of society, as well as fully enjoying the strategic effects of its victory.

Scale of the war(total or limited war) and its severity depend solely on the decisiveness of the political goals of the parties.

The features of modern war are its inclusiveness, ruthlessness and(especially for its information component), its continuity and irrecoverability of the former paradigms of the existence of the losing side.

State of Modern Warfare- this is a state of permanent, incessant, controlled "distemper", imposed by the strongest on the rest of the world and on the opposite side.

Signs of war- these are constant and permanent changes in the state of the sovereignties and potentials of the parties, during which it is found that one of them is clearly losing national (state) sovereignty and losing its (cumulative) potential (losing its positions), and the other is clearly increasing its own.

An accurate and unambiguous sign of war is the use by the parties (one of the parties) of their armed forces.

The means (weapon) of war is anything, the use of which allows you to achieve the goals of the war, or decide the outcome of its episodes.

An episode of war is any event of a war that has its own meaning, time frame and fits into the general plan of the war.

Terms of the war are no longer determined by the official (recognized by the world community) fixation of victory, as happened, for example, after the signing of the Act of Unconditional Surrender of Germany in 1945, or as a result of the signing of the Belovezhskaya Accords in 1991 (which can be considered the Act of Unconditional Surrender of the USSR as the party that lost World War III - Cold War).

In the world war going on today, the dates are not determined because the war itself has a permanent (constantly ongoing) character.

It seems important to us to introduce, into the logic and theory presented above, some conclusions from the civilizational (value) analysis of wars and military conflicts of the 20th century, and especially the aggressive wars of the West-USA "against all" of the last decade. They are as follows.

The results of the analysis show that in modern conditions the struggle of geopolitical projects, and in them the rivalry of national (civilizational) values, is no longer of a complimentary (mutually respectful) nature, but has the appearance of war.

In a modern war, its object is not so much the actual armed or economic components of the state as its national values, since only they make the nation and the state what they are in the history of mankind, their change is the main task of the war.

The main "prize" of the war is the expansion not so much of the geopolitical and economic "resource field" as the expansion of the complementary (friendly) value area of the winner, since only the mutual complementarity of nations (that is, the friendly compatibility of the value bases of their being) gives that benevolent (favorable) internal and external climate of their international (mutual) coexistence, and is the best guarantee against mutual aggression, which, in turn, improves the nation's chances for historical survival, and in the opposite case, worsens them.

In other words, the main "prize" of the war is the national mentality of the defeated side, forcibly changed by the war. If this does not happen, that is, the defeated nation does not surrender, then the initial and obvious success of the winner (every victory) is always so historically temporary and unsteady that the answer (revenge of the defeated) is inevitable.

This means that a war to change national values (in the event that the goals of the war are achieved by forcibly changing national values) always ends in the final (historical) defeat of the aggressor-initiator of the war, and this is one of the laws of war.

Thus, modern war, regardless of its scale and legal certainty and the status of the parties, is determined by a set of very precise certainties.

Firstly. The presence of the Goal, the achievement of which should lead to a new level and

the status of one of the parties to the war.

Secondly. The presence of the enemy as the opposite side of the war.

Thirdly. Violence as a means to achieve the goal of war.

Fourth. The organization of violence to ensure the achievement of the objectives of the war.

Fifth. Mobilization, concentration of resources to achieve victory in the war.

At sixth. Conducting military operations.

Seventh. Victory or defeat in the war of one of its sides.

2.3 "Winning the War"

"You are looking for victories, and I am looking for meaning in them!" - such was the remark of Field Marshal Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov to his generals before the battle of Maloyaroslavets.

The great Russian commander was aware of the importance of the meaningfulness of victory in the war, realizing that no matter how terrible the war itself is, the defeat in it is even more terrible.

Therefore, he built a war strategy in such a way that all the components of this strategy meaningfully and inevitably led to a military victory over the enemy, as the basis for the future benefits of Russia's development.

Now, the importance of considering this problem lies in the fact that without even theoretical certainty in this matter, it is impossible to formulate an answer to an absolutely doctrinal question: "What do we want from our Army, as a fighting force, if and when it will be used?", and "Is it possible to be a great power without ever defeating anyone?"

The excellent Russian military writer A. Kersnovsky defined his own, but shared by the majority of educated and humanistically educated people, view of the problem of war and victory in it as follows:

"War is not waged to kill, but to win.

The immediate goal of war is victory, the final goal is peace, restoration of harmony, which is the natural state of human society.

Everything else is excesses, and excesses are harmful. When dictating peace to a defeated enemy, one should be guided by strict moderation, not drive him to despair with excessive demands that only breed hatred, and therefore, sooner or later, new wars. To force the enemy to respect himself, and for this do not go into chauvinism, respect the national and simply human dignity of the vanquished."

Everything in this phrase is correct, but it seems to us that a professional view of the problem makes it much more difficult.

The military encyclopedic dictionary interprets the category of military victory as a military success, defeating enemy troops, achieving goals set for a battle, operation, war as a whole.

"VICTORY- a successful outcome of a war, military operation, military campaign or battle for one of the opposing sides. It is characterized by the defeat or surrender of the enemy, the complete suppression of his ability to resist.

Victory in a large-scale war acquires world-historical significance, and the memory of it becomes one of the key elements of the national self-consciousness of the victorious nation."

We share the general interpretation of the category "victory" given by V. Tsymbursky, who wrote: "In fact, victory as "achieving goals in the struggle in spite of the resistance of the other side" cannot "not be the goal of the war" in the very meaning of the concept of victory - and the meaning is invariant, lying deeper than all historically changeable interpretations.

From the height of the philosophy of war, victory in war is the (same) moment of truth, which:

fixes the realization of the potential for change in peacetime, as the realization of applications (claims) for a new role, place and status of the winning side;
means the fixation (legal consolidation or consolidation post factum) of the transition to a new quality of the old system of relations and roles of the participants in the war (or confirms the old status of the parties);
determines the beginning of a period of peacetime;
consolidates the results and experience of the war in the law and relations of the parties;
gives impetus to the progress of peacetime, giving it new areas and directions of exploration and development.

The parties put up with the results of the war and this is a victory, even if the losing side is still capable of resistance, but the "insignificance" of which is no longer taken into account in the new alignment of forces and roles.

Thus, victory can be viewed as the result of a combat interaction or other open (hidden) clash, when one side gains the upper hand over the other. Here it acts as a way of redistributing the results (effects) between the participants in the conflict.

In this case, the goal of victory is to establish new or restore old relationships between the participants, change or maintain the status quo.

Important remark

Representations by British military theorist Liddell Harth
about the essence of victory as the goal of war

“Victory in its true meaning implies that the post-war order of the world and the material situation of the people should be better than before the war.

Such a victory is possible only if a quick result is achieved or if a long effort is economically spent in accordance with the resources of the country. The end must match the means.

Having lost the favorable prospect of achieving such a victory, the prudent statesman will not miss the opportunity to make peace.

A peace brought about by a stalemate on both sides, and based on mutual recognition by each side of the strength of the adversary, is at least preferable to a peace made as a result of general attrition, and often provides stronger foundations for a reasonable peace after a war."

"The prudence to risk war for the sake of peace, rather than to expose oneself to the danger of exhaustion in war in order to achieve victory, is a conclusion contrary to habit, but reinforced by experience.

Perseverance in war will only be justified if there are good chances for a good end, that is, with the prospect of establishing a peace that compensates for the human suffering endured in the struggle.

“Speaking about the purpose of war, it is necessary to understand well the difference between political and military goals. These goals are different, but closely related, because countries wage war not for the sake of war itself, but for the sake of achieving a political goal.

A military goal is only a means to a political goal. Therefore, the military goal must be determined by the political goal, and the main condition follows - not to set unrealizable military goals.

“The purpose of war is to achieve a better, if only from your point of view, state of the world after the war. Therefore, when waging war, it is important to remember what kind of world you need.

This applies equally to aggressive countries, seeking to expand their territory, and to peace-loving countries, which are fighting for self-preservation, although the views of aggressive and peace-loving countries on what a "better state of the world" is are very different.

Victory can also be interpreted as a result that pays for the costs of achieving it.

A result measured in purely monetary terms (for example, the possibility of obtaining certain benefits from compensation, indemnities or reparations) received directly from the vanquished, or in the form of "strategic effects", as a variant of "deferred benefits", obtained from the exploitation of the politically and geo-economically formalized results of victory .

Paraphrasing the statement of the Russian military scientist and émigré A. Zalf, who formulated the basic law of armed struggle, which is known, unfortunately, only to a few specialists, we can say that - "in a war, the side that has previously produced so much useful military work (including and combat work), which is necessary to break the moral and material resistance of the enemy and force him to submit to our will.

Desiring to achieve victory, each side must clearly understand its role, tasks and capabilities not only in the war, but also in the period before and after the war, that is, in peacetime, a time longer than the time of the armed struggle of the war itself.

