About self-sufficient Ukrainians, the psychotype of “genius” and the media space of metamodern

– Dear Sir Edward, I congratulate you! Allow some time to spend on our conversation. Now, in the days when people’s attention to Ukrainian TV screens has increased somewhat, let’s start with this side of being. What stereotypes do you find in the TV and radio space of Ukraine that irritate you the most?

– Language is known to be a great indicator of human consciousness. Therefore, even in the course of my classes at the National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine, I practice initiatives such as drawing students a certain thesaurus of the stereotypes we should abandon.

For example, at one time our leaders (presidents, prime ministers, speakers of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, etc.) actively used the word “average” person, citizen, Ukrainian, etc. It was necessary to pay attention to this, because in the conditions of modern – postmodern – Ukraine, the leading psychosocial group of people are self-sufficient Ukrainians, who, both in form and in essence, are incorrectly treated as ordinary citizens, who were Soviet people.

The stereotypes of a totalitarian Soviet past that must be eliminated or properly used include the words “stable” / “permanent”. The first word automatically refers us to the realities of a static Soviet industrial history, while the second word refers to a postmodern modernity characterized by a dynamic nature and a dynamic social norm. The same in the economic sphere can be said about the words “stagnation” and “recession”. Both terms mean slow economic development, but for different reasons. The first is the stagnation of the inherently economic economy and its reproductive forces. The second is a recession, linked to the shortcomings in the development of the post-industrial economy.

– Your very persistent research into the realm of archetype – what is it? Passion scientist, admiration, inexhaustible source of tools, ideas and inspiration?

– Many of us consider passion to be synonymous with the mad passion or obsession inherent in a politician, scientist, or other specialist in the success of professional self-realization. Therefore, I will not argue about the inherent and me of these feelings.

One might also think that archetype, or more precisely the idea of ​​the archetypal unconscious, introduced into the analytical psychology of the Swiss by Carl-Gustav Jung, with a certain methodology that expands the arsenal of scientific possibilities. In particular: on the realization in the modern – postmodern society of scientific tasks of social prognostication; optimizing the mechanisms of regulation of the innovation process, which becomes the basis of modern development of man, society, civilization; etc. This methodology opens for the modern – rational and self-sufficient human individual – the unlimited noospheric potential of the ideas of all previous human history.

Finally, the birth of the Ukrainian School of Archetype has certain prerequisites and a logic for its formation, in the course of which it is implemented.

Special tools have been created and adapted to mass surveys to explore the archetypal nature of the collective unconscious: the projective technique of “color preferences” (author – Eduard Afonin; 1987); ), the analytical and synthetic concept of the “Universal Epochal Cycle” (authors – Eduard Afonin, Andriy Martynov, 1996-2002).

Sociological monitoring studies were initiated using archetypal methodology (authors – Eduard Afonin, Olga Balakireva) of system-wide changes in Ukraine (1992-2017 – 62 studies), identification processes in Ukraine (2002-2018 – 14 studies), Russia (2010, 2011), Belarus (2010, 2011, 2013), functional and competence capacity of the civil service system of Ukraine (2005, 2009, 2014 – 3 studies). The results of monitoring studies were summarized in different scientific paradigms: first in social (1992-1994), then in cyclical (1996-2012) and finally in archetypal (2002-2019).

– What was your path to science? How did children’s experiences affect this journey because they are unique?

– My path to science, as it is fashionable to say today, was non-linear. The first science on this path was philosophy. It happened in the mid 60’s during my studies at the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics of the Taganrog Pedagogical University, when my teacher of philosophy – the head of the philosophy department of Rostov Medical University Dmitry Zerkin – offered me preparation for entering graduate school. Life, however, is different. Shortly after graduating from the institute, I was mobilized to the ranks of the Soviet army and subsequently to the state security agencies. However, here, during my initial professional training in Minsk, I got a second chance to pursue psychology. However, I decided to gain some practical experience, which lasted until 1986, when I entered a full-time psychology graduate course in Moscow.

Reflecting on my path to science today, I can confidently say that its foundation was the psychotype of “genius”, which required my self-realization in many types of human activity. Last but not least was the school environment, which was dominated by an atmosphere of student democracy and creativity, which greatly contributed to the self-realization of the pupils, their creative and intellectual potential. A striking manifestation of the Soviet system of school education with its mission of “comprehensively developed personality” was tested by me outlook model of “station wagon”. And quite similar at that time among the generation of sixties sayings of “physics-lyricism” became my life landmark. This, I think, can be explained by the fact that, in my life, there has perhaps been a better combination of a broad cognitive interest in the natural and social sciences with a love of literature, poetry, music and dance.

– Who was your Teacher, a guide? Which of the world famous – from different times – was inspired by his works and examples?

– As I noted, my first teacher was (1966-1970) Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Head of the Philosophy Department of Rostov Medical Institute Dmitry Zerkin. His educational heritage was continued (1986-1990) by Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Deputy Head of the Department of Pedagogy of the Military-Political Academy named after VI Lenin of the Armed Forces of the USSR, Member of the Expert Council of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR Volodymyr Davydov, and Doctor of Philosophical Sciences of the NAS of Ukraine , and graduated (1992-1996) Principal Researcher at the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Corresponding Member of the NAS of Ukraine Lydia Sohan.

As for the scientists whose heritage inspired and continues to inspire me in my research, I would first of all name such scientists as: Alfred Adler, Sigmund Freud (Austria), Sigmund Bauman, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Carl Robert Popper , Herbert Spencer, Arnold Toynbee (United Kingdom), Daniel Kahneman (Israel), Jose Ortega-i-Gasset (Spain), Ulrich Beck, Max Weber, Martin Heidegger, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Ralph Darendormp, Erihvalg, Erival Jaspers (Germany), Piotr Stompka (Poland), Alexander Ahi lake, Mykola Berdyaev, Andriy Brushlinsky, Mykola Danilevsky, Mykyta Moiseyev, Pityr Sorokin, Sergey Rubinstein, Nina Talizina, David Feldstein, Alexander Chizhevsky, Vladimir Yadov (Russia), Immanuelle Ellernarlard, Elderberwar Ellersturr Thomas Coon, Lloyd De Moz, Talcott Parsons, Paul Lazersfeld, William Sumner (USA), Leonid Burlachuk, Vladimir Vernadsky, Petro Halperin, Olena Donchenko, Sergey Crimean (Ukraine), Jean Baudrillard, Fernand Brodel, Pierre Burber , Emile Durkheim, Auguste Comte, Jean-France Lyotard and Michel Maffesoli, Serge Moscovici and Jean-Paul Sartre, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Alexis de Tocqueville, Michel Foucault (France), Otto Weininger, Max Lüscher, Jean Piaget, Carl Jung (Switzerland) and many others.

– How can your robots integrate with software, with your creative work?

– Prior to the key, the results were the result of the implementation of three copyrighted scientific conceptualizations (the social and social, social cycles and the archetypes of public management), and the following became more and more important: 1994 .); “Successful development of the Church of Christ = Social development AD” (2000 – English and Ukrainian); “The Great Outflow” (2002 – Ukrainian); “The Great Co-Evolution” (2003 – growing., English); “Social cycles” (2008 – Ukrainian); “Institutional peculiarities and technologies of the most important political processes” (2008 – Ukrainian); “Political parties as a sub-form of political and administrative elites in the minds of political modernization” (2008 – Ukrainian); “Conceptual ambush of modalities and governance” (2010, Ukrainian); “Social globalism = Social globalism” (2011 – Ukrainian and Russian, 2012 – Russian); “Ukrainian wonder: a way of depressing to social optimism” (2019 – Ukrainian).

– Is the modern Ukrainian a network or single person? What are its main features?

– Today’s Ukrainian, as evidenced by the data of 84 sections of our monitoring study (1992-2018), is still under development. However, his social portrait, which can be drawn from our monitoring research, is already clearly visible. The leading psychotype of the modern Ukrainian today can be quite confidently called self-sufficient personality, which is inherent in the idealistic picture of the world, the orientation to individual and utilitarian values, sensory-logical thinking, reformist activity and self-control. It is, relatively speaking, the “rational psychosocial type” of a person, which relies accordingly on a rational way of decision-making.

The total number of self-sufficient Ukrainians, who become the leading psychosocial group in society, today is at least a quarter of the adult population of Ukraine. In the near future, this high-probability proportion may increase to two-fifths of the total number of Ukrainians.

The second largest typological group of Ukrainians who have a formed identity are collectivists. Their number in society seems to have reached its level of saturation and is one fifth of the total number of Ukrainians.

The third group of Ukrainians is made up of layers of people whose identities are unformed and therefore exhibit unstable, situationally variable behavior. It is a kind of “transitional” contingent between a rational and emotionally sensitive person, who is sensitive to external information influences and nourishes situational behavior.

– Can you characterize the main “trend persona” of the metamodern era? What are its differences from postmodern and modern man? In general, where does metamodern originate from and where does it originate?

– The general features of the “trend-person” of the metamodern (or post-postmodern) times, as for me, are fundamentally different from the leading psychosociotype of the modern times – the “emotionally-sensitive person”, who has a materialistic picture of the world, orientation to the socially significant (morally important). ) behavior, intuitive thinking and an irrational way of making decisions, a tendency to attribute responsibility for the results of one’s activities to outside forces, and an orientation to traditional social roles.

 However, the psychosocotype described above (with possible sociocultural differences that would best meet current information and communication capabilities such as big data technologies) will resemble a kind of “molecular social model” in which former self-sufficient postmodern personalities continue to relate to their own self. In reality, the behavior of most such “molecular entities” will resemble, under new conditions, the behavior of molecules that, under the action of electromagnetic field forces, acquire a unidirectional character. In other words, a new, post-modern society can be called a network totalitarian society by its very nature.

The range of countries that are gravitating today to the postmodern (post-modern) mathemodern may well be attributed to the Euro-Atlantic area, which has recently been showing signs of post-postmodern reality – the transition from subjectivity of the “I” to the subjectivity of the “We”. This is what characterized the last US presidential election campaign. Honorary Professor Sorbonne Michelle Maffesoli (1988) writes about the end of individualism in his book.

– The struggle for the preservation of identities, borders, as well as for one’s own well-being – does it destroy the process of development, evolution, self-improvement? What is the development process? What struggle do you consider natural, what do you consider atavism, inadequacy, etc.?

– Sorry for the word, but the format you set with the keyword “fight”, to me, is a sign of a bygone historical era (modern), which is finally coming to an end. Judge for yourself. The dominant psychosocial type of the society at that time was the “emotionally-sensitive” person with his extraversion (orientation to the external forms of objects and things) and irreconcilable (warlike) attitude towards the social-class opponent. As a supporter of the “postmodern world” and based on the interests of the new – “rational” psychosocial type of person, which extends its dominant position not only in the post-Soviet space, but in the world as a whole, I reject the word “struggle” as a confrontation with its negative connotation. which is ultimately directed against human development. After all, it does not go beyond the preservation or functioning of a closed-ended social system that, in fact, impedes the progress of man, society or civilization as a whole. Instead, I prefer the word “affirmation” associated with innovation – new trends, practices, etc. that extend the scope of social system development processes.

 Obviously, such an accentuation weakens the traditional (simplified – social) nature of human identity, making it a more complex, multifaceted (social) phenomenon. Under these conditions, the institutional foundations of the community, including its state institutions and their attributes (territory and borders), undergo substantial changes. It is no coincidence that in today’s context there are discussions regarding the weakening of the role of the state and interstate entities. Recently, the issue of the need to develop new principles, peace and security for Modernity is also being updated. One such initiative on the need to launch the Helsinki-2 process in Europe was introduced by the President of the Republic of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, at the OSCE PA meeting on July 5, 2017.

May 10-11, 2019 in Lviv (Ukraine) within the framework of the annual events of the Ukrainian School of Archetype (X TMS-2019) using “dynamic network” technology, we plan to hold the first attempt of a general discussion on developing new principles of peace and security in Europe and the World .

– How would you evaluate the latest developments in international political life (which of your choice: USA, Europe, Russia, countries of the East, etc.)?

– The news that is expanding around the world is the provision of Thomas to provide autocephaly to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine. However, I believe that the recent US presidential election (2016) and the events in France related to the “Yellow Vest” protests (2017) remain more significant for the political situation in the world. Both of these events, to my mind, are interconnected and testify to the approach of these countries to the condition that the English philosopher Thomas Hobbs called in his treatise “Leviathan” (1651) “a war of all against all” (Bellum omnium contra omnes) . In other words, in these countries the liberal-democratic potential of postmodern development is being exhausted and, as we have indicated above, they are approaching the situation of radical social change towards the “metamodern”.

 For me, for example, the main indicator of a social state is the self-awareness of individuals of a leading social group, their identity (social or social). For the societies of the former “Modern” (say, the republics of the former USSR), this identity was associated with the identification of an individual with a social group or class. Accordingly, the value basis of such people was cemented by group or collective values, the person felt as a part of the whole, and therefore such a social subject can reasonably be identified with the category “We”. Quite the opposite type of social subject is the category “I”, which is based on individual values ​​and social (integral) identity. This social psychotype, in fact, is the basis of the modern – Postmodern society, and therefore it is often called atomized, and because of its leading psychological character – rational.

 Of course, in the light of the above, it is quite understandable that the last US presidential election campaign has dramatically changed its rhetoric. The key word in the pre-election texts of both US presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was “We” (2016). We also see it in the title of the book by the Honorable Professor of French Sorbonne Michel Muffesoli “Time of Tribes. The Decline of Individualism in Postmodern Society (1988). A detailed analysis of the social situation in the US and France provides other evidence of the offensive in these countries” Metamodern “.

– What do you think people want to see and hear in the media: politicians, scientists, artists and their works, legislators, those who solve their everyday problems, great personalities or ordinary people, these worlds, near or far and coming?

– It is clear that the future prospects of Ukraine and most other post-Soviet countries are connected with the affirmation of individual values ​​and rational consciousness of people, their innovative activity. Therefore, the key topics of the Ukrainian present day will be self-realization of man and his successes in education, science, business, politics, other spheres of life.

As for the key characters in these topics, they should first and foremost be leaders. And mostly leaders are innovators. After all, the basis for the growth of the country, the well-being of people in one way or another in modern society are linked to the economy, and its basis – the innovation process.

It is quite appropriate to recall the conclusions of the Argentine philosopher and economist Claudio Solomon that he made them in the aftermath of his study of the US economy in the first half of the twentieth century, when in this country formed the information-innovation segment of the economy, forming the basis of its post-industrial. The results obtained show that the industrial economic segment, which is based on labor and capital, provides only up to 14% of the potential profit of economic entities, while a post-industrial economy, able to innovate, can provide 86% of the potential potential profit. Of particular importance is this result for the post-Soviet countries, which, through innovation, could provide both surplus profits for large capital groups and a decent socio-economic level for the middle class of their countries.

In this context, the issue of sources of innovative activity of people is not the last. Given the results of monitoring studies conducted over 26 years by representatives of the Ukrainian School of Archetype, it is not unreasonable to assume that such sources are archetypes of the collective unconscious, in particular, their class, such as the archetypes-logos (see: Gilbert Durant).

– If you consider the media space in terms of the noospheric approach, how would you define this concept, is this entity you personally? What would you include here? What do you think is needed for the development of Ukrainian media space?

– It is considered that the works of the founder of the NAS of Ukraine Vladimir Vernadsky “Ethic” (1880), “A few words about the noosphere” (1944) and “Scientific thought as a planetary phenomenon” (1945) are key to the formation of ecological ethics, which unites in a harmonious whole natural and social aspects of human development. However, with the development of socio-humanitarian science, especially psychology, this noospheric concept of the Ukrainian scientist is quite right to extend to the psychological nature of man. Here, the idea of ​​the existence of archetypes of the collective unconscious, as well as the theory of the phased formation of mental actions and the Frenchman Gilbert Duran’s concept of the Imagineer in the Structural Imagery, can be quite suggested here a hundred years ago by Swiss Carl Jung.

 These key ideas of scientists are promising enough and in my unity, I think, are able to explain the interaction between the conscious (social institutions) and the unconscious (archetypes of the collective unconscious). In particular, as a scientific and educational process, it develops the space of the collective unconscious, and the latter nourishes the modern innovation process, ensures the effective functioning of social institutions and, as mediated archetypes of the collective unconscious (intangible culture of mankind), reproduces the organic unity of the modern “atomized society”.

The media space formed by ZMK is thus a harmonizer of the innovative development of Modern society and a source of social unity of society. Accordingly, the media space is a kind of platform for broad public dialogue, the development of which can be called a media mission.

– What qualitative and quantitative indicators of the information space of the state would you consider to be the most important?

– If we consider innovation as the driving force of social development of modern postmodern society, and communication as a factor of harmonization of the innovation process, then such indicators can be considered the number of “self-sufficient” citizens in society and their communication (computer + internet) weapons. Our BAD technique (Burlachuk, Afonin, & Donchenko, 2002) allows us to measure the first of the indicators with a high degree of confidence. Second, it is the capacity of the media / QMS to support the required level of social innovation, as well as the scope of the information and innovation segment of the post-industrial economy and its competitiveness characteristics.

– What bright personalities of the past and our time would you like to see on Ukrainian TV and hear on Ukrainian radio? The same question applies to TV and radio from around the world.

– It seems to me that each of the figures that adequately anticipated or described the Postmodern modernity, above all its “universal” characteristics, is worthy to be acquainted with it, its ideas and evaluations by our youth. For specific personalities, they are individual preferences. Among them, I would call, first of all, the British Sigmund Bauman, the Americans Erich Fromm, Edward Burnes, the French Jean Baudrillard, Gilbert Duran, Michel Mafesoli, Serge Moskovichi, Alexis de Tocqueville, Michel Foucault, Tejar de Chardin, Schiardl Chardin.

– You are the inspiration and head of the International Internet Club of Scientists and Experts. How do you see the role of communication and dialogue? What kind of dialogue is relevant, what can its tone be, and what do you think hinders the dialogue as such? How do you achieve that the people who participate in the discussions of the Club do not once again say “what should be” as a mantra, but still individual and free, and thus unexpected, undeniable, vulnerable to external criticism? What other examples of other philosophical, political discussion clubs can you provide?

– As we have already noted, innovation is a systemic factor in the development of modern society, whose potential today in Ukraine is 25% and in the near future will grow to 40% of the adult population. This already amounts to about 10 million innovators and will increase to 15 million Ukrainians in the near future. Given the wide range of social interests, this amount of multi-vector innovative activity of people is unlikely to be able to remain in the control of state and non-state management. Self-organization processes should come to the rescue. However, running them is unlikely to be possible without communication.

I will probably not be original if, following my fellow countryman from Donetsk, Alexander Panarin, professor at Moscow University named after MV Lomonosov, I say that the communicative component plays the role of the harmonizer of modern society in modern society.

In the practice of establishing the Ukrainian School of Archetype, in 1999 we started something like the Social Globalist Club at the laboratory of the Institute of Political and Social Psychology of the National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine. The frequency of our meetings was 1-2 months. At such meetings we invited speakers of current topics from Ukraine, Russia. Even in conjunction with a large St. Petersburg university, they planned to hold an international conference to bring a large group of Ukrainian researchers such as Anatoly Arseyenko, Vitaliy Pavlenko, Yuriy Pakhomov and others. As part of the preparations for the conference, the Russians claimed responsibility for the granting of our intentions. We are for the invitation of European speakers (from London, Amsterdam and Rome). Unfortunately, despite the work already underway to prepare the event, this remarkable intention has never been achieved due to a lack of financial support.

A vivid attempt to develop such initiatives was the practice that we initiated during the existence of the Ukrainian School of Archetype. It is about launching activities to promote the results of the USA research in the format of an international lecture on “Laws and features of Ukrainian transformation”. During the period from October 2015 to December 2016, we organized 20 international distance-based online remote formats with the participation of participants from 5 countries: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCiE7UTMLHiNAW5nY7tHQTM6wJeOPWyRy. A discussion site was opened in the format of the International Internet Club of Friends of the Ukrainian School of Archetype, which lasted from September 2016 to April 2017: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCiE7UTMLHiNdM-9MKDe4JC-QyqQsKWyp).

In organizing this work, we modeled the club of supporters of the ideas of Gilbert Durant in Grenoble (France). True, not literally, but only as a guide. Today, we can say that these forms of work of our community are still used, but occasionally as needed, because the main forms we practice (a set of annual events of the US), we are completely satisfied. There are a number of authors around the school and its activities, whose composition is dynamic. The school’s orbit today includes about 200 scientists from 15 countries. Usha has a youth wing that is updated annually. However, this does not provide full guarantees for sustainable development. The latter, in my opinion, can provide the only one – an innovative component that must be tested annually. This is the only way to develop.

– What are your favorite places in Kiev, Ukraine? Maybe not only in Ukraine? I think a lot of people define their favorite places …

– I think you agree with the idea that the place of your birth and childhood are the most expensive places for each of us. For me, this is the city of Mariupol in Donetsk region, where my childhood and school years passed. Not only do I remember my place of birth (Kungur city of the Perm region), but I was born there, being temporarily the same as in the city of Vorkuta or the forestry of the Arkhangelsk region of Russia.

I remember that after 8th grade I dreamed to become a captain of long-distance swimming and therefore went to go to Riga (Latvia) seafaring school. Eventually, after my full-time job, I ended up in Lviv, where I actually started working. Already at adulthood, I realized that my desire to leave Mariupol was related to the needs of my own development, and therefore to the culture. Today, the “cultural disadvantage” of this or that locality is being offset by the Internet and the mass media. And that can be said to be a positive thing.

So, my second hometown was Lviv, in particular the outskirts of the High Castle, which retains the memory of Danylo Halytsky and his son Leo. In Lviv, in Potocki Castle, I got married. My twin sons were born here. And Lviv region (Chervonograd city of Sokal district) as a whole became the beginning of my working career.

– What works of art, works of art (theater, cinema, painting, etc.), names of writers, artists are the most inspiration to you, those closest to you, your favorite?

– With modern cinema, literature, theater, etc., there is hardly anything to brag about. Here I remain a conservative supporter of classical literature, music and art. Although I can not say that I completely reject the opportunity to meet new authors. Once in my 90s, my son in Germany (and he is an ardent supporter of all Ukrainian), I discovered with great pleasure such new Ukrainian authors as Andrukhovich, Zabuzhko, Zhadan, Kurkov and others.

– Sometimes I hear this: if you “spray” (to love both the humanities and natural sciences, engage in various favorite subjects, go to conferences a lot, have a lot of creative connections, “be distracted” by different projects and “want too much”), you will do as much as a scientist or artist, as you would have done if you had not “scattered”. Apparently, this is solved individually. What will you say?

– You touched on the typological features of the modern self-sufficient person, who has a narrow profile of his professional abilities. In this connection, I recall a case that happened to me in 2002 in Scotland. During the conference, I lost the screw holding the eyepiece. In my turn to the watch workshop with this problem, I received a stubborn suggestion to look for an optics repair shop. It was here that I first felt the difference between the Western European specialization of personnel and our post-Soviet versatility.

The kind of universalism offered by the Soviet system of production and management brought up the corresponding psychosociotype of the “genius” man – a kind of cat Matroskin from the famous in the post-Soviet space cartoon “Prostokvashino” who knows both the second and third and much more. It was this psychosocial prototype of genius that led me to acquire more than one profession. Their arsenal numbered 34 profiles. Instead, time brings its own, and today the marked human properