15. MODERN SOCIETY: VALUES AND LAWS

Formation of public consciousness

The main causes of disappointment in socialism are known - the lack of economic and social success, especially in comparison with Western countries; negative, previously unknown information about the historical past of socialist construction; immense abuse of socialist slogans, the gap between them and real life.

Relying on socialism, the overwhelming majority of people never accepted any other social ideal. According to a 1992 study, just over 10% of those surveyed believe in the progressiveness of bourgeois relations for Russia; 15% believe that "capitalism equally has its advantages and disadvantages." The majority (54%) do not believe in any of the social doctrines in relation to Russian society.

Objectively, one or other ideas about the desired social relations (not necessarily conscious and clearly expressed) cannot exist in the consciousness of a person. These ideas orient it in a real-life society, act as criteria in assessing specific social situations, political decisions, and determine the corresponding values, thereby largely forming the norms of behavior.

Studies conducted in Moscow in 1992 showed a number of priorities, which are currently focused mass consciousness. Among them:

• guaranteed the ability of ordinary people to participate in public administration, to directly influence decisions affecting their vital interests (about 70% believe that today they do not have such opportunities);

• the priority of the individual over the state;

• The paramount importance of universal values;

• social, legal, economic security of the individual, guarantees of his rights and freedoms (almost half of the respondents in 1992 faced with the infringement of their rights and freedoms).

The role of religion in Russian society is quite peculiar in this respect. The majority of respondents (64%) see the benefit of spreading religious views, 17% of them are sure that only in religion can one find social ideas uniting the whole people.

Based on the analysis performed, it is possible to predict the development of the corresponding spiritual processes.

For quite a long time, the socialist ideal will not dominate in the public consciousness (the number of its adherents stabilizes at about 20%).

Studies record major changes in the scale of life orientations for many people: the social sphere has significantly decreased and the value of purely individual values ​​has increased.

This process cannot be described as unequivocally negative. Positive in it is the development of such an important spiritual quality, previously ignored, as the awareness of oneself as a free, independent, self-valuable person who wants to rely, first of all, on his own strength and capabilities, striving for self-realization.

At the same time, people cannot be ignored: for many, such values ​​as the desire to be useful to people, finding the meaning of life in socially significant work, creating a strong family, etc., are receding into the background.

In the first place are increasingly coming values ​​of consumption. And not just the desire to have good clothes, food, furniture, a car, etc., which is quite natural, but the pursuit of things as the main, sometimes the only goal of life. Consumer psychology is reborn in consumer ideology. According to a 1988 study, people focused on consumption as the only value were 8–12% among those surveyed. According to 1993 polls, these were 35–40%. Growth is mainly due to the young.

A similarly increased desire for elitism, a desire to stand out, to be different from everyone else, and especially from the “crowd” is connected with such a change in the scale of values. A survey of Russian entrepreneurs showed that this desire is one of the two main driving forces for business activity (along with the desire to get rich) more than 40% of respondents.

The social, property stratification of Russian society also revived in a rather massive manner the problem of misalliance: 65% of the surveyed parents spoke out categorically against their children marrying (getting married) to a person “not in their own circle” (primarily by "Level of social status"). Almost 40% of young people between the ages of 19 and 24 also opposed it.

In modern Russian society, the degree of prevalence of certain moral qualities, norms, and traditions varies significantly. The process of “erosion” in the minds of people of such simple norms of morality as kindness, mercy, decency, honesty, responsibility, politeness, etc., goes on quite intensively.

According to the self-assessments of those surveyed in 1992, no more than 30% of them are truly responsive, conscientious, and retained the well-known Russian cordiality. Approximately the same amount does not stand out "neither in the direction of good, nor in the direction of evil" and 40% are callous, aggressive, capable of an dishonest act. (Studies of the 70s yielded the exact opposite result: the respondents believed that unscrupulous, callous, unmerciful people in their environment were no more than 10%).

Pragmatism is becoming increasingly common in moral qualities: the predominant focus of a person is only on personal gain in dating, in social and political situations, in resolving various conflicts, etc.

Prognostically, it is more likely to assume that in the moral consciousness of Russians, the importance of purely selfish values ​​will continue to increase. A special policy is needed to neutralize in a certain way the negative consequences of this process: full encouragement of open associations of citizens based on cultural, sports, educational and other interests, encouragement of societies, foundations of charity, formation of positive public opinion towards various socially significant actions, heroic actions both in the historical past of Russia, and in the present, etc. Outside of such efforts, the socio-economic relations of the transition period carry the risk of personality degradation: the development of egocentrism, elitism, and total disregard for public interests.

Level of public patience

At present, in Russian society, the ratio of patience and intolerance (aggressiveness) is quite complex and contradictory.

In order to properly assess this situation, it is necessary to distinguish between different spiritual states of the individual: tolerance and patience.

Tolerance (tolerance) is a certain personality trait, its moral and psychological attitudes to accept or not accept various, including alien to it, ideas, habits, behavioral norms.

Patience is a level, a threshold of perception by a person of social, spiritual and other influences unfavorable to her, above which she loses her psychological and volitional stability and is capable of unpredictable actions.

The development of ideological, political and economic pluralism, the expansion of press freedom contributed to a significant increase in tolerance towards social theories and norms of behavior. In 1983, only 8% of respondents believed that ideas that contradict the communist theory, and the corresponding social behavior have the right to exist and a certain respect. The rest were in various degrees intolerant of them (from the need to expose them ideologically to the use of repressive measures). Studies of the end of 1992 show that the level of tolerance of the population (first of all, of the city) has grown significantly: almost 60% of respondents tend to be quite loyal to ideas, norms of behavior, actions, the essence of which they do not share; retain a high degree of intolerance about 15%.

This circumstance is not always taken into account by various opposing forces in society. Harsh assessments, ideologized stereotypes, intolerance for dissenters not only fail to achieve the goal set - to defame the enemy, to win public opinion, but also often lead to the opposite result. Attitudes of people towards labels like “so-called democrats”, “red-brown”, “nomenclature revenge”, “occupation authorities”, “partocrats” and the like are mostly negative. Only 10% of respondents consider them quite appropriate, 30% feel a feeling of irritation in connection with their use, 40% view these biting expressions as manifestations of politicking.

The level of patience of the population can be ambiguous.

The level of social patience of Russians is not rigidly and mono-linearly connected with the material situation of people. From January to December 1992, the number of those dissatisfied with the material conditions of their lives, as well as those who consider them below their subsistence level, increased from 30–40% to 60–70%. At the same time, they said that they were “angry and ready to go for anything,” in February there were 12%, in May - 16%, in September - 14%, in December - 12%.

The analysis shows that, in addition to economic factors, the level of patience of the population is seriously affected by:

- the degree of trust in the ruling structures and, above all, their moral evaluation;

- the degree of social injustice, corruption, deception and similar phenomena in a society;

- the level of awareness of people, their importance and understanding of the economic, social, international, and other policies implemented;

- differentiation of the population depending on the place of work, attitude to property and some other factors.

Anger "neutralized" socio-political passivity, fatigue. In 1989, up to 70% of the able-bodied population participated in political life in various forms, of which every third is active; in 1990, 35–40% of respondents were interested in political campaigns; in 1991 - less than 20%; in 1992, 12–15%. A survey conducted in Moscow in early 1993 shows that only 6–8% of citizens are ready to actively participate in various political actions.

In this case, one important tendency should be taken into account: while political activity falls, politicization of consciousness increases. People are increasingly inclined to assess any facts of reality, even if they have nothing to do with politics, from the point of view of their own political likes and dislikes. Special psychological studies have established that the most common stereotypes of consciousness, acting as evaluative criteria, are: “it’s all the communists to blame”, “it’s all the democrats to blame” and the like. This politicization of consciousness of a certain degree is, as it were, a time bomb: political activity can increase dramatically at any moment.

The level of patience varies significantly in different socio-demographic groups. The greatest predisposition to patience (as well as the greatest optimism in assessing the future) is shown by young people (especially those under the age of 20), people with higher education, residents of small towns. The smallest - workers of medium and low qualifications, employees, retirees, the population of large cities.

The degree and nature of patience are also associated with the processes of differentiation of the working population of Russia depending on the place of work. The most stable in social terms is the part that works in effectively developing industries, in commercial structures. According to various sources, this part today constitutes 10–15% of the able-bodied population of Russia. The level of patience with that part of skilled workers who are not employed in such enterprises, but hope to get a job there, is quite high. The stability of this group is less stable than the first because it is conditioned by conformist attitudes. It can be assumed that in quantitative terms it is 40–45%. The part of the population that does not expect, does not hope because of insufficient qualifications, public lack of demand for professions, age and other reasons to get a high-paying job, is afraid of losing the existing one is most susceptible to various kinds of social actions, unrest. This group includes 15–20% of the population.

When analyzing the level of patience, one should take into account the tendency, characteristic of modern Russian society, to exist outside the law and above the law. In 1992, only 38% thought so, and 46% of respondents did not see anything reprehensible in this or that violation of laws or social norms. From 12 to 22% of young people surveyed in different social groups admit the possibility of violence in public life, up to and including the use of weapons to achieve the righteous, in their view, goals.

Integrating all the above factors and trends, we can assume that in the foreseeable future, most likely, a relatively high level of patience will remain among the majority of the population. There is no reason to expect any serious large-scale public unrest. Naturally, this does not exclude the possibility of individual speeches, extremist actions and other violations of social stability.

Moral assessment of power

Sociological research reveals a tendency, characteristic of our time, of the increasing importance of the moral factor in the overall assessment of power, concrete leaders and the political elite as a whole.

In 1982, the moral and professional characteristics of managers were assessed by respondents by their weight as 30% to 70%. In 1988, already 50% of people consider the main qualities of managers to be attention to the life and everyday life of a simple person and knowledge of this life. Next come: adherence to principles, the unity of words and deeds, justice, honesty, modesty.

Moral assessments of higher state structures and specific leaders of Russia in public opinion are not strictly connected with assessments of their business skills: competence, effectiveness of decisions made, productivity in work, etc., which is specific to crisis societies.

It is characteristic that the main reason for the low prestige of political structures in Russia is the fact that, in the opinion of more than 3/4 of the respondents, none of the existing parties and movements in Russia protect the interests of the population. They did not believe that the state takes care of them and their loved ones in May 1990, 70% of the polled Russians, in December 1992 - 77%. Studies have identified specific factors (according to their degree of significance), which to the greatest extent determine the negative moral evaluations of modern government institutions, government leaders.

1. " Isolation from the people . " 72% of respondents consider this one of the main reasons for their negative evaluation of various managers. A similar opinion is made up of the following statements (answers in open-ended questions):

• do not know the real needs of the population, its difficulties, as they themselves live well (63%);

• enjoy privileges and privileges, although they themselves opposed them (58%);

• engaged in the struggle to preserve their power (47%);

• do not consult with the people (36%).

Most often, such judgments are expressed by workers, technical intelligentsia, retirees, employees of public institutions. Less often - doctors, humanitarian intelligentsia, scientists; much less often - entrepreneurs, young people under the age of 25 years. The number of those who adhere to such assessments substantially depends on where they live: in large cities there are fewer of them than in small cities, towns, and rural areas. So, about 40% of Muscovites surveyed believe that the President of Russia, the Supreme Council and the government of the country “do not know how the people live”, in other regions 65–70% of respondents think so.

2. "The discrepancy between word and deed . " 64% of respondents cited this reason for their negative assessment of various managers. Most often the following judgments were given:

• having come to power, many are doing the exact opposite of what they said before;

• leaders often hide the truth or simply lie;

• The authorities do not fulfill the promises they make to the people.

3. " The authorities are led by dishonest entrepreneurs . " This judgment, like the previous one, has a tendency to spread. This is largely due to the negative attitude of the population towards domestic entrepreneurs. 50% believe that our businessmen have a thirst for profit at any cost; 44% - that they are prone to any scam and fraud. (The corresponding estimates of foreign entrepreneurs: 10.3 and 1% of respondents.).

4. " The power is not a patriot of their homeland . " A similar assessment (in a different lexical form) is given in almost 40% of the answers to open questions. The most common statements are:

• the Russian leadership poorly protects the Russian-speaking population in the republics of the former Soviet Union (67%);

• the authorities are led by the West, ignoring the interests of Russia;

• a policy of belittling the history of Russia, its heroes, and neglect of its culture and specifics.

Almost 70% of respondents agree that Russia should maintain itself as a great power, even if it worsens relations with the outside world, 65% believe that many leaders of the country do not pursue such a policy.

The peculiarity of the opinion about the non-patriotism of the Russian authorities is that it is held approximately equally by representatives of different socio-demographic groups of the population.

Factors such as the manner of speaking, behaving (especially in front of the camera), communicating with people and the like also have a certain influence on the moral evaluation of managers. For example, less than 3% of respondents positively perceive an appeal to the “gentlemen” audience (12% among domestic entrepreneurs).

The significance of the moral assessment of state structures, leaders of Russia in the formation of a favorable moral and psychological climate in society, in the preservation of social stability will increase. It can be expected that such an assessment will seriously affect the attitude of the population towards the reforms being carried out.

The analyzed trends generally confirm the general conclusion that moral and psychological attitudes in modern Russian society are characteristic of crisis, unstable societies. At the same time, being ambivalent themselves, these installations bear a particular burden in determining the direction and pace of development of society.