At the same time, there is always, explicitly or implicitly, a third party - an ally or mediator, who, as a rule, reaps its fruits, that is, the benefits and results of the redistribution of spheres of influence that has begun, gaining the opportunity to influence both parties in their own interests, etc.

At the same time, peace is understood here as the only way and condition for the fulfillment of the roles established as a result of the outcome of the war.

Victory concerns the winner, the vanquished and the ally (intermediary), as a result of the actions of the three parties, as a factor in eliminating the uncertainty that was before the victory.

At the same time, it is important to understand that in order to define "victory" as a category of realized military success, it is necessary: the conflict of the parties; the enemy as an object of military influence; standard - the criterion of victory, that is, its goal and reality, the presence of which makes it possible to unequivocally define it as the success of one of the parties; and also, the actual, legal and (or) political consolidation of this success.

The standards of victory can also be varied- this is both "depriving the enemy of the will to resist, and ensuring peace on our terms"; it is both "crushing" and "destruction" of the enemy; this and "the destruction of the opponent's claim to win" and so on.

Thus, now we can have several options for the standard of victory, and only the decision of the top political leadership of the state can and should determine which of them corresponds to our interests and capabilities in a specific historical situation, as one of the main basic doctrinal points of the national Strategy and military policy .

It is important to understand that if the standard of victory at the level of tactics is always the crushing (destruction) of the enemy, at the level of operational art it is almost always a military success proper, then at the level of strategy, that is, at the level not so much of the actual military, but at the level state interactions, victory may have another standard than crushing the enemy and depriving him of the opportunity to resist.

In general, the tactical and operational levels of a combat clash of the parties are not designed to change their political status, while victory at the strategic level always presupposes the achievement of general political goals.

At the same time, the winner takes everything, and the loser gets a chance for his national survival, remaining in a new role, in the role and quality of an object of exploitation and a territory for development.

A. Shcherbatov wrote: “Under the current conditions of international struggle, victory remains with the fighting force behind which there is a nationwide determination to win, at all costs and no matter what the cost of sacrifices. It is easy to create such a mood in the Russian people, since the state the beginning has always taken precedence over personal interests, but it is necessary that in the minds of the people there should be a clear idea of the tasks of the struggle, and for what exactly sacrifices are required from it.

The price of war and victory in it directly depend on our understanding that victory is the salvation of the nation and its future, and defeat is slavery and the death of (at least) Russian civilization.

Obviously, for this, Russia must have its own, determined by its national state idea, national and pragmatic National Strategy, which would work in wartime and peacetime and would exclude the repetition of our historical mistakes.

Now let's answer the above doctrinal questions.

1. We want and demand from our Army, as from the fighting force contained by the nation, only victory in any war, and another Army of the nation is not needed.

Russia is obliged to create, maintain, respect and provide for an Army worthy of its historical mission and greatness.

2. A great power becomes great only when, with its indisputable victories in wars, it asserts its right to greatness, world recognition, a leading role in the world and respect for its peoples, thereby asserts its right to peace, successful development and eternity in the history of mankind.

A great power must have a national ideology that ensures awareness and full support by the nation of its great power, responsibility for its historical destiny and for the formation of its national elite set for victory.

2.4 Aftermath of the war

The history of mankind confirms that the winner in the war always considers the resources of the vanquished to be his military, and therefore free, booty, and the very fact of victory in the war, as it were, a priori, implies the right to free exploitation of the population and resources of the vanquished.

The reparations and indemnities of a modern war are essentially the same - territory and resources, but already given to the winner voluntarily and practically without shedding much blood.

Now this "prize part of the war" is realized in the form of direct and delayed strategic effects obtained through the use of new operational means of war.

But in general, as a result of the war:

winners- will single-handedly manage the whole world (region), that is, all its connections, use all its resources, and build at their own discretion the world architecture they need, securing their victory (themselves, in this status and opportunities) for centuries, by creating an appropriate system of international the rights;

defeated- will be managed by the winners, will become part of the supporting subsystem of the new global governance and will pay with their national interests, resources, territory, historical past, culture and future.

The fact that war is death, blood and destruction, that is, disaster, is a thesis so clear that it does not even need to be explained, Russia, like no other power, knows this more than well in its own history.

But the consequences of the war are not limited exclusively to direct reparations and indemnities.

The most serious consequences of a war, especially a long and bloody one, is the initiation (or acceleration) of the process of degradation of a nation.

This constant and accompanying the history of mankind and Russia, the war factor was absolutely correctly noticed and formulated as early as 1922 by the outstanding Russian publicist and sociologist Pitirim Sorokin, who wrote:

"The fate of any society depends primarily on the properties of its members. A society consisting of idiots or mediocre people will never be a successful society. Give a group of devils a magnificent constitution, and yet this will not create a beautiful society out of it. And vice versa, a society consisting of from talented and strong-willed individuals, will inevitably create more perfect forms of community life.It is easy to understand from this that for the historical fate of any society it is far from indifferent: what qualitative elements in it have increased or decreased in such and such a period of time.A careful study of the phenomena of prosperity and death of entire peoples shows that one of the main reasons for them was precisely a sharp qualitative change in the composition of the population in one direction or another.

The changes experienced by the population of Russia in this respect are typical of all major wars and revolutions. The latter have always been an instrument of negative selection, producing top-to-bottom selection, i.e., killing the best elements of the population and leaving the worst elements to live and multiply, i.e. people of the second and third grade,

And in this case, we lost mainly elements: a) the most biologically healthy, b) energetically able-bodied, c) more strong-willed, gifted, morally and mentally developed psychologically.

"The last wars have finished us off. It is possible to restore the destroyed factories and factories, villages and cities, in a number of years the pipes will smoke again, the fields will turn green, hunger will disappear - all this is fixable and replaceable. But consequences of the selection of the general(World War I. A.V.) and the civil war are irreversible and irreplaceable. The real payments on their bills are in the future, when generations of surviving "human slush" grow up. "By their fruits you shall know them"...

Our folk wisdom only confirms this bitter conclusion "in a war, the best die first."

In general, this means that the war is leading to:

the death of the best citizens and passionaries of the nation;
the triumph of human slush (P. Sorokin);
changing the sign of patriotism from "national greatness" to "national worthlessness and imitation", that is, "patriotism of national humiliation";
the degeneration of the nation;
the loss of the historical place, role and purpose of the nation in the history of mankind and its historical oblivion.

This list and the list could go on almost endlessly.

Perhaps this is precisely the most terrible consequences and the most profound strategic consequences of wars, but do all wars lead to such results and to such consequences?

We believe that practically everything, since any kind of "loss" is an accurate sign of war and its inevitable factor.

We will touch on this issue in more detail in the section on the laws of war, but we will say right away that the onset of the historically disastrous consequences of war for a nation directly depend both on the duration and severity of the war, especially when large-scale forms of armed struggle are used in it, and on the goals of the war itself. war, especially on the level of morality of its goals, as well as on where, that is, in which theaters of war the war is being waged.

2.5 "Strategic Effects"

The most important category of the theory of war and national strategy is the concept of "strategic effects", by which we mean the onset of long-term positive changes in the status, capabilities and conditions of the existence of the nation, resulting from the implementation of the goals (including intermediate ones) of the national strategy, stages and episodes of the war .

In practice, it is precisely the positive strategic effects of war that are its goals.

The strategic effects obtained as a result of victory in the war, directly and quickly and / or slowly and indirectly, lead to an improvement in the quality of life of the nation, the strengthening of the role and place of the nation in the world, improve the general conditions for the survival of the nation and create the prerequisites for its historical eternity, and so on.

In the field of the economics of war, strategic effects can consist of:

stimulation of national science and economy by their own militarism and internal mobilizations;
obtaining direct economic benefits from receiving a new mass of state (international) orders, "for war" and "for reconstruction";
from the direct "benefits of the war", for example, reparations, confiscations, indemnities, the seizure of new resource spaces, their monopoly and uncontrolled use;
obtaining indirect economic benefits from the geopolitical transformation of the territory and spaces of the defeated in the war, for example, the control of resource and transit zones, changes in the economic balance in the region and the creation of a "new internal market";
obtaining direct and indirect economic benefits from the very fact of "eliminating" a competitor";
benefiting from the new international and regional division of labor, as well as from the management of resource flows;
creating conditions for "new investment attractiveness" and so on.

Here, it seems appropriate to us, to recall that there are also negative effects of war. This means that in the event of a defeat in a war, the nation becomes a "donor" of the winner, a field for the realization of his strategic effects, which may affect its historical fate - curtailment.

3. On the national strategy of Russia

The general foundations of the theory of war dictate their own conditions and framework for the formation of the national strategy of Russia, as a theory, practice and art of government

In this regard, the basic concepts of the National Strategy are new strategic categories

Strategic Matrix of the Nation
The people as a position
The ideal, as the meaning of being, the image of the future of Russia desired by the nation, as a goal
national strategy and the basis of the position of the people
The nation's own higher internal and external determinations as
foundations of its strategic position
The strategic line of conduct of the nation
Maximum expansion line
"Peace" and "war" time
national space
"National Interest" and "National Security" - a new reading
The information sphere of the nation and its security

Dear colleagues!

Of course, it is not possible to cover the entire general theory of war and the national strategy of Russia at one round table, and we did not set ourselves such a goal. But the general outline of the tasks, in this regard, they tried to bring to you.

However, today we have begun a process of rethinking the theory of statecraft, which can lead us to concrete, new and effective state practices that will affect the success of our country.

Thank you for attention.

5 Creveld Martin van. Martin van Creveld / The Transformation of War. Per. from English. - M.: Albina Business Books, 2005. (Series "Military Thought")

6 POSTULATE(from lat. postulatum - requirement) -
1) a statement (judgment) accepted within the framework of any scientific theory as true, although not provable by its means, and therefore playing the role of an axiom in it.
2) The general name for the axioms and derivation rules of any calculus. Modern encyclopedia. 2000.
POSTULATE, A position or principle that is not self-evident, but is taken as truth without evidence and serves as the basis for building some kind of scientific theory, assumption. (For example, the postulates of Euclidean geometry). Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary. D.N. Ushakov. 1935-1940.
POSTULATE- A judgment accepted without proof as a starting point in the construction of a scientific theory .. Encyclopedia of Sociology, 2009

7 AXIOM(Greek axioma), a position accepted without logical proof due to direct persuasiveness; the true starting point of the theory.
Great Encyclopedia of Cyril and Methodius. - M.: SURE DVD. 2003

8 This phenomenon is considered in the work "Theses on the logic of ethnogenesis and passionarity of the main modern geopolitical players, and the imperatives of Russia's national strategy" Vladimirov AI Abstracts on the strategy of Russia. - M.: "Publishing house of YuKEA". 2004, p. 36 In this work, "Lev Gumilyov and the National Strategy of Russia" are given in the Appendix to the Fourth Chapter.

9 HYPOTHESIS(Greek hypothesis - basis, assumption), a hypothetical judgment about the regular (causal) connection of phenomena; form of development of science. Great Encyclopedia of Cyril and Methodius. - M.: SURE DVD. 2003

10 According to Heidegger, world wars are "world-wars" (Welt-Kriege), "a preliminary form of eliminating the distinction between war and peace", which is inevitable, since the "world" has become a non-peace due to the abandonment of what is by the truth of being. In other words, in an age when the will to power rules, the world ceases to be a world.
"War has become a kind of that extermination of existence that continues in peace ... War does not go into the world of its former kind, but into a state where the military is no longer perceived as military, and the peaceful becomes meaningless and meaningless."
Heidegger M. Overcoming metaphysics // Heidegger M. Time and Being / Per. with him. V. V. Bibikhina. M.: Respublika, 1993. p.138
The term "peaceful military existence" was first introduced into Russian political science by the outstanding Russian military historian Ignat Stepanovich Danilenko.

18 V. Tsymbursky notes: “At the political level, a new standard of victory is formalized in the idea of the surrender of the defeated regime, often with its overthrow by the winner. In 1856, the St. if the enemy is "deprived of ... of any ability to resist our actions," and strategic, when "we will extract from this situation all possible benefits for us," including "we will change the form of government of a hostile state." Military encyclopedic lexicon. Vol. 10. St. Petersburg ., 1856.

19 Shcherbatov A. State Defense of Russia. - M.: 1912. (Fragments). Based on the Russian military collection. Issue 19. State Defense of Russia. Imperatives of Russian military classics. - M.: Military University. Russian way. 2002.

20 Sorokin P. A. The current state of Russia. 1. Changes in the size and composition of the population. Polis No. 3 1991

21 Sorokin P. A. The influence of war on the composition of the population, its properties and social organization // The Economist.-1922.- No. 1.- P. 99-101

On June 14, 2012, the All-Russian Scientific Conference "Global Trends in the Development of the World" was held at the Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The participants identified the main global trends in world development in the coming decades, including the redistribution of players in the global energy market, new industrialization, intensive migration, the concentration of information resources, and the increase in global crises. The main problems facing humanity were also named, including maintaining the food balance, the need to build a global system for managing the world (world legislative, executive and judicial authorities).

Keywords: globalization, global crisis, economic cycles, management, post-industrialism, energy.

The All-Russian conference “Global trends of the world development” was held on June 14, 2012, at the Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The participants defined the main global trends of the world development for the next decades among which are redistribution on the world’s energy market, reindustrialization, intensive migration, centralization of the mass-media, and more frequent world crises. The most important problems of the future globalizing world were also defined including the maintenance of the global food supply balance, organization of the global management system (world legislative, executive and judiciary powers).

keywords: globalization, world crisis, economic cycles, governance, postindustrialism, energy.

On June 14, 2012, the All-Russian Scientific Conference "Global Trends in the Development of the World" was held in Moscow at the Institute for Scientific Information on Social Sciences (INION) of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The organizers were the Center for Problem Analysis and State Management Design at the UN RAS, the Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the RAS, INION RAS, the Institute of Economics of the RAS, the Institute of Philosophy of the RAS, the Faculty of Global Processes and the Faculty of Political Science of Lomonosov Moscow State University.

The conference was attended by Director of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences Ruslan Grinberg, Director of the Center for Problem Analysis and State Management Design Stepan Sulakshin, foreign member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Askar Akaev, First Vice President of the Russian Philosophical Society Alexander Chumakov and others.

Taking into account the unfolding process of globalization, the relevance of the topic, as stressed by the chairman of the conference, head of the Department of Public Policy of Moscow State University and scientific director of the Center for Problem Analysis and State Management Design Vladimir Yakunin, does not even need special justification. The world is uniting, ties between countries are becoming stronger and closer, and mutual influence is becoming more and more inevitable. This is felt especially strongly today, during the global financial and economic crisis. A vivid example suggests itself thanks to one coincidence: the conference took place literally on the eve of parliamentary elections in Greece, the result of which actually determined whether the country would remain in the eurozone or leave it. And this, in turn, would have an impact both directly and indirectly in various and far from always predictable ways on the entire world that has become global and, ultimately, on each of its inhabitants.

Vladimir Yakunin: "One of the biggest dangers is the global domination of the consumer society"

At the beginning of his report "Global Trends in Modern World Development", which opened the plenary session of the conference, Vladimir Yakunin, head of the Department of Public Policy of Moscow State University, listed the main directions on which the shape of the future world depends:

· development of energy, including the development of alternative energy sources;

· the possibility of "new industrialism" (and global civilizational conflicts, conflicts of the real and virtual economy, as well as the possibility of neo-industrialism);

Maintaining the food balance in the world, providing the population of the planet with drinking water;

• migration and changes in the composition of the population;

the movement of information flows.

Most of Vladimir Yakunin's speech was devoted to the energy theme. Speaking about energy as one of the main factors of the future, he stressed that we are in a period of changing energy patterns: the oil pattern, apparently, is already beginning to give way to the gas one. The oil supply is finite, and although fossil fuels are predicted to remain the main source of primary energy in the coming decades and will provide 3/4 of the world's energy needs by 2030, alternative energy sources are already being developed today.

According to experts, non-recoverable energy resources today account for at least 1/3 of all hydrocarbon reserves, the volume of non-recoverable gas is 5 times greater than the world's recoverable gas reserves. These resources will account for 45% of all consumption in a few decades. By 2030, "non-traditional" gas will take 14% of the market.

In this regard, the role of new technologies is becoming increasingly important: countries that can develop and apply appropriate technologies will take the lead.

It is important to foresee how Russia's position will change in connection with this process.

Some of our politicians so actively called the country an energy power that they believed it even abroad: foreign colleagues began to build a system to counter the superpower. However, this is nothing more than a rhetorical formula that has little in common with reality.

Qatar, Iran and Russia will apparently remain traditional suppliers. But the United States, which is actively developing new technologies (in particular, shale gas production), may become not importers, but exporters of hydrocarbon raw materials as early as 2015, and this will certainly have an impact on the world market and may shake Russia's position.

China, traditionally a "coal" country, by 2030 will depend on oil imports by no less than 2/3. The same can be said about India.

The obvious, according to Vladimir Yakunin, is the need for a radical change in the management of the energy system, the introduction of an international system for regulating energy production.

“I avoid the word “globalism” because it has acquired a clear political connotation. When we say “globalism”, we mean that the world has become unified, has shrunk thanks to information flows and world trade. And for politicians, this is a well-established system of dominance in their own interests,” Vladimir Yakunin emphasized.

Then the speaker described another major factor that will influence the face of the world - the new industrialism. He recalled David Cameron's recent speeches: at very representative meetings, the British prime minister repeatedly returned to the idea of reindustrialization of Great Britain. Thus, despite the fact that Britain is associated with the Anglo-Saxon model of the world, which postulated the idea of post-industrialism, the British establishment itself is beginning to understand the failure of this theory underlying the neoliberal approach. Against the backdrop of slogans that material production is losing its role in the economy, harmful production is being withdrawn to developing countries, where centers of industrial development are being formed. Vladimir Yakunin stressed that there is no percentage decline in material production.

The theory of post-industrialism is the rationale for the practice of a new redistribution of wealth in exchange for virtual values.

Now these values, generated by the giant financial sector, are increasingly divorced from real values. According to some data, the ratio of the real and virtual economy is 1:10 (the volume of the real economy is estimated at 60 trillion dollars, the volume of paper money, derivatives, etc., is estimated at 600 trillion dollars).

The speaker noted that the distance between crises is shrinking. It was also said about the model of crises developed at the Center for Problem Analysis and State-Administrative Design, according to which - at least in a mathematical perspective - a continuous state of crisis will soon come (Fig. 1).

Rice. 1. Zero-point forecast for the global dollar pyramid

Speaking about changes in the world population, Yakunin mentioned some significant trends, in particular the change in the ratio of Catholics and Muslims. The ratio of the number of working population and pensioners in 50 years will change from today's 5:1 to 2:1.

Finally, one of the most striking global trends is the colossal monopolization of the information sector. If in 1983 there were 50 media corporations in the world, then in less than 20 years their number has decreased to six.

Vladimir Yakunin noted that now, with the help of information technology, some countries can be classified as "losers", while others can be made bearers of world values that are being imposed on all of humanity.

And yet the main problem of the global world, according to Vladimir Yakunin, is not food or water, but the loss of morality, the threat of relegating people's interests exclusively to material goods. The establishment of the global dominance of the values of the consumer society is one of the greatest dangers of the future world.

Ruslan Grinberg: “Right-liberal philosophy has gone out of fashion”

The plenary session was continued by Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Director of the Institute of Economics of the Academy of Sciences (IE RAS) Ruslan Grinberg. In the report “World Trends and Chances of Eurasian Integration”, the scientist stated “four returns”, which we are now witnessing.

The first return is the centralization and concentration of capital. According to the speaker, literally the same processes of capital concentration, mergers and acquisitions are taking place now as in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. The crisis of Keynesianism and the triumphant march of liberalism brought to life the formula small is beautiful - “small is beautiful”. But this, the director of the Institute of Economics believes, was only a deviation from the general trend: in fact, giants rule the world. in this context, the discussion in Russia about the benefits of state corporations is typical.

The second return is the return of the material economy. Here Ruslan Grinberg referred to the previous report, in which Vladimir Yakunin mentioned the speeches of David Cameron.

“The financial sector ceases to be a goal and again becomes a means of economic development,” the scientist states.

The third is the return of cycles. It seemed that the cycles were overcome, the world developed a serious arsenal of actions against cyclical development, especially the monetary policy within the framework of monetarism - here it must be praised - worked very effectively, Ruslan Grinberg admits.

However, the cycles returned. There is a discussion about the nature of the current crisis. “As president of the Kondratiev Foundation, I should have stood by our scientist to the death, but I agree more with Simon Kuznets's theory,” the speaker says.

“I lean towards a simple theory of fat and lean years,” says the scientist. - After 130 months of rapid growth in the West, the "golden age" of the economy, the fashion for deregulation came an investment pause. It is unlikely that it is connected with the transition to a new way of life.

Finally, the fourth return is the return of the imperative of global regulation. The global economy requires a global regulator, Ruslan Grinberg is convinced, otherwise it cannot develop further. Here a problem arises: there are abstract talks about global peace, but countries do not want to lose their national sovereignties.

Speaking about potential conflicts, the director of the Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, noted that the shrinking of the middle class, which is taking place on a global scale, could become the basis for them.

As a result of the victory of liberalism, a middle class arose, which led, as it were, to a classless society. Now there is a return to classes again, a "revolt" of the middle class. This can be seen with particular force in Russia, Ruslan Grinberg is convinced. A characteristic feature of this "uprising" is dissatisfaction with the authorities, but the absence of a real project. This paves the way for right-wing and left-wing populists to win elections.

It seems that 500 years of the dominance of the Euro-American civilization are coming to an end, Ruslan Grinberg believes. In this regard, China attracts special attention. How will he behave?

“We know that America can make very big mistakes, but we know how it behaves, but we don’t know how China will behave. This creates good conditions for Russia, which can become a balancing force in the world,” Grinberg says.

In conclusion, the speaker stated that right-liberal philosophy has gone out of fashion: Obama and Hollande, as well as other examples, confirm that the welfare state is returning.

There is a linear increase and repeated “flips” in the prices of oil and other global commodities, and the distance between these “flips” is shrinking. After analyzing the emergence of global financial crises, the "comb" of crises (Fig. 2), the Center's staff came to the conclusion that none of the existing mathematical models of random distribution explains their cyclicity.

Rice. 2."Comb" of significant financial and economic crises

Meanwhile, the inter-crisis interval is subject to regularity. For example, the staff of the Center built a three-phase model of the crisis and described a theoretical model of a controlled financial crisis, which, apparently, has been operating for 200 years.

Having built a generalized cycle of market conditions and tried to phase the cycle of world crises with it, the employees came to the conclusion that there is no convincing synchronism (Fig. 3).

Rice. 3. A generalized cycle of market conditions and world crises phasing with it. Lack of convincing synchronicity

Crises are not associated with cyclical development (at least, up to historical statistics). They are connected with acquisitiveness, with the interests of the group of beneficiaries, Stepan Sulakshin is convinced. The US Federal Reserve, which issues dollars, is a complex supranational structure woven into the political mechanism. The beneficiaries' club influences all countries of the world. The US itself is actually a hostage to this superstructure.

It exists due to the fact that material support is ten times lower than the monetary equivalent. The appreciation of the dollar in national and regional currencies gives beneficiaries the opportunity to receive more real benefits.

The fact that the Fed and the US are beneficiaries is proved by the magnitude of the damage caused by crises to the GDP of different countries (Fig. 4).

Rice. 4. Comparison of damage from global financial crises for different countries of the world in terms of GDP

At the end of the plenary session, the presentation of a collective monograph by the staff of the Center "Political Dimension of World Financial Crises" took place, in which a huge amount of factual material was analyzed and a controlled model of crisis phenomena was described in detail.

Rice. five. Comparison of the damage from global financial crises for different countries of the world in terms of GDP, inflation, unemployment and investment

Alexander Chumakov: "Humanity is on the verge of a global war of all against all"

First Vice-President of the Russian Philosophical Society Alexander Chumakov made a presentation "Global World Governance: Realities and Prospects".

According to him, among the main tasks of modern humanity, the need to form global governance mechanisms is becoming central, since any social system in the absence of governance lives according to the laws of self-organization, where various elements of such a system seek to occupy a dominant (more advantageous) position by any means. An annihilating struggle logically ends the conflict unless one of the parties recognizes itself as defeated, with all the ensuing consequences. Starting to consider the problem, the speaker clarified the concepts that play a key role in solving the problem.

Since “the modern global world is immanently connected with globalization”, it is important to emphasize that there are serious discrepancies in the understanding of this phenomenon even in the expert community, not to mention the broad public consciousness. A. Chumakov understands globalization as "primarily an objective historical process, where the subjective factor sometimes plays a fundamental role, but is not the initial one." That is why, speaking of global management, it is necessary to correctly define the object and subject of management. At the same time, if everything is more or less clear with the object (this is the entire world community, which by the end of the 20th century formed a single system), then with the subject - the controlling principle - the situation is more complicated. Here, as was emphasized, it is important to get rid of the illusion that the world community can be controlled from any one center or through any one structure, organization, etc. In addition, it is necessary to distinguish between regulation and management, which involves clarifying these key concepts. Further, the dialectics of the correlation of these concepts was shown and examples of their work at the level of nation-states were given.

Since the task of organizing the management of a megasystem has become acute for humanity, the central question is how such management will become possible. In the speaker's opinion, here the historically justified principle of separation of powers into three branches should be taken as the basis: legislative, executive and judicial. And it is in this context that we can and should talk not only about the world government (as an executive power), but also about the totality of all the necessary structures that would represent the legislative power (the world parliament), the judiciary and everything else related to upbringing, education , encouragement and coercion at this level.

However, due to the colossal differentiation of the world community and the egoistic nature of man, the near future on the planet, according to A. Chumakov, will most likely be subordinated to the natural course of events, which is fraught with serious social conflicts and upheavals.

Further, the work of the conference continued within the framework of the poster section, where several dozen participants from different cities of Russia presented their work. As Stepan Sulakshin emphasized, the poster section of the conference is very extensive, and this is extremely important, since it is there that live, direct communication of the participants takes place. Fascinating and sometimes controversial reports could be listened to by visiting one of the four sections of the conference:

· “Humanity in megahistory and the universe: the meaning of the “project””;

· "History of the global world";

· "Transition processes in the world";

· Threats to the world.

So, the main global trends in the development of the world have been announced, options for action have been proposed. Summing up the results of the conference, one cannot, however, say that the participants of the plenary session and sections have always managed to achieve unanimity or at least stable mutual understanding. This only confirms how complex the problems of the global world are, which humanity will inevitably have to solve. their discussion is necessary, attempts to see the challenges and set goals are extremely important in themselves. Therefore, it is difficult to overestimate the significance of the conference, in which scientists and experts managed to "synchronize watches".

As a result of the conference, it is planned to publish a collection of works.

In recent decades, some qualitatively new trends and the problems of social, economic, political and cultural development of a global character that arise on this basis have manifested themselves especially clearly. Let's take a closer look at some of them.

Postmodern era? IN Foreign (and partly domestic) social and humanitarian literature is now increasingly discussing the problem of the so-called postmodern. What is it? The term itself, according to many authors, was originally formed in the framework of the latest cultural studies (especially in the field of theory and practice of architecture). Postmodernism was considered to be a specific style of creating and studying works of art, especially architecture. It was opposed to the former modernist styles that existed in these areas of culture in the 19th and most of the 20th centuries, such as, for example, futurism, cubism, constructivism, etc. concrete blocks, which has spread in many countries. It is no coincidence that one of the postmodern theorists C. Jencks argued that the architecture of modernism died in St. Louis, Missouri, on July 15, 1972, when "the shameful Pruitt-Igoe building, or rather several flat blocks" ceased to exist after an explosion with dynamite .

Postmodern in its sociological understanding is very difficult to define due to the significant uncertainty of the term itself. At the same time, attention should also be paid to the fact that differences in the understanding of processes are reflected in the variants of the term: postmodern, postmodernism, postmodernization. Without going into the subtleties of word usage, we note only what seems to be the most important. The general meaning, in short, boils down to the fact that these terms are trying to designate some features of social reality, “social conditions” (J.F. Lyotard) that developed in the second half of the 20th century, as well as features of understanding this reality and the social activity of people in new conditions. They also emphasize that postmodern is a change in the very direction of development of modern societies.

One of the first to use the term "postmodern" was in the 1950s. 20th century English historian A. Toynbee in the famous "Study of History". From his point of view, the period of time from the Renaissance to the end of the 19th century was a period classical modern - industrialization, seemingly endless scientific and technological progress, faith in the power of the human mind, science, the possibility of a rational arrangement of society. However, since the last quarter of the XIX century. moods of pessimism, tendencies of irrationality, indeterminism and anarchy, which Toynbee associates with the advent of "mass society" And " mass culture". This period, which continues to this day, he calls the period of postmodernity - the period of "anxious time" for Western civilization, its social disintegration, the destruction of age-old values. (Recall that Sorokin characterizes approximately the same period as the period of the beginning of the crisis of sensory culture.)

R. Inglegart, J. F. Lyotard, J. Baudrillard, C. Jencks, M. Foucault and a number of other thinkers can be considered, to one degree or another, as researchers and supporters of postmodernity.

American sociologist Inglegart the process of postmodernization opposes the process modernization. From his point of view, over the last quarter of the 20th century "there has been a change in the main direction of development." The term “postmodernization” itself contains an important conceptual meaning, according to which modernization “is no longer the most recent event in the modern history of mankind, and social transformations are developing today in a completely different direction.” At the stage of postmodernism, there is a transition to a more humane society, in which more space is given to independence, diversity and self-expression of the individual, society moves away from standard bureaucratic functionalism, from passion for science and economic growth, and places more emphasis on aesthetic and human moments.

One of the most developed concepts is put forward by the French author Lyotard. From his point of view, the inhabitants of developed Western societies have already from the beginning of the 60s. 20th century live in a postmodern world, which should be understood as a fundamental " social condition" these societies, and not only as a new creative style in art, including architecture. The social condition, in particular, consists in the collapse of the two most important foundations of previous eras, which in reality turned out to be myths. He refers to them "myth of liberation" And "myth of truth". The "myth of liberation" means the collapse of hopes for the creation with the help of science of a society in which a person would feel free, liberated individual, a creative person. In fact, the idea of a free man was destroyed by the growing repressiveness of Western society, world wars, the presence of concentration camps and gulags, the invention of weapons of mass destruction of people. Faith in the possibility of knowing one great Truth that could captivate and inspire the masses of people was also lost - both under the influence of unfulfilled social hopes and under the growing influence of relativistic theories of social cognition (in particular, the theories of T. Kuhn, P. Feyerabend) . The general result of a massive loss of confidence in the basic foundations of the modern period has been that the population of developed Western societies lives in a world in which there are no guarantees either regarding the long-term results of their activities, or regarding the reliability and truth of their knowledge. Intellectual activity is largely transformed into "language games".

characterizes postmodern in a slightly different way Jenks. This is an era, he argues, when no orthodoxy can be accepted without self-reflection and irony, and no tradition can have validity in the eyes of the masses of people. This situation is partly due to what is called information explosion, a new social organization of knowledge, the formation of a global communication network. Almost every city dweller with the help of a computer and the Internet can get information from virtually anywhere in the world. “Pluralism, this “-ism” of our time, is a great problem, but also a great opportunity: where Every Man becomes a Cosmopolitan and Every Woman a Free Individual, confusion and unrest become the leading states of mind, and ersatz the general form of mass culture. ". This is the price we pay for the postmodern era, just as monotony, dogmatism and poverty were the price for the modern era. But it is already “impossible to return to the old culture and industrial form of society, to impose a fundamentalist religion or even a modernist orthodoxy” .

Thus, if we try to summarize the main provisions of postmodern theorists and analysts, we can say the following:

postmodern is characterized as a special period, an “epoch” in the recent history of society, primarily Western, some (Lyotar and others) specify: Western capitalist society;

from the point of view of "social conditions", i.e., social content, this period follows the period of modernity - classical capitalism and industrialization and covers the last decades of the 19th and a significant part of the 20th century;

"social conditions" of postmodernity are usually characterized by a combination of conflicting trends, the dominance of social and cultural pluralism, a variety of styles, variability, transience of orders, the absence of long-term and firmly established guidelines;

postmodern is also a special view of society, according to which it is unlawful to single out and isolate as relatively independent spheres of the economy, politics, ideology, culture, etc. Society is an integrated integrity in which all elements are organically interconnected;

the social sciences find themselves in a critical position, because as a result of the dominance of cultural pluralism and epistemological relativism, the legitimacy of the truths discovered by the sciences is eroded. There is a loss of confidence in the validity of science, the reality of its content, at least in terms of formulating more or less long-term tendencies and trends.

It should be emphasized that the theories of postmodernism met with a far from unambiguous reaction in the sociological community in different countries. A significant part of sociologists subject them to fairly sharp criticism. Of course, it is impossible not to admit that the concepts of postmodern, so to speak, capture some important features of the processes of information, technological, social and cultural development, which concern primarily developed Western societies. Apparently, there is reason to talk about significant differences in the very nature, causes, driving forces and social consequences at the stage of industrialization (modernization) of society and at the subsequent stage, which many authors call postmodernization. Naturally, these differences require special and detailed study.

Information revolution. Indeed, in the second half of the XX century. and especially in recent decades, significant changes have taken place in the world that change not only the social image of the world, but the very direction of socio-historical development in the most developed countries and build a new hierarchy of factors in this development. One of them is connected with the informatization and computerization of modern society and the profound social changes resulting from them. These shifts are called by a number of authors information (information technology) revolution, moreover - a revolution that lays the foundation for a new type of society - information society. What is the essence of this revolution?

In purely technical terms, the following elements of the information revolution are usually distinguished:

the invention and widespread use of television;

the spread of not only wired, but also radiotelephone communications;

the invention and widespread use of optical cable;

the invention of the computer, the personal computer and the widespread computerization of modern society;

the use of artificial Earth satellites for the purposes of radio and telecommunications;

spread of the worldwide Internet system.

Each of these elements separately, of course, is a great achievement of modern civilization, scientific and technical thought. But these elements, combined into a single system that “entangles” the entire planet with single, unified information networks, create a qualitatively new situation that has the most significant social consequences. Some researchers consider it possible to talk about the formation of a special infospheres(information sphere) along with the biosphere. The infosphere is presented as a continuation and concretization of the ideas of V. I. Vernadsky about the noosphere.

What are the social consequences of the information revolution? It must be said frankly that these consequences have not yet been sufficiently studied. At the same time, some conclusions (albeit in the most general form) can be drawn already now.

First: shaping global unified information system, connecting almost all civilized points of our planet. Information obtained at one point, for example in Europe, can be almost instantly delivered and received at any other point - not only in Europe itself, but also in America, Africa, Australia, even on the remote islands of the Pacific Ocean. Under these conditions, the question of the availability of information takes on a fundamentally different character. The recipient or user does not need to move around to receive it. Information can be delivered to your home or local office upon request at any time. As a result, the social interaction of people, social communication acquire new features that were not there before. In particular, the interaction of individuals, as well as entire groups of people, social organizations can be carried out directly across borders, without the mandatory participation of the state in this process, as it was before. We can say that the information revolution, as it were, "compresses" space and time into a new social reality.

Second: arise Information Technology. Information technology lines for the creation and dissemination of information operate not only on a global, national or regional scale. From now on, they permeate literally all spheres of human life - economics, politics, culture, ministries, corporations, firms, banks, etc. business and management units. Under certain conditions, it is information, knowledge, human ingenuity, imagination and good will that become the main resource for development. And this applies both to entire states and to individual organizational structures. The Conference of Nobel Laureates (Paris, 1988) in their Declaration stated: "Scientific knowledge is one of the forms of power, therefore both individuals and nations should have equal access to it."

Third: the information revolution is an essential factor in the globalization of all spheres of life of modern society - economic, political, cultural. (See below for more on this.)

Fourth: information and knowledge are becoming the most important strategic resource and factor in the development of modern societies. Societies with a more developed information resource have greater opportunities for the rapid development of science-intensive and resource-saving technologies in the economy and thereby develop their economy faster, produce competitive products and, on this basis, increase national and individual wealth. In this regard, the problem of the social significance of education, especially higher education, and the training of highly qualified personnel, is presented in a new light. The most socially demanded professions are related to activities in the infosphere, its maintenance, development, etc.

Fifth: The information revolution has a significant impact on the social stratification of society. Employment is sharply increasing in the information sphere - in the sphere of production, transfer, storage of knowledge and information. Possession of knowledge, information, competence, high qualifications are becoming the most important factors of vertical mobility, raising the social status of personnel. The workers employed in the infosphere began to form the largest group of workers. So, if in the USA back in the 1970s. they accounted for 47% of the total civilian labor force, while industrial workers accounted for about 28, service workers - 22, agricultural workers - 3%, by now the number of information workers in the United States (and several other countries) has already exceeded the number of employees in all other areas combined.

Globalization. This concept denotes the processes of formation of more or less unified global systems in the economy, technology, information, politics, etc. As a result of such processes, countries and peoples become not only interconnected, but also interdependent. Globalism - it is a new awareness of the whole world as a single, common "place of residence". It is precisely this quality that globalization radically differs from the system of international relations and relations that has existed for many centuries.

Also in Human Development Report 1999, prepared by UN experts, globalization at the present stage was characterized by the following aspects:

the emergence of global currency and capital markets;

the emergence of new tools (means) of globalization, such as the Internet, cell phones, information networks, including satellite television;

the emergence of new actors (organizations) such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), multinational corporations, worldwide networks of non-governmental organizations (NGOs);

formation of new rules and norms. These are international agreements on trade, services, intellectual property, etc., which are binding on national governments.

Indeed, a global economy interdependent around the world is being formed, and numerous multinational corporations and large companies (for example, the famous McDonald's), which have branches in many countries, and seek to sell their products or services throughout the world, are a vivid indicator of it. the world. In other words, globalization means, as the Nobel Prize-winning economist M. Friedman, the ability to produce a product anywhere, using resources from anywhere, by companies located anywhere in the world, for sale anywhere.

It is obvious that globalization, as one of the leading trends in the modern world, stimulates growth and progress in the economy, technology, information systems, and carries a huge potential for social (and cultural) changes. It forms in different countries a new, largely unified perception of reality, a new lifestyle for people, new values, and thus can help bring developing countries up to the level of modern civilization. It is in this sense that the Russian authorities (as before the Soviet authorities) are in favor of joining the country to the world globalization processes.

But at the same time, unmanaged, uncontrolled globalization brings a lot of the negative consequences especially for developing countries. Many researchers pay attention, first of all, to the fact that globalization does not lead to equalization of the levels of economic, technological, informational development of different countries. Moreover, inequality in these relations between countries not only persists, but in many respects increases. In the 1999 Human Development Report mentioned, the following data are given: the income gap between a fifth of the world's population living in the richest countries and a fifth living in the poorest countries was expressed in 1997 by a ratio of 74: 1, while in In 1990 the ratio was 60:1, and in 1960 it was 30:1. This means that the income gap between the richest and poorest countries has increased by almost two and a half times in less than 40 years. Particularly large (and growing) is the gap between knowledge-intensive industries and spending on research and development.

But, perhaps, the greatest concern is caused by globalization directly in the sphere of social relations and in the sphere of culture. The expansion of unified patterns of behavior, foreign cultural customs, values, norms threatens the very existence of many original national and regional cultures, and therefore often causes an active negative reaction, rejection, open and numerous demonstrations of protest by the so-called anti-globalists.

The main question that arises when considering the processes of globalization is the question of whether these processes will lead to the unification of the world community of people and the global unification of culture? Apparently, it cannot be denied that such a danger exists. But at the same time, there are objective boundaries, the limits of such a unified globalization. They lie in the stability of the social structures of different peoples, their historical culture, national traditions, and language. The practical task is not to stop, to prohibit the processes of globalization. It is impossible to do this, and it is not necessary. It consists in skillfully combining the benefits of globalization with local and regional socio-cultural norms and institutions in order to ensure more effective management of scientific and technological progress at the local, regional, national and global levels.

The imperatives of sustainable development. In the last 15-20 years, among scientists of various specialties, as well as in political circles in many countries of the world, the issue of the need to develop international and national strategies for sustainable development has been increasingly discussed. The fact is that the scale of modern production, socio-political and even everyday activities of people within the world community are so impressive that they give rise to more and more global contradictions and new crisis situations that pose cardinal problems for governments, scientists, and the entire population of the Earth about the possibilities continued existence of human civilization. Of these, two groups of problems, closely related to each other, are of particular importance. The first is the impact on nature of technogenic and anthropogenic factors, which leads to a global environmental crisis. Mankind, primarily industrialized countries, absorb such a quantity of mineral natural resources, especially non-renewable ones (oil, gas, coal, etc.), that the continuation of production activities in the future in the same volumes and with established industrial methods leads not only to the depletion of these resources, but threatens the existence of nature itself, primarily the existence of the biosphere.

The second is the growing inequality in the economic, scientific, technical, political, intellectual spheres between industrialized countries, the so-called "golden billion", and other countries, as well as the growing socio-economic inequality within individual countries.

In recent decades, such dangers for all mankind have become recognized already at the level of governments, politicians from different countries, international political and economic organizations. This was manifested in the convening of a number of international conferences, forums, meetings of the leaders of some countries, at which the current situation was discussed. Thus, in 1992, the UN Conference on Environment and Development was held in Rio de Janeiro at the level of heads of state and government, which pointed out the problems facing the world community and the need for a global sustainable development (sustainable development; It should be immediately noted that, from our point of view, the Russian translation of this expression as “sustainable development” is unsuccessful. The meaning of the original English concept is self-sustaining development, i.e., the development of society, as if consistent with the state and development of the environment, nature, as a result of which society and nature should be considered as a single integral system). The President of the Conference, President of Brazil Fernando Collor de Mello, defined the objectives of the conference as follows: “We have gathered to ensure progress in solving a common task based on two fundamental provisions - development and the environment. We accept the historical necessity and the moral obligation to form a new model (of development), in which the well-being of all and the preservation of the environment would necessarily be synonymous ... We cannot ensure the environmental safety of the planet in a socially unjust world.

The imperative of sustainable development, its awareness in science has evolved over a number of decades. In this regard, in the scientific literature they call the concept noosphere outstanding domestic scientist academician V. I. Vernadsky, well-known reports of representatives of the Club of Rome and some other currents of philosophical and socio-economic thought. Vernadsky's concept has a philosophical and general scientific character, and its essence, in short, is as follows: the human mind now reaches such power that, by learning the laws of nature, developing technique and technology, it becomes not only a social, but also a geological force. There are new forms of matter and energy exchange between society and nature, biogeochemical and other human impact on nature is expanding and deepening. As a result, the biosphere turns into the noosphere, i.e., it passes into a new, higher stage. Society and nature can and should be considered as a kind of integrity.

Club of Rome - it is an informal organization, an association of some scientists, politicians, public figures. Its representatives in a number of their reports in the 1970-1980s. argued that the continuation of the previous policy of uncontrolled economic growth leads to the depletion of the planet's natural resources, destroys nature. This idea was especially clearly expressed in the well-known report by D. Meadows "Limits to Growth". At the same time, the authors of the report argued that, due to the current situation in the world economy, it is necessary to set the limits of economic growth and development, first of all, to prevent the transformation of the countries of the "third world" into industrialized countries of the North American or Western European level. Otherwise, according to the speakers, a global catastrophe is possible due to the depletion of natural - material, mineral, energy, food and other resources and the irreversible damage to the natural human environment.

The sustainable development imperative has both global and national and regional dimensions. It directly concerns the prospects for further development of the Russian Federation in these aspects. Back in 1996, the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation “On the concept of the transition of the Russian Federation to sustainable development” was issued, in which it was proposed to develop and submit a project for consideration by the President State Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Russian Federation. The development of the State Strategy for Sustainable Development of Russia faces, first of all, two groups of problems, which are both research and practical and political. The first group is connected with the state of the current ecological crisis and the prospects for its resolution. The point is that the crisis is both domestic and global at the same time. In other words, a correct, scientific definition of the essence of the crisis and ways to resolve it is possible only if the interests and needs of the world community and the interests and needs of the Russian society, the Russian multi-ethnic people are taken into account and balanced. In this regard, it is interesting to quote the opinion of the President of the Club of Rome R. Diez-Hochleitner: “The concept of sustainable development will have the right to exist only when the characteristics of each country are fully taken into account, its resources and prospects for industrial and agricultural development are assessed, world trade trends are analyzed, and the environmental viability of the global economy is explored. Until we set the maximum permissible level of pollution and agree on compensation for damage, using the mechanisms of influence available to the world community, we will not achieve a harmonious and sustainable development of the world.

Another group of problems is no less, and perhaps more complex. We are talking about the crisis of the global spread over several centuries of such a model of socio-economic development, which is based on ideas about the unconditional advantages and effectiveness of capitalist market relations, the possibility and necessity of endless exploitation of natural wealth, natural resources, the inevitability of the division of the world community into developed, prosperous countries. (“golden billion”), dominated by the manufacturing industry, science-intensive, environmentally friendly production, and underdeveloped countries dominated by the mining industry, environmentally “dirty” technologies.

It is no secret that such a model of socio-economic development is explicitly or implicitly supported by a number of prominent Western politicians, scientists, and representatives of transnational companies. And they not only support, but through the state bodies of some Western countries and through some international organizations they seek to impose on the whole world the idea that such a model is the only possible, the only acceptable model of sustainable development in modern conditions.

However, such views are criticized not only by statesmen and public figures and scientists in developing countries, but also by far-sighted, insightful intellectuals in developed Western countries. They emphasize the exhaustion of uncontrolled capitalist market development, the injustice of dividing the world community into "prosperous countries" and "outcast countries". Thus, at the aforementioned 1992 Conference in Rio de Janeiro, the Secretary General of the Conference M. Strong stated: “This growth model and the associated pattern of production and consumption is not sustainable for the rich and cannot be adopted by the poor. Following this path may lead to the end of our civilization ... The wasteful and destructive way of life of the rich cannot be maintained at the expense of the life and conditions of the poor and nature.

A number of prominent scientists (for example, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. Koptyug and others) emphasize that the key issue is the issue of compatibility of sustainable development and market relations, since the first involves the dominance of conscious and systematic control, and the second - elements of spontaneity, uncontrollability, uncontrollability.

Other prominent scientists (academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences N. N. Moiseev and others) believe that we should not just talk about caring for nature, preserving it for future generations, but about fully understanding the need for society to move to a new type of evolution, the so-called coevolution, i.e., the joint harmonious development of nature and society. Moiseev considers it completely illusory and insufficient to believe that if we learn not to pollute the environment with industrial waste and not destroy the living world, then our future is guaranteed. Of course, "preservation of wildlife is an absolutely necessary condition, but not sufficient." The situation is much more serious. The problem of sustainable development is "the problem of the formation of a new civilization." We do not know what kind of civilization this will be, but we are firmly convinced that the path of development through the conquest of nature, through the conquest of some countries by others, some peoples by others, some people by others, this path has actually exhausted its possibilities. It led to the modern ecological crisis, the crisis of the socio-economic development of the world community. On the agenda is the development of “a strategy for the transition period to such a state of nature and society, which we can characterize by the terms “co-evolution” or “epoch of the noosphere”” See: Club of Rome. History of creation, selected reports and speeches, official materials / Ed. D. M. Gvishiani. M., 1997.

Roman club. History of creation, selected reports and speeches, official materials. S. 285.

Independent newspaper. 2000. June 2.

Moiseev N. N. With thoughts about the future of Russia. M., 1998. S. 139.

Modern development trends can be characterized in two words - globalization and acceleration. Technology, manufacturing and our entire lives are accelerating every day. The economies of various countries are becoming more and more intertwined every year, the Internet unites millions of people around the world, transport allows you not to think about distances, events in one region of the world, one way or another, affect all countries.

Modern development trends are based on the interaction of individuals, organizations and entire states. Today, only a few countries manage to maintain isolation from the outside world, but they will never be able to achieve complete isolation. For example, even in North Korea you can get on a tourist excursion, which already speaks of the partial openness of this country. Globalization has connected the various regions of the planet so strongly that events in one of them will inevitably affect the other. Mankind has realized that it is necessary to combine their knowledge, skills and technologies in order to achieve even greater success, and therefore we can observe countless international agreements, treaties, organizations and associations.
In every sphere of people's lives, the directions of change are different, but at the same time they have much in common. As already mentioned, everything in our lives is accelerating and becoming more interconnected.
Modern trends in the development of technology are so radically changing our daily lives that it is already difficult to imagine existence without many technological devices. It is unlikely that anyone will be able to do without a mobile phone, computer, digital camera. The development of communication technologies has led to tangible changes in the way business is conducted. The so-called electronic business or business on the Internet is gaining more and more development. This became possible thanks to the wide spread of the Internet, now we can connect to the global network not only from our home computer, but also from a laptop, mobile phone and other portable computer devices. Current trends in the development of wireless communications suggest that we will soon be able to connect to the network anywhere in the world, which is undoubtedly very convenient. Along with the expansion of the connection zone, the quality of the connection itself improves and the number of services provided increases. In addition, modern economic development trends focus on the provision of services rather than on the production process itself, which is why Internet commerce has become so widespread.

In our world, modern development trends can also be described as a series of changes that radically change our reality. If earlier we had to go to the post office or the bank to pay any bills, now we can do all this without leaving our room - the Internet saves us from unnecessary running around and queues. The improvement of the service sector affects the current trends in the development of the entire world economy. Now the main attention is paid to the promotion of goods and its improvement, great attention is paid to the improvement of technologies, both production and sales. Automation of production has made it possible to reduce labor costs for the manufacture of products itself, now employees are required not only to manufacture, but to improve and promote goods on the market. Now the important thing is not what to sell, but how to do it.
Modern trends in the development of the world economy cannot be imagined without the process of globalization. One of the most influential organizations that establishes the principles and rules of world trade is the WTO - the World Trade Organization. The largest countries in the world are part of this association, but developing countries are rapidly gaining momentum and many of them are already almost ready to join this global community. According to the WTO, in recent years the market share occupied by communication services and information technologies has increased in the world, while the share of trade in agricultural products and raw materials has decreased.
The development of technology and the healthcare system have not bypassed. Modern trends in the development of medicine and health protection are also based on the achievements of communication systems. In addition to the breakthrough in the pharmacological field, it is worth mentioning the diagnostic component of healthcare. It is now possible to diagnose patients at a distance, which increases the accuracy of the diagnosis, as the attending physician is able to immediately consult with a more experienced specialist in a particular field. With the help of the latest technologies, the international GLOB project was launched, which involves studying the mechanisms of the relationship between the quality of primary health care provided to the population and the level of training of personnel providing this health care. Speaking about the use of the latest technologies in the treatment of various ailments, it should be noted that current development trends in this area boil down to the fact that the current possibilities of medicine make it possible to minimize surgical operations that require deep incisions or openings. Laser treatment technologies make it possible to do without postoperative scars and scars, because no deep incisions are made.

Speaking about medicine, one should also mention the current trends in the development of cosmetology. Among the most developing hardware techniques are laser, RF, photo techniques. At the same time, long-used technologies are being improved: electromyostimulation, ultrasound, microcurrent therapy, etc. For example, RF technologies help eliminate excess fat deposits on the face, give excellent results in skin tightening and eliminate the external manifestations of cellulite. Many cosmetic procedures are carried out using ultrasound, for example, in the correction of local fat deposits.
Current trends in the development of education suggest that soon a machine can largely replace a person. For example, it is worth remembering the system of distance education, which made it possible to gain new knowledge without leaving your home. Modern trends in the development of education are based on self-learning, because the assimilation of the material depends solely on the student. Now there is no need to force to learn something, if a person really needs education, knowledge and a diploma, then he will make enough efforts. Of course, this education is not available to everyone. The point is not in the material or technological support of this type of educational process, but in the ability to work independently. Modern trends in the development of education focus not so much on learning to do something, but on learning to independently find and apply the necessary information. The current level of development of information and communication technologies allows everyone to find a lot of information on a particular subject, and now it is important not just to find information, but to choose the right one and use it correctly. Many teachers and educators are noticing that traditional education systems in schools and universities are becoming less and less adequate for the required level of preparation. Every year, the curricula are adjusted, but in the end, something is still wrong. Modern trends in the development of society force us to look for radically new teaching methods, to use not just textbooks, but textbooks in combination with specific real-life examples and tasks. In many countries, a methodology is already being practiced in which the student himself chooses the necessary subjects for study, and the teacher can only suggest the necessary set of disciplines. This can be considered reasonable, because, you see, it is not always important for a builder to know the ancient or modern concepts of the origin of the universe. It is much more important for this specialist to know the properties of building materials, mathematics, physics and other natural sciences. It is necessary to transform the training system so that, having come to work, a person can almost immediately begin to fulfill his duties, and now we can often observe the picture:

Forget everything you learned at school/university and learn all over again.

Obviously, a young specialist can hear such a phrase quite often in our time, which is why the entire education system needs to be restructured.
The above modern trends in the development of technology, economics, education, medicine are not a complete list of changes and innovations that we can meet in our lives. However, no matter what area we take for consideration, the key will still be advances in technology, because they most strongly change the usual foundations and algorithms of actions. At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, we faced the so-called era of global change, which was caused by a breakthrough in microelectronics. The latest developments have made many dreams and wildest assumptions a reality: wireless Internet, mobile communications, etc. The older generation had a chance to retrain and adapt to the radically changed working conditions and life in general. Young people are rapidly moving forward, quickly assimilating huge flows of information. Modern trends in the development of society indicate that in today's world a successful person is a person who knows how to quickly find the necessary information and effectively apply it. Thus, we have come close to such a concept as the information society, in which the main value is not traditional labor, land, capital, but information. As never before, the phrase sounds convincing: "Who owns the information - owns everything."
Elizabeth Lz

The main trends in the development of the modern world

Parameter name	Meaning
Article subject:	The main trends in the development of the modern world
Rubric (thematic category)	Politics

Relations between countries are unpredictable and chaotic. In politics, both unexpected partners and yesterday's enemies interact. The unwritten rule is: ʼʼ The state has no friends and enemies, but only permanent interestsʼʼ. At the beginning of the XXI century. The following trends have been noted in world politics:

1. Integration and globalization. Both tendencies indicate a desire to jointly solve pressing problems. It is especially noticeable that strong and influential states try to adhere to one foreign policy line, while often attacking the positions of weaker ones in the world economic system. Politics is becoming more transparent, international observers are invited to the elections, neighbors are informed about the movement of troops, and they are invited to military exercises. Even terrorism in our time has acquired an international character.

2. In this regard, the understanding of power and security is changing. In the modern world, there are 4 components of state security:

but) political– preservation of sovereignty͵ prevention of infringement of one’s interests,

b) economic– cooperation and integration with other countries, access to world markets,

in) humanitarian– observance of human rights, provision of humanitarian assistance to the suffering, the fight against drugs,

G) ecological– actions aimed at preserving the environment, securing a reasonable

wearing to nature

3. Transition to a unipolar world. New era ushered in US policy announcement transnationalism . It literally means NATO intervention in the affairs of sovereign states in the event of human rights violations. Since 2001 ᴦ. The United States is becoming the world's gendarme, motivating the invasion of other countries by the fight against international terrorism. The United States does not reckon with UN resolutions (for example, with the resolution condemning the start of the operation in Iraq), they ignore the opinions of other countries, even if they are in the majority. Military operations are carried out independently, without notifying even NATO partners. Russia made a proposal to reverse the situation and called on China, India and the Middle East to declare regional leadership, then the world will become multipolar, and the opinion of other countries will have to be taken into account. The current situation is also outraged by the countries of Latin America. Cuba and Venezuela are actively pursuing an anti-American policy in the region

4. The European Union is expanding. The bloc almost always acts in the interests of the United States, portraying a kind of bipolar world, but the strategic partnership between the European Union and the United States is a priority. Partnership with Russia fails for many reasons

5. There is an imposition of a democratic path on peoples whose mentality is alien to everything that is connected with the American system of values. It is especially inappropriate to impose American culture on the Middle East and Central Asia. The usual trend is the accusations of the Russian Federation and other "objectionable" countries of the United States of departing from democratic principles. Nevertheless, in the United States, the most democratic country, they open the mail of citizens, eavesdrop on negotiations. Under the American constitution, presidential elections are not direct, but indirect, and Congressional resolutions are not binding on the President. In England, another stronghold of democracy, anti-war demonstrations have been banned for the past 2 years. Clearly, democracy is in crisis. In violation of democratic principles, the United States makes decisions alone, regardless of the positions of other countries, the European Union is preparing a resolution on a new mechanism for approving decisions, according to which the "old" EU members will have advantages over the "newcomers". The opinion of the latter will be taken into account in extreme cases. The democratic system of elections allows political forces that have repeatedly tried themselves on the terrorist path to come to power on legal grounds. In Palestine, a grouping came to power legally (ʼʼHammasʼʼ, which is why a civil war broke out six months later).

A notable trend is multifaceted attack on Russia . The goal is to comprehensively weaken the state, to prevent the return of products to world markets

Russia's policy is compared to a pendulum: Yeltsin with his permissiveness and political course directed by the West is one direction, Putin with his desire to restore order and strengthen the state is another

· A lot of efforts are being made to spoil Russia's relations with former partners, allies and neighbors. In 1991 ᴦ. NATO promises not to expand its presence to the East, however: a) all the countries of Eastern Europe are now members of NATO, b) with the assistance of the West, a wave of "color" revolutions swept through the countries of the former USSR, c) the issue of placing elements of the American system is being discussed ABM in Eastern Europe, d) perhaps the West wants to provoke a revision of the borders and agreements concluded with the participation of the USSR, at least they deliberately turn a blind eye to the fact that after World War II fascism was condemned

· In April 2007 ᴦ. The US State Department's report on support for democracy was released, which openly declared support for the press, non-governmental organizations and opposition parties in Russia. England panders to Berezovsky's activities, refusing to extradite him to the Russian authorities. There is no doubt that the West will try to implement another "revolutionary" scenario, already on the territory of Russia

Separate facts testifying to unfriendliness towards Russia and ʼʼdouble standardsʼʼ

Human Rights Commission in Chechnya

Arrest of a Russian fighter plane at the Lebourg air show

Arrests of high-ranking Russian officials in the United States and the European Union (Borodin, Adamov), as well as injustice towards ordinary citizens

The case of football coach Gus Higging

Sports doping scandals

Actions aimed at imposing a moratorium on the execution of the death penalty in Russia on the one hand, and the use of the death penalty in the United States without restrictions, as well as the decision of the International Tribunal on the execution of Saddam Hussein and his associates

In recent years, Russia's position has become tougher: at the EU-Russia Summit (Samara, May 2007), Putin spoke about the fact that all problems are solvable, and that the EU-US partnership is also not cloudless. The closest strategic partners do not even hide problems such as Guantanama, Iraq, the death penalty. All this is contrary to European values.

* Feeding - way of keeping officials at the expense of the local population (thus, they ʼʼfeedʼʼ at the expense of the subject population)

* Otkhodniki - peasants with their own farms, temporarily leaving to work where there is a seasonal demand for labor

* Faction (from Latin fractio - breaking) - an integral part of a political party or an elected body of power

* As income increases, so does the tax rate.

The main trends in the development of the modern world - the concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Main trends in the development of the modern world" 2017, 2018.

What else to read

Orthodox Charitable Foundation "Alatyr" The Vicar of the Holy Trinity Monastery, the city of Alatyr, Archimandrite Jerome (Shurygin) - Father, departed to the Lord ...

Pukhtitsa: an uninterrupted tradition of female monasticism Protodeacon of the Russian Orthodox Church Andrey Kuraev in LiveJournal told his version of the origin of about 300...

St. Anastasius Stauropegial Convent St. Anastasius Monastery in Zhytomyr has already managed to become one of the most...

Trends in the modern world. Global trends in the development of the world. Prices should be affordable to consumers

Dear colleagues!

1. The World Today: A General Assessment of the Strategic Environment

1.1 The content of the modern era and the main civilizational factors of the modern existence of mankind

1.2 Basic causes of war

1.4 Basic prerequisites for war as an armed struggle

Historical background and evidence

Current situation

2. About the theory of war as new knowledge and new nation existence paradigm

Fundamentals of the General Theory of War

2.1 Basic postulates of the theory of war

2.1.1 The first postulate of the theory of war

2.1.2 The second postulate of the theory of war

2.1.3 The third postulate of the theory of war

2.1.4 The fourth postulate of the theory of war

2.1.5 Fifth postulate of the theory of war

2.1.6 The sixth postulate of the theory of war

2.1.7 The seventh postulate of the theory of war

2.1.8 The eighth postulate of the theory of war

2.1.9 The ninth postulate of the theory of war

2.1.10 Tenth postulate of the theory of war

2.1.11 Eleventh postulate of the theory of war

2.1.12 The twelfth postulate of the theory of war

2.1.13 The thirteenth postulate of the theory of war

2.2 Categories "war" and "peace" in the interpretations of the author

2.3 "Winning the War"

2.4 Aftermath of the war

2.5 "Strategic Effects"

3. On the national strategy of Russia

Dear colleagues!

Forget everything you learned at school/university and learn all over again.

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

Categories

2. About the theory of war as new knowledge and new
nation existence paradigm