Typology of conflicts

Factors of Interethnic Regional Conflicts

Conditions and factors of social conflict

Conditions and Conflict Factors

Sources of conflict

Causes of social conflict

Reasons and sources of social conflict

Determinants and typology of social conflicts

Issues for discussion

1. What is a conflict and what is its structure?

2. What elements of the structure of the conflict are objective, which are subjective?

3. What are the main approaches to understanding the dynamics of conflict?

4. What is the essence of the latent period in the dynamics of the conflict?

5. Prove that conflict is a multidimensional dynamic phenomenon.

6. Graphicize the structure of the conflict, the dynamics of the conflict.

In general philosophical terms, the concept "cause"   means a phenomenon whose action causes or produces any other phenomenon, which is called a consequence. In society, as well as in nature, there is an infinite number of causal relationships and dependencies. And conflicts here are no exception, they can also be caused by a variety of reasons: external and internal, universal and individual, material and ideal, objective and subjective, etc.

Reasons for the conflict   - these are problems, phenomena, events that precede the conflict and in certain situations that develop in the process of activity of the subjects of social interaction, cause it.

It should also be noted that it is necessary to distinguish the cause of the conflict from its cause. Cause of conflict   serves as a phenomenon that contributes to its occurrence, but does not determine the appearance of a conflict with necessity. In contrast to the cause, the cause arises by chance and can be created completely artificially, as they say, "from scratch." The reason, however, reflects the natural connection of things.   So, a reason for a family conflict can be an undersalted (salted) dish, while the true reason may be the lack of love between spouses.

Among the huge variety of causes of conflicts, general and particular causes can be distinguished. General groups of reasons:

1) socio-political and economic reasons related to the socio-political and economic situation in the country;

2) socio-demographic reasons, reflecting differences in attitudes and motives of people, due to their gender, age, ethnicity, etc .;

3) socio-psychological reasons that reflect socio-psychological phenomena in social groups: relationships, leadership, group motives, collective opinions, moods, etc .;

4) individual psychological reasons, reflecting the individual psychological characteristics of the personality: ability, temperament, character, motives, etc.

Among most common reasons   social conflicts can be identified:

Different or completely opposite perceptions by people of goals, values, interests and behavior;

The unequal position of people in imperatively coordinated associations (some govern, others obey);

The discrepancy between the expectations and actions of people;

Misunderstandings, logical errors, and generally semantic difficulties in the communication process;

Lack and poor quality of information;

The imperfection of the human psyche, the mismatch between reality and ideas about it.

Private reasons   directly related to the specifics of a particular type of conflict. For example, dissatisfaction with the conditions of labor relations, violation of professional ethics, non-compliance with labor laws, limited resources, differences in the goals and means of achieving them, etc.

Let us dwell on the causes of conflicts determined by the labor process. Indeed, for many labor collectives they are a leading source of conflict situations.

There are several ways or methods to determine the causes of conflict behavior. As an example, consider one of them - conflict mapping method. Its essence lies in the graphic representation of the components of the conflict, in a consistent analysis of the behavior of the participants in the conflict interaction, in the formulation of the main problem, the needs and concerns of the participants, ways to eliminate the causes that led to the conflict.

The work consists of several stages.

At the first stage, the problem is described in general terms. If, for example, we are talking about inconsistencies in the work, that someone is not “pulling the strap” along with everyone, then the problem can be displayed as “load sharing”. If the conflict arose due to the lack of trust between the individual and the group, then the problem can be expressed as “communication”. At this stage, it is important to determine the very nature of the conflict, and so far it does not matter that this does not fully reflect the essence of the problem. The problem should not be defined in the form of a double choice of opposites “yes or no”, it is advisable to leave the possibility of finding new and original solutions.

At the second stage, the main participants in the conflict are identified. You can enter individuals or entire teams, departments, groups, organizations in the list. To the extent that people involved in a conflict have common needs with respect to a given conflict, they can be combined together. A combination of group and personal categories is also allowed.

For example, if a conflict map is drawn up between two employees in an organization, then these employees can be included in the map, and the remaining specialists can be combined into one group, or the head of this unit should also be separately identified.

The third stage involves listing the basic needs and concerns associated with them, of all the main participants in the conflict interaction. It is necessary to find out the motives behind the positions of participants in this issue. The actions of people and their attitudes are determined by their desires, needs, motives that need to be established.

The term “fears” means concern, anxiety of a person when it is impossible to realize any of his needs. In this case, one should not discuss with the parties to the conflict how justified their fears and concerns are until they are listed. For example, one of the participants in the conflict had a fear about something that seemed unlikely when compiling a map. At the same time, the fear exists and it must be included in the card, it must be acknowledged. The advantage of the cartography method is that it is possible to express in the process of compiling a map and reflecting irrational fears on it. Fears may include the following positions: failure and humiliation, fear of oversight, financial collapse, the possibility of being rejected, loss of control over the situation, loneliness, likelihood of being criticized or condemned, loss of work, low wages, fear that they (the party to the conflict) will be commanded that everything will have to start all over again. Using the concept of "fear", it is possible to identify motives that are not called out loud by the parties to the conflict. For example, for some people it is easier to say that they do not tolerate disrespect than to admit that they need respect.

As a result of compiling the map, the points of coincidence of the interests of the conflicting parties are clarified, the fears and concerns of each of the parties are more clearly manifested, and possible ways out of this situation are determined.

The social heterogeneity of society, the difference in income levels, power, prestige, etc. often leads to social conflicts.

They are an integral part of public life and are always associated with the subjective consciousness of people, the contradictory nature of their interests of certain social groups. Exacerbation of the contradiction gives rise to open or closed conflicts only when they are deeply experienced by people and are recognized as incompatibility of goals and interests.

Conflict- a clash of opposing goals, opinions, interests, positions of opponents or subjects of interaction.

Social conflict- this is a confrontation between individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals. It occurs when one side seeks to realize its goals or interests to the detriment of the other.

English sociologist E. Giddens gave the following definition of conflict: “by social conflict I understand the real struggle between existing people or groups, regardless of what the sources of this struggle are, its methods and means mobilized by each side.”

ConflictIs a ubiquitous phenomenon. Every society, every social group, social community is more or less prone to conflict.

In science, there is a special branch of sociological knowledge that directly studies this social phenomenon - conflictology.

The main subjects of conflicts are social groups, since their needs, claims, goals can be realized only through the use of power. That is why such political forces as the state apparatus, political parties, parliamentary groups, factions, “influence groups”, etc. take part in conflicts. It is they who express the will of large social groups and the main carriers of social interests.

In conflict studies, much attention is paid to the concept of the strength of participants in a social conflict.

Force- this is the ability of the opponent to realize his goal against the will of the interaction partner. It includes a number of various components:

1) physical force, including technical means used as an instrument of violence;

2) an information-civilizational form of using social force, which requires the collection of facts, statistics, analysis of documents, the study of examination materials in order to ensure complete knowledge about the essence of the conflict, about your opponent to develop strategies and tactics of behavior, use materials that discredit the opponent, etc. . d .;

3) social status, expressed in socially recognized indicators (income, level of power, prestige, etc.);

4) other resources - money, territory, time limit, psychological resource, etc.

The stage of conflict behavior is characterized by the maximum use of force by the parties to the conflict, the use of all means at their disposal. A significant influence on the development of the conflict is exerted by the surrounding social environment, which determines the conditions in which the social conflict proceeds.

It can be either a source of external support to the parties to the conflict, or a deterrent, or a neutral factor.

Social conflict, as a rule, goes through the main stages.

In conflictology, it is customary to distinguish the following stages of the conflict:

1) the latent stage, at which the contradictions between the parties to the conflict are not yet recognized and are manifested only in explicit or implicit dissatisfaction with the situation;

2) the formation of the conflict - a clear awareness of the claims, which, as a rule, are expressed to the opposite side in the form of requirements;

3) incident - an event that transfers the conflict to the stage of active actions;

4) the active actions of the parties that contribute to reaching the highest point of the conflict, after which it is waning;

5) the end of the conflict, and it is not always carried out by satisfying the claims of the parties.

It is also necessary to remember that at any of the indicated stages the conflict can end either on its own, or by agreement of the parties, or with the participation of a third party.

2. Types of conflict

In modern sociological literature, there are many classifications of types of conflicts on various grounds.

From the point of view of subjects entering into conflict, four types of conflicts can be distinguished:

1) intrapersonal (may take the following forms: role - occurs when conflicting demands are made on one person about what should be the result of his work; intrapersonal - may also arise as a result of the fact that production requirements are not consistent with personal needs or values );

2) interpersonal (can manifest itself as a clash of individuals with various traits, attitudes, values \u200b\u200band is the most common);

3) between the individual and the group (occurs if the individual takes a position different from the position of the group);

4) intergroup.

Conflicts can be classified according to spheres of life into political, socio-economic, national-ethnic and others.

Political- These are conflicts over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. They arise from a clash of different interests, rivalry and struggle in the process of acquiring, redistributing and exercising political and state power.

Political conflicts are associated with consciously formulated goals aimed at gaining leading positions in institutions in the structures of political power. The main political conflicts include:

1) between branches of government;

2) inside the parliament;

3) between political parties and movements;

4) between the various parts of the administrative apparatus.

Socio-economic- These are conflicts over the means of livelihood, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access to the distribution of material and spiritual goods.

National ethnic- These are conflicts that arise during the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups.

According to classification D. Katza conflicts are:

1) between indirectly competing subgroups;

2) between directly competing subgroups;

3) within the hierarchy and regarding remuneration.

Conflict Researcher C. Boulding identifies the following types of conflicts:

1) valid (existing objectively in a particular social subsystem;

2) random (depending on secondary issues in relation to fundamental contradictions that cause conflict);

3) substitution (which are a visible manifestation of hidden conflicts);

4) based on poor knowledge (the result of inept management);

5) hidden, latent (participants for various reasons cannot fight openly);

6) false (creating only visibility).

The current view is that some conflicts are not only possible, but may even be desirable.

In accordance with this, two types of conflicts are distinguished:

1) a conflict is considered functional if it leads to an increase in the effectiveness of the organization;

2) the conflict can also be dysfunctional and lead to a decrease in personal satisfaction, group cooperation and the effectiveness of the organization.

3. Compromise and consensus as a form of ending social conflict

An external sign of conflict resolution is the completion of an incident.

Elimination of the incident is necessary, but this is not a sufficient condition for resolving the conflict. Full resolution of a conflict situation is possible only when the conflict situation changes.

This change can take various forms, but the most radical change is one that eliminates the causes of the conflict.

It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the requirements of one side: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.

In modern conflict resolution, two types of successful completion of the conflict can be distinguished: compromise and consensus.

A compromise is a way to resolve the conflict, when the conflicting parties realize their interests and goals by either mutual concessions or concessions to the weaker side, or to the side that has managed to prove the validity of their claims to someone who voluntarily renounced part of their claims.

Consensus- the presence between two or more individuals of similar orientations in any respect, one or another degree of agreement and coordination in actions. It is easy to see that it is in the stage of conflict resolution under certain conditions that such a situation is possible.

M. Weber considers consensus as an integral characteristic of any human community, as long as it exists and does not break up.

He contrasts the consensus of solidarity, arguing that consensus-based behavior does not imply it as a condition.

It should be remembered that consensus does not completely exclude the conflict of interests between the parties. Also, consensus does not completely exclude the possibility of a new conflict escalating.

According to M. Weber, consensus is an objectively existing probability that, despite the lack of preliminary agreement, participants in one form or another of interaction will regard each other's expectations as significant for themselves. Thus, consensus is not always associated with conflicting behavior.

It is easy to see that the interpretation of Weber considers this social phenomenon in the broad sense of the word.

From this we can conclude that consensus is not always generated by conflict, just as a conflict does not always end with consensus.

With this understanding of consensus, behavior is based on consent, different from contract based behavior. In this case, consensus is the primary form - it arises in the minds of people.

The agreement is secondary, since it is a normative consolidation of consensus.

The achievement of consensus in society implies the achievement of political consensus.

It is usually understood as a state of agreement regarding a particular political course as a whole or its individual aspects.

Moreover, such agreement is not identical to joint actions and does not necessarily mean cooperation in the implementation of the respective goals and objectives. The degree of agreement itself by consensus may be different, although it is understood that it should be supported, if not by the prevailing, then at least a large majority.

Varying from problem to problem, the degree of consensus is usually higher in views on provisions of a more general, abstract nature.

That is why the conflicting parties for more successful negotiations need to start them with such topics, as this will give them more chances to find a common consensus.

To maintain consensus in society, three things must be considered.

Firstly, the natural readiness of the majority to follow applicable laws, regulations, and norms.

Secondly, a positive perception of institutions designed to implement these laws and regulations.

Thirdly, the feeling of belonging to a certain community, which contributes to a certain leveling of the role of differences.

There is no human community in which there are no contradictions and clashes between its members. Man is no less inclined to hostility and clashes than to cooperation.

Rivalry often results in open clashes, in conflicts. We define social conflict as an attempt to achieve reward by removing, subordinating, or even physically eliminating rivals. Conflicts pervaded the whole life of society, and we can observe them everywhere - from an elementary fight or a family quarrel to wars between states.

The causes of social conflicts can be divided into two large groups. We designate them as personal and social. These two groups of causes are interdependent.

The causes of social conflicts may be incompatibility of interestsand   goals   relevant social groups. The presence of this reason was indicated by E. Durkheim and T. Parsons.

The cause of social conflicts may be incompatibility of individualand   public   values. Each individual has a set of value orientations relative to the most significant aspects of social life. But when meeting the needs of some groups, obstacles arise from other groups. At the same time, opposing value orientations are manifested, which can cause a conflict. For example, there is a different attitude to property: some believe that property should be state-owned, others favor private property, and others seek cooperative property. Under certain conditions, supporters of different forms of ownership may come into conflict with each other.

The main social prerequisites for conflicts are:

1) Social inequality   - i.e., the uneven distribution between members of society and groups of wealth, influence, information, respect and other social resources. Experts in the field of conflict sociology note that the social position of people and the nature of their claims depend on access to the distribution of values \u200b\u200b(income, knowledge, information, elements of culture, etc.). The striving for universal equality, as history has shown, cannot be regarded as a blessing, because it leads to leveling, the extinction of many incentives for creative activity and initiative.

In fairness it should be noted that it is impossible to satisfy the interests and needs of all comers. Therefore, inequality, including socialunremovable. The conflict arises with such a degree of inequality when it is regarded by one of the social groups as very significant, preventing the satisfaction of its needs. The resulting social tension leads to social conflicts.

2) Social disorganization. Society is a system, that is, an organized integrity that has the ability to spontaneously adapt to emerging difficulties. However, there are so threatening crisis situations that the social system falls into a state of total chaos and discord. In such cases, the prevailing familiar balance between the processes of destruction and creation is violated, the collapse of social production begins, the crisis of political power begins, the basic ideologies and accepted moral and cultural norms are devalued and lose their attractiveness.

There comes anomie - a state of uncontrollability - lack of norms. This implies the growth of aggression, the insecurity of life, property and dignity of citizens, due to the weakening of social control and the legal system, the disorganization of society and its legal institutions. In such a situation, the state and society lose their ability to restrain the negative energy of decay, and a kind of “war of all against all” begins. A conflict situation is forming.

3) Cultural heterogeneity   - that is, the coexistence in society of different value systems, different ideas about the world, different behavioral standards (compare the subculture of the criminal world with its specific values \u200b\u200bthat are opposite to the rest of a law-abiding society).

But social premises alone do not necessarily lead to
  to conflict clashes. The subjects of conflicts in the end are always specific people - either individuals or people united in groups. In order for the social preconditions of the conflict to really lead to conflict, personal involvement, awareness of the injustice of the situation is necessary.

4) The objective and subjective causes of social conflicts are linked together in the phenomenon social deprivation.

S. V. Sokolov defines deprivation as a contradiction between subjective expectations in relation to the realization of one’s own interests and objective opportunities to realize them: “Deprivation is a discrepancy between the interests-expectations (state of consciousness) of the subject and the real possibilities of their satisfaction in practice”. Deprivation is felt by the individual as a sharp disappointment, experienced with a feeling of oppression, causes the individual to become estranged from the society in which he lives. Deprivation arising from chronic dissatisfaction with fundamental vital needs: security needs, food, treatment, etc., is especially painful.

On the other hand, the lack of the necessary satisfaction of spiritual needs is also associated with deprivation: for example, believers should live in accordance with their religious beliefs and norms, have the opportunity to pray, go to church, but society is not always ready to provide them with this, as it was in the USSR in the era of forced atheism. American researchers C. Glock and R. Stark highlight the body deprivation experienced by people with disabilities and those with serious illnesses, the severity of which can be minimized if society cares for physically disabled people.

Deprivation is the cause of social conflict precisely because it causes strong negative emotions. However, the dynamics of the development of deprivation is multidirectional: the feeling of deprivation can increase up to the formation of an open conflict; it can remain at the same level or decrease.

A change in the state of deprivation occurs if the above reasoning changes in the direction of expansion or contraction:

Or if the needs and interests of people change (decrease, primitivize, or vice versa, expand), and the level of their satisfaction with society remains the same;

Or if the needs and interests remain the same, and the objective level of satisfaction is changing; or, finally, if there is a change in both needs and the quality of their satisfaction.

With increasing deprivation, social tension also grows accordingly: large masses of people dissatisfied with their lives are ready to open conflict according to the catchphrase from the “Manifesto of the Communist Party”: “The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains, they will gain the whole world.” In this case, the conflict becomes the only way for deprived groups to achieve a more complete satisfaction of their needs.

Thus, we can conclude that the main personal motive for the conflict is an unmet need. There are many diverse and highly detailed typologies of human needs. We give here the most simple.

Human needs can be divided into the following groups:

1) the needs of physical existence (food, material well-being, the need for procreation, etc.);

2) the need for security;

3) social needs (the need for communication, recognition, love, respect, etc.);

4) higher needs (in creativity, spiritual growth, etc.). These
  Needs are not manifested in all people, but if they express themselves, they are able to push aside all other needs, minimizing them.

When a need is not satisfied, a person experiences discontent, anxiety, fear and other negative emotions. The longer the state of dissatisfaction lasts, the stronger these emotions, the worse the state of a person.

  How does a person act in a situation of dissatisfaction? Three behaviors are possible:

1) you can retreat, stop striving to meet needs;

2) look for a workaround to meet needs;

3) through aggression to achieve the desired.

The third way most often leads to conflicts (the second is also fraught with the emergence of a conflict situation, if it leads to a clash with the prevailing norms in society). The object of aggression is that object that impedes the satisfaction of needs. This can be a person, a group, society as a whole (since it is difficult to attack the whole society, aggression is directed at those who are “responsible” for the situation in society). The one to whom aggression is directed responds with an aggressive action. So there is a conflict.

The object of aggression can be determined incorrectly, that is, the culprit of the situation is one who is not. This phenomenon is called false identification and is very common. False identification may occur involuntarily as a result of an error. However, it is possible to manipulate the consciousness of excited people, to set them on objectionable persons or groups, usually undertaken by those who benefit from such misinformation.

However, unmet needs alone do not lead
to conflicts. If a person or group perceives their depressed, restrained position as something ordinary, familiar, embedded in the “course of things” itself, then the conflict may not arise. The basis of the conflict is the awareness of the injustice of the situation (naturally, from the point of view of the interested party). But even in such conditions, the conflict does not always arise. Uncertainty of the consequences of a future conflict, fear of retaliation, disorganization (when it comes to communities) prevent conflicts.

The role of unmet need for conflict is obvious if we are dealing with a conflict of individuals or small groups. But if it is a conflict of states? What role does “unmet need” play in this case? The "state" in itself can neither make decisions nor enter into conflicts.

Only people can make decisions, enter into conflicts. The policies of any state are also determined by specific people - members of the government, presidents, etc. It is they who decide what is the "need" of a particular state at the moment. Therefore, even in global conflicts such as wars between states, the importance of personal motives is very great. But in relation to such cases, it is better to speak not about “satisfying needs”, but about “protecting the interests” of the subjects of the conflict (while remembering the subjective nature of the interpretation of these interests).

A society with social inequality embedded in its structure is potentially fraught with conflict. In every society there are groups whose needs are not regularly met and interests are ignored.

Society provokes conflicts not only through social inequality. Each society has certain cultural models that its members must conform to. Social role systems prescribe certain types of behaviors. This leads to the fact that people who do not meet these standards find themselves either in isolation or in a state of conflict with the social environment.

The degree of conflict in society increases in situations of anomie, political and economic crises. The instability of the situation and the uncertainty of the norms lead, firstly, to the fact that more and more people do not satisfy their needs, and secondly, it is easier for people to “step over" the limits of what is permissible, since these "frames" in an anomic society lose their clarity (as an example, serve Russia post-Soviet period).

An important feature of crisis societies is the widespread sense of insecurity and fear. And this is accompanied by an increase in aggressiveness, which not only provokes conflicts, but also toughens their character.

Social conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Social conflict   - conflict caused by disagreement social groups   or personalities   with differences in opinions and views, the desire to take a leading position; manifestation of social connections of people.

In the field of scientific knowledge, there is a separate science devoted to conflicts - conflict management. Conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, views of the subjects of interaction. At the same time, conflict is the most important aspect of the interaction of people in society, a kind of cell of social being. This is a form of relations between potential or relevant subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values \u200b\u200band norms, interests and needs. An essential aspect of social conflict is that these actors operate within the framework of some broader system of ties that is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict. If interests are multidirectional and opposite, then their opposition will be revealed in the mass of a variety of assessments; they themselves will find for themselves a “field of collision”, while the degree of rationality of the claims will be very conditional and limited. It is likely that at each stage of the development of the conflict, he will be concentrated at a certain point of intersection of interests.

Causes of Social Conflicts

The reason for social conflicts lies in the very definition - this is a confrontation between individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals. It arises when one side of the conflict seeks to fulfill its interests to the detriment of the other.

Types of Social Conflicts

Political conflicts   - these are conflicts, the cause of which is the struggle for the distribution of power, dominance, influence and authority. They arise from various interests, rivalries and struggles in the process of acquisition, distribution and implementation of political and state power. Political conflicts are directly related to gaining leading positions in the institutions and structures of political power.

The main types of political conflicts:

conflict between branches of government;

conflict within parliament;

conflict between political parties and movements;

the conflict between the various parts of the administrative apparatus, etc.

Socio-economic conflicts   - these are conflicts caused by livelihoods, the use and redistribution of natural and other material resources, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access and distribution of spiritual goods.

Ethnic conflicts   - These are conflicts that arise during the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups.

According to the classification of typology D. Katz distinguish:

conflict between indirectly competing subgroups;

conflict between directly competing subgroups;

conflict within the hierarchy due to reward.

The main aspects of social conflict.

The social heterogeneity of society, the difference in income, power, prestige, etc. often lead to conflicts. Conflicts are an integral part of public life. This causes the close attention of sociologists to the study of conflict.

Conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, opinions and views of opponents or subjects of interaction. Radugin A.A., Radugin K.A. Sociology. - M.: Center, 1996., p. 117. The English sociologist E. Giddens gave the following definition of conflict: “By conflict I mean a real struggle between existing people or groups, no matter what the origins of this struggle, its methods and means, mobilized by each of the parties.” Conflict is a ubiquitous phenomenon. Every society, every social group, social community is more or less susceptible to conflict. The wide distribution of this phenomenon and the keen attention of society and scientists to it contributed to the emergence of a special branch of sociological knowledge - conflictology. Conflicts are classified according to their structure and areas of research.

Social conflict is a special type of interaction of social forces, in which the action of one side, faced with the opposition of the other makes it impossible to realize its goals and interests.

The main subjects of the conflict are large social groups. The major conflict expert R. Dorendorf refers three types of social groups to the subjects of conflict. one). Primary groups are direct participants in the conflict. Which are in a state of interaction regarding the achievement of objectively or subjectively incompatible goals. 2). Secondary groups - seek to be unsolicited directly in the conflict. But they contribute to fueling conflict. At the stage of exacerbation, they can become the primary side. 3). Third parties are interested in resolving the conflict.

The subject of conflict - this is the main contradiction because of which and for the sake of resolving which subjects enter into confrontation.

Conflict management has developed two models for describing the conflict: procedural and structural. The procedural model focuses on the dynamics of the conflict, the occurrence of a conflict situation, the transition of the conflict from one stage to another, forms of conflict behavior, the final outcome of the conflict. In the structural model, the emphasis is shifted to the analysis of the conditions underlying the conflict and determining its dynamics. The main goal of this model is to establish parameters that affect conflict behavior and specify the forms of this behavior.

Much attention is paid to the concept of “strength” of parties to conflicts. Strength is the ability of the opponent to realize his goal against the will of the interaction partner. It includes a number of heterogeneous components:

Physical strength, including technical means used as an instrument of violence;

An information-civilized form of the use of force, which requires the collection of facts, statistical data, analysis of documents, the study of examination materials in order to ensure the full knowledge of the essence of the conflict, about your opponent to develop strategies and tactics of behavior, use materials that discredit the opponent, etc .;

Social status, expressed in socially recognized indicators (income, level of power, prestige, etc.);

Other resources - money, territory, time limit, number of supporters, etc.

The stage of conflict behavior is characterized by the maximum use of the strength of the parties to the conflict, the use of all the resources at their disposal.

An important influence on the development of conflict relations is exerted by the surrounding social environment, which determines the conditions in which conflict processes take place. The environment may be either a source of external support to the parties to the conflict, or a deterrent, or a neutral factor.

1.1.Classification of conflicts.

All conflicts can be classified according to areas of disagreement as follows.

1. Personal conflict.   This zone includes conflicts that occur within the individual, at the level of individual consciousness. Such conflicts can be associated, for example, with excessive dependence or with role tension. This is a purely psychological conflict, but it may turn out to be a catalyst for the emergence of group tension if an individual searches for the cause of his inner conflict among the members of the group.

2. Interpersonal conflict. This area includes disagreements between two or more members of the same group or several groups.

3. Intergroup conflict.A certain number of individuals forming a group (i.e., a social community capable of joint coordinated actions) come into conflict with another group that does not include individuals from the first group. This is the most common type of conflict, because individuals, starting to influence others, usually try to attract supporters, form a group that facilitates actions in the conflict.

4. Conflict of belonging. It occurs due to the dual belonging of individuals, for example, when they form a group within another, larger group, or when an individual enters simultaneously into two competitive groups that pursue the same goal.

5. Conflict with the environment.   The individuals who make up the group are under pressure from the outside (primarily from cultural, administrative, and economic norms and regulations). Often they come into conflict with institutions that support these norms and regulations.

According to their internal content, social conflicts are divided into rational   and emotional. Rational conflicts include conflicts that encompass the sphere of rational, business cooperation, redistribution of resources, and improvement of the managerial or social structure. Rational conflicts also occur in the field of culture, when people try to free themselves from obsolete, unnecessary forms, customs and beliefs. As a rule, those participating in rational conflicts do not go to the personal level and do not form the image of the enemy in their consciousness. Respect for an opponent, recognition of his right to a certain amount of truth - these are characteristic features of a rational conflict. Such conflicts are not acute, protracted, since both sides strive in principle for the same goal - improving relationships, norms, patterns of behavior, fair distribution of values. The parties come to an agreement, and as soon as the frustrating obstacle is removed, the conflict is resolved.

However, in the course of conflict interactions, collisions, the aggression of its participants is often transferred from the cause of the conflict to the individual. In this case, the initial cause of the conflict is simply forgotten and the participants act on the basis of personal hostility. Such a conflict is called emotional. Since the appearance of emotional conflict in the minds of people participating in it, negative stereotypes appear.

The development of emotional conflict is unpredictable, and in the vast majority of cases they are uncontrollable. Most often, such a conflict ceases after the appearance of new people in the situation or even new generations. But some conflicts (for example, national, religious) can pass on the emotional mood to other generations. In this case, the conflict lasts quite a long time.

1.2.Characteristic of conflicts.

Despite the many manifestations of conflict interactions in social life, they all have a number of common characteristics, the study of which allows us to classify the main parameters of conflicts, as well as identify factors that affect their intensity. All conflicts have four basic parameters: the causes of the conflict, the severity of the conflict, its duration and consequences. Considering these characteristics, it is possible to determine the similarities and differences in conflicts and the features of their course.

The causes of conflict.

The definitions of the concept of the nature of the conflict and the subsequent analysis of its causes is important in the study of conflict interactions, since the reason is the point around which the conflict situation unfolds. The early diagnosis of a conflict is primarily aimed at finding its real cause, which allows social control over the behavior of social groups at the pre-conflict stage.

The consequences of social conflict.

Conflicts, on the one hand, destroy social structures, lead to significant unreasonable expenditures of resources, and on the other hand, they are the mechanism that helps to solve many problems, unites groups and ultimately serves as one of the ways to achieve social justice. The duality in people's assessment of the consequences of the conflict led to the fact that sociologists involved in the theory of conflicts did not come to a common view on whether conflicts are useful or harmful to society.

So, many believe that society and its individual elements develop as a result of evolutionary changes, i.e. in the course of continuous improvement and the emergence of more viable social structures based on the accumulation of experience, knowledge, cultural patterns and the development of production, and as a result of this, it is assumed that social conflict can only be negative, destructive and destructive.

Another group of scientists recognizes the constructive, useful content of any conflict, since new qualitative certainties appear as a result of conflicts. According to supporters of this point of view, any finite object of the social world from the moment of its inception carries its own denial, or its own death. Upon reaching a certain boundary or measure, as a result of quantitative growth, a contradiction that carries negation comes into conflict with the essential characteristics of this object, and therefore a new qualitative certainty is formed.

The constructive and destructive paths of a conflict depend on the characteristics of its subject: size, rigidity, centralization, relationship with other problems, level of awareness. The conflict grows if:

competing groups are increasing;

it is a conflict over principles, rights or individuals;

conflict resolution sets a significant precedent;

the conflict is perceived as winning and losing;

the views and interests of the parties are not connected;

the conflict is poorly defined, nonspecific, vague. 11 Social conflict: current research. Ed. N.L. Polyakova // Abstract collection. - M, 1991, p. 70.

A particular consequence of the conflict may be increased group interaction. As interests and points of view within a group change from time to time, new leaders, a new policy, new intra-group norms are needed. As a result of the conflict, the early adoption of new leadership, new policies and new norms is possible. Conflict may be the only way out of a tense situation.

Conflict Resolution

An external sign of conflict resolution is the completion of an incident. It is the completion, not the temporary cessation. This means that between conflicting parties the conflict interaction ceases. Elimination, termination of the incident is a necessary but insufficient condition for the settlement of the conflict. Often, having stopped active conflict interaction, people continue to experience a frustrating state, to look for its causes. In this case, the conflict flares up again.

The resolution of a social conflict is possible only if the conflict situation changes. This change can take many forms. But the most effective change in the conflict situation, allowing to settle the conflict, is the elimination of the cause of the conflict. In a rational conflict, eliminating the cause inevitably leads to its resolution, but for emotional conflict, the most important point in changing the conflict situation should be considered a change in the opponents' attitudes towards each other.

It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the requirements of one of the parties: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.

Social conflict can also be resolved by depleting the resources of the parties or by the intervention of a third force, creating an overwhelming superiority of one of the parties, and, finally, as a result of the complete elimination of the opponent. In all these cases, a conflict situation is inevitably changing.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. One of the important conditions is a timely and accurate analysis of its causes. And this involves the identification of objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. The analysis carried out from such an angle allows us to outline the “business zone” of the conflict situation. Another, no less important condition is mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of mutual recognition of the interests of each of the parties. For this, the parties to the conflict must strive to free themselves from hostility and distrust of each other. To achieve this state is possible on the basis of a goal that is significant for each group on a broader basis. The third, indispensable condition is a joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue between the parties, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.

Conflict management has developed a number of recommendations, following which accelerates the process of conflict resolution: 1) during negotiations, priority should be given to the discussion of substantive issues; 2) the parties should strive to relieve psychological and social tension; 3) the parties must demonstrate mutual respect for each other; 4) negotiators should strive to turn a significant and hidden part of the conflict situation into an open one, openly and convincingly revealing each other's positions and deliberately creating an atmosphere of public equal exchange of views; 5) all negotiators should be prone to

2. Social conflicts in modern society.

In modern conditions, in essence, each sphere of social life gives rise to its own specific types of social conflicts. Therefore, we can talk about political, national-ethnic, economic, cultural and other types of conflicts.

Political Conflict -   it is a conflict over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. This conflict may be hidden or open. One of the most striking forms of its manifestation in modern Russia is the conflict between the executive and legislative powers in the country, which lasts the whole time after the collapse of the USSR. The objective causes of the conflict were not eliminated, and he moved to a new stage of his development. From now on, it is implemented in new forms of confrontation between the President and the Federal Assembly, as well as executive and legislative authorities in the regions.

A prominent place in modern life is ethnic conflicts   - conflicts based on the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. Most often these are conflicts related to status or territorial claims. The problem of cultural self-determination of various national communities also plays a significant role.

A major role in modern life in Russia is played socio-economic conflicts, that is, conflicts over livelihoods, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for various goods, about real access to these goods and other resources.

Social conflicts in various spheres of public life can take the form of intra-institutional and organizational norms and procedures: discussions, requests, adoption of declarations, laws, etc. The most striking form of expression of the conflict are various kinds of mass actions. These massive actions are carried out in the form of claims to power from dissatisfied social groups, in mobilizing public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs, in direct actions of social protest. Mass protest is an active form of conflict behavior. It can be expressed in various forms: organized and spontaneous, direct or indirect, assuming the nature of violence or a system of non-violent actions. The organizers of the mass protests are political organizations and the so-called “pressure groups”, uniting people according to economic goals, professional, religious and cultural interests. Forms of expression of mass protests can be such as: rallies, demonstrations, pickets, campaigns of civil disobedience, strikes. Each of these forms is used for specific purposes, is an effective means of solving very specific problems. Therefore, choosing a form of social protest, its organizers should be clearly aware of what specific goals are set for this action and what is the public support for certain requirements.

Sociology as a science. Tutorial

X. SOCIAL CONFLICTS

1. The concept, causes and types of social conflicts. 2. Mass actions. Social movements.

Basic concepts Anomie, conflict society, antagonisms, system crisis, counter-actions, violation of the system stabilization mechanism, consensus, neutralization of an opponent, bifurcation, compromise, latency, business zone, post-conflict syndrome, parties maximalism, frustration, public mood. The purpose of the information: to give students an idea of \u200b\u200bthe nature, dynamics, subjects and methods of resolving social conflicts in society.

Recommendations The first question. When studying the nature, essence and participants of social conflicts, find their definitions in the literature and try to find out motives and prerequisites for the maturation of social tension in society using concrete examples of conflict systems existing in the world (society, group, social institution). Carefully study the foundations of the theory of modern Western conflictology and try to carry out a comparative analysis of the most common conflict paradigms in sociology. When studying the patterns of functioning of social systems, focus on the concept of crisis society and consider the processes of integration and disintegration, differentiation of interests, stratification, functional and dysfunctional systems, spontaneous and targeted conflicts. Particular attention should be paid to the concepts of conflict society K. Marx, R. Darendorf, L. Coser and others. It is advisable to consider the second question by the method of comparative analysis of numerous types of mass social movements and actions, to reveal the dialectical nature of their interaction, interdependence, explain the nature, direction, driving the forces of modern formal and informal mass movements. It is useful to analyze the hierarchy of mass movements and the current state of mass consciousness on the basis of a study of the political life of Russian society.

The concept, causes and types of social conflicts Conflicts have always been an integral part of society. Conflict is a clash between people or large social groups, which acts as a universal phenomenon, i.e. any society is subject to conflict. They can lead to the destruction of not only economic or political systems, but also of society as a whole. Therefore, a special industry was formed within sociology - conflict studies, which faced a number of scientific and practical problems. Is a society without conflict possible? Question about 1) the causes of conflicts; 2) on the role of conflicts in society; 3) on the possibilities of regulating social conflicts. The term "conflict" comes from the Latin word conflictus - collision. The concept of "social conflict" is a complex phenomenon. This is a certain form of social interaction between people in the form of a clash of opposing goals, values, views, needs, interests. Conflict is the simultaneous deployment of action and counter-action. This is an extremely complex action of two or more parties united by opposition. The term "social conflict" was introduced by the German sociologist Georg Simmel, who called it a "dispute." M. Weber called the conflict "struggle." The English sociologist Anthony Giddens defines conflict as "a real struggle between existing people or groups." Americans T. Parsons and R. Merton considered the conflict as a dysfunction of individual structures in the social system. L. Coser considers the conflict as the most important element of social interaction, which contributes to the strengthening or destruction of social ties. In general, in sociology, conflict is defined as a form of interaction between various social communities. The nature of conflicts is due to the presence in society of objective and subjective contradictions that permeate the economy, politics and culture. The simultaneous aggravation of all contradictions creates a crisis of society, a violation of the mechanism of stabilization of the system. A manifestation of the crisis of society is the growth of social tension, the clash of classes, nations, the masses with the state. But objective contradictions should not be equated with conflict. Contradictions give rise to open and closed conflicts only when they are recognized by people as incompatible interests and needs. Social conflict is a way of interaction between individuals, communities, social institutions, due to their material and spiritual interests, a certain social position, power. The dynamics of social systems is a process that is implemented in various types of social interaction: competition, adaptation, assimilation, conflict. Note that the conflict here appears as a kind of connecting transitional form, say, to competition (competition), consensus. Consensus is one of the methods for making economic, socio-political and other decisions, which consists in developing an agreed position that does not cause fundamental objections from the parties. One way or another, the conflict was and remains a constant companion of public life, just as consistent with the nature of society and man, as well as consensus. The legalization of conflict management in our country was prompted by a situation when conflicts literally overwhelmed the country, when we were not ready for the fact that "democracy is a conflict." A special role belongs to the sociological aspect of research (conflict and society), the political science (conflict and politics). But the socio-psychological aspect is becoming increasingly important in terms of studying the dynamics of conflict. We single out two basic concepts of social conflict. "The concept of positive functional conflict" (G. Simmel, L. Coser, R. Darendorf, K. Boulding, J. Galtung and others) is actually sociological. In it, the conflict is considered as a problem of communication and interaction. Its social role is stabilization. But the sustainability of society depends on the number of conflicting relationships existing in it and the types of connections between them. The more different conflicts intersect, the more complex the group differentiation of society, the more difficult it is to divide all people into two opposing camps, which do not have any common values \u200b\u200band norms. So, the more conflicts independent from each other, the better for the unity of society. In this concept, “competition” is singled out as a key concept, and the interests of the parties are considered the driving force of the conflict. Its process consists of a combination of reactions to the outside world. All collisions are reactive processes. Consequently, the essence of the conflict is the stereotypic reactions of social actors. But conflict resolution is conceived of as a “manipulation” of behavior without a radical change in the social system. This is mainly the difference between Marxist conflictology (the theory of class struggle and social revolution) and the principle of "coercity" (that is, limited benefits, deficits), which is characteristic of Western interpretations of the causes of conflict. A positive-functional concept considers the conflict as a “struggle for values \u200b\u200band claims for a certain social status, power. and insufficient material and spiritual benefits for all, a struggle in which the goals of the parties to the conflict are to neutralize, inflict damage, or destroy the "rival". In the concept of conflict as. "social disease" T. Parsons was the first to speak loudly about the conflict as a pathology, defined the following stability principles: satisfaction of needs, social control, coincidence of social motivations with social attitudes. E. Mayo put forward the idea of \u200b\u200b"peace in industry", describing the conflict as a "dangerous social disease", which is the antithesis of cooperation and balance. Proponents of this concept (among them, first of all, the Swedish ecologist Hans Brodal and the German sociologist Friedrich Glasl) proceed from the fact that two opposite trends manifest themselves in the historical process. The first is emancipation, the desire to free oneself (man - woman, younger and older generation, office workers - entrepreneurs, developed and developing countries, East - West). The disease begins when emancipation leads to selfishness, and this is the negative side of individualism. The second is an increasing mutual dependence, containing a tendency to collectivism. The disease begins when interdependence turns into collectivism, i.e. when a certain system wins, allowing to neglect a person as an individual. The disease has a wide spectrum, capturing the individual, social organisms, groups, organizations, communities, nations, entire nations. What are the aspects of the sociological diagnosis of conflict? First of all, these are the origins of the conflict (not the reasons, but what it starts with); then the biography of the conflict (its history, roots, the background on which it is progressing, crises, turning points); parties (subjects) of the conflict, depending on which the level of social complexity of any conflict is determined; position and relations of the parties, formal and informal dependencies, roles, personal relationships; initial attitude to the conflict (hopes and expectations of the parties). X. Brodal and F. Glasl distinguish three main phases of the conflict. 1. From hope to fear (discussions, self-closure, disputes taken to extremes, loss of communication, the beginning of actions). 2. From fear to loss of appearance (the formation of false images of the enemy, strengthening leadership and authoritarianism, pushing for self-disclosure, intimidation and panic). 3. Loss of will - the path to violence (limited destruction and violence, destruction of the nervous (managerial) center, finally, total destruction, including self-destruction). The escalation of the conflict is a kind of deadly process, but it can be overcome quickly, completely disappear, if the main contradiction of the parties is eliminated. In any conflict there is a struggle of tendencies of egoism and "collectivism". To find a balance between them means to find a way to resolve the conflict and grow in your human being (it is always an effort!). ; Extremeness (its researchers - M. Weber, E. Durkheim, L. Sorokin, N. Kondratyev, I. Prigogine, N. Moiseev, etc.) arises when the very existence of a social system is threatened within the framework of this quality and is explained by the action of extreme factors. The extreme situation is associated with the emergence of a "bifurcation state" (Latin bifurcus - bifurcation), that is, a state of dynamic chaos and the emergence of opportunities for innovative development of the system. Under these conditions, the parameters change, boundary (marginal) states arise. As a result, the effect of "detection of the essence" occurs. Its function is to stabilize the system in response to the action of extreme forces. When leaving dynamic chaos, it is necessary to have a leader (at the group level) or dominant motivation (at the personality level), which carry out the target function of the survival of the social system. Sociologists see two ways out of an extreme situation. The first is a catastrophe associated with the decay of the core of the system and the destruction of subsystems. The second is adaptation (compromise, consensus), the object of which is group contradictions and interests. To analyze the dynamics of a social system, the concept of "cycle of an extreme situation" is introduced. The cycle is associated with a minimum of time for making decisions, with a maximum of information about events, with a maximum of efficiency (mobilization of forces, abilities, resources), with a minimum of errors.

Social conflict - it is a confrontation between individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals (distribution of values, resources, power, etc.). It arises when one side seeks to fulfill its interests and goals to the detriment of the interests of others.

Social conflicts can have both positive and negative effects on the development of society. On the one hand, they are a source of socio-political changes, preventing the stagnation of social systems, stimulating the modification of social relations, structures and institutions. In this sense, conflicts act as a form of regulation of the conflicting interests of various groups of society, and contribute to the relaxation of tension in their relations. On the other hand, social conflicts pose a threat to the destabilization of society and can lead to disastrous consequences - revolutions, wars, anarchy.

Social conflicts are caused by a variety of reasons. This is economic and social inequality, a shortage of vital goods (material, spiritual, prestigious, etc.), a different position in relation to power, a mismatch of interests and goals of different social groups, ideological and political differences, confessional contradictions, incompatibility of individual and public values etc.

In modern conditions, each sphere of society creates its own specific conflicts. Here we can distinguish political, socio-economic and national-ethnic conflicts.

• 1. Political Conflicts - these are conflicts over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. They arise from differences of interests, rivalry and struggle in the process of acquiring, redistributing and exercising political and state power. Political conflicts are associated with consciously formed goals of gaining leading positions in the institutions and structures of political power. The main political conflicts include:
  • - conflicts between branches of government (legislative, executive, judicial);
  • - conflicts within parliament;
  • - conflicts between political parties and movements; - conflicts between the various parts of the administrative apparatus, etc.

In the modern history of Russia, one of the forms of manifestation of a political conflict was a long confrontation between the executive and legislative branches, which led to the dramatic events of October 1993. A partial resolution of this conflict was the election of the Federal Assembly and the adoption of the new Constitution of Russia. However, the causes of the conflict were not completely eliminated, and he moved to a new stage of his development, taking the form of confrontation between the President and the Federal Assembly. And only at the present time there has been a constructive interaction between the executive and legislative branches.

2. Socio-economic conflicts - these are conflicts over livelihoods, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access to the distribution of material and spiritual goods.

Socio-economic conflicts arise on the basis of dissatisfaction, primarily, with the economic situation, which is considered either as a deterioration compared to the usual level of consumption (real conflict of needs) or as a worse situation compared to other social groups (conflict of interest). In the second case, a conflict can arise even if there is some improvement in living conditions, if it is perceived as insufficient or inadequate.

In modern Russian society, many socio-economic conflicts develop along the lines of "labor collectives - state administration." Along with the requirements for raising wages, living standards, eliminating wage arrears and paying pensions, the demands of collectives to assert their rights to property of enterprises are more often put forward. Such requirements are addressed primarily to state authorities, which are the main subjects of property redistribution.

Mass conflicts in the economic sphere are often associated with the fact that the country still lacks a clearly developed legal framework for resolving labor disputes. The conciliation commissions and their arbitrations do not fully realize their functions, and administrative authorities in some cases do not fulfill the agreements reached. All this poses the task of creating a more effective legislative system for regulating labor conflicts.

3. Ethnic conflicts - these are conflicts that arise during the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. Most often, these conflicts are related to status or territorial claims. In modern Russia, the dominant factor in conflicts was the idea of \u200b\u200bthe sovereignty of territories, people, or ethnic groups. Until the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993, almost all regions fought for an increase in status: autonomous regions sought to become republics, republics declared their sovereignty and independence. In extreme cases, the question was raised of secession from Russia and full state independence (the most striking example is the conflict in Chechnya).

Quite widespread in our country are territorial conflicts arising between closely residing ethnic groups (Ossetian-Ingush, Dagestan-Chechen conflicts). It should be noted that such conflicts are deliberately provoked by various forces of a nationalist, separatist, fanatical-religious sense.

Thus, conflicts arising in the political and socio-economic spheres, in the field of interethnic relations, pose the greatest danger to society. In modern Russia, which is experiencing a difficult transitional period, conflicts have become an everyday reality. It is important to learn how to manage them, to achieve the consent of the conflicting parties.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. One of the important conditions is a timely and accurate diagnosis of the causes of the conflict, i.e. identification of existing contradictions, interests, goals. Another, no less important condition is mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of recognition of the interests of the opposite side. This can be achieved on the basis of a goal that is significant for both parties. The third indispensable condition is a joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of tools and methods: direct dialogue between the parties, negotiations through an intermediary, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.

Conflict management has also developed a number of recommendations, following which accelerates the process of conflict resolution: I) during negotiations, priority should be given to the discussion of substantive issues; 2) the parties should strive to relieve psychological and social tension; 3) the parties must demonstrate mutual respect for each other; 4) all participants must be inclined towards compromise.

An external sign of conflict resolution is the completion of an incident. Elimination of the incident is a necessary but not sufficient condition for resolving the conflict. Often, having ceased active conflict interaction, people continue to experience a tense state and look for its cause. And then the fading conflict flared up again. Full resolution of a social conflict is possible only when the conflict situation changes. This change can take various forms, but the most radical change is one that eliminates the causes of the conflict. It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the requirements of one of the parties: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.

Of great importance is the final, post-conflict stage. At this stage, the contradictions at the level of interests and goals must be finally eliminated, as well as measures taken to relieve socio-psychological tension and stop any struggle.

In modern Russia, it is important to make social conflicts (primarily shadow, implicit, latent) public, as open as possible. This will allow them to be brought under control and to respond in a timely manner to processes occurring during the confrontation of the parties. And here the media, public opinion and other civil society institutions can play a large role.

In sociology, modernization is primarily understood as the transition from a traditional society to a continuously changing modern industrial society. According to the definition of the famous American sociologist N. Smelser, modernization is a complex set of economic, social, cultural, political changes taking place in society in connection with the process of industrialization, the development of scientific and technological achievements.

The theory of modernization was developed mainly in relation to developing countries. Nevertheless, it largely explains the process of reforming any society, its transformation on the model of the advanced countries of the world. Modernization covers almost all aspects of society - the economy, social relations, spiritual life, the political sphere.

In the field of economics modernization involves the use of scientific knowledge and modern technology; deepening professional specialization; the formation of markets for goods, capital, labor; development of entrepreneurship and market relations; increasing the independence of the economy from politics; separation of production and workplace from family economy; increasing agricultural productivity, developing farms, etc. Structural changes in the economy are accompanied by increased social mobility, mass migration from rural areas to large cities, the transformation of traditional social structures, higher living standards of the population, etc.

In the socio-political sphere the main manifestations of modernization are the formation of the rule of law, the democratization of the political system, party pluralism, the growth of social activity of the population and its participation in political life, the establishment of civil society institutions, the improvement of the political culture of citizens, the development of mass media and communication.

In the spiritual and cultural sphere modernization involves the spread of the values \u200b\u200bof individualism, the progress of science and education, the rationalization of consciousness, the formation of moral prerequisites for new forms of economic activity, secularization and the growing diversity of spiritual life. The essence of changes in this area is conveyed by the concept of "modernity" as a complex characteristic of the culture of modern Western society.

The culture of "modernity" means a commitment to rationalism and scientism, focus on the growth of material production and technological progress, attitude to nature as an object of application of one's own forces and knowledge. It is also the idea of \u200b\u200bequal opportunities and personal freedom, individualism, the attitude towards success, a person’s readiness for constant changes and the desire to initiate such changes.

Depending on the nature and timing of the implementation, two types of modernization are distinguished: primary (organic) and secondary (inorganic). Primary modernization refers to the period of the industrial revolution that began in the UK in the 60s. XVIII century .. and after several decades swept the United States, France, Germany and other Western countries. This modernization took place naturally, on the basis of its own socio-economic, political and socio-cultural prerequisites, and met the internal needs of social development. It organically flowed from the entire previous evolution of society and its historical preparedness for comprehensive, profound changes.

Secondary modernization, associated mainly with the developing countries of Asia, Africa, Latin America, is not an organic result of the natural course of the evolution of society. It is largely dictated from the outside: the desire to enter the world community, adapt to a new geopolitical reality, and give an answer to the "challenge" from other countries. This is a peculiar way of “catching up with development,” when the authorities carry out reforms to overcome the country's historical backwardness.

Such modernization is usually carried out by attracting foreign investment, borrowing advanced technology, purchasing foreign equipment, inviting foreign specialists, studying abroad, etc. Corresponding changes are taking place in the political and social spheres: the management system is radically changing, new structures and institutions of power are being created, the country's constitution is being reconstructed according to Western standards, a new legislative system is being formulated, and relations between the state and society are being reviewed. An important socio-psychological factor in this case is the so-called demonstration effect, the desire to imitate the style and lifestyle of the richest, most developed countries.

Secondary modernization, as it were, is artificially introduced “from above”, it is inorganic for the socio-economic and spiritual system of society, violates its unity and historical continuity of development. Therefore, the majority of the population is often not ready for it and does not provide the necessary social support. All this determines the complex and sometimes contradictory nature of modernization processes in various countries.

However, in a number of cases, secondary modernization may succeed when countries, as a result of their conduct, begin to develop on their own basis. This happened in Japan, which took only two decades to catch up and, in some respects, even get around the United States, from where it originally borrowed advanced technology.

As for Russia, so far, modernization has not brought the expected results. An effective mechanism of a market economy has not been debugged in the country, there is no civilized free enterprise, a high standard of living and social protection of the population are not ensured, there is no support for small businesses, and there is no large middle class that determines the stability and welfare of society. At the same time, the high scientific and intellectual potential of Russian society nourishes a certain hope for the prosperous prospects for the development of modernization processes in our country.

It should be noted that at present, theorists of modernization are largely revising their conceptual settings. This is due to a new look at the role of traditional institutions and cultures, the identification of their ability to organically integrate into modernization processes, ensuring the integrity and spiritual unity of society. Thus, the juxtaposition of traditional and industrial societies is no longer regarded as a rigid antithesis, but as a moving relationship due to the dynamism of the traditional principle, its ability to change and adapt to modern conditions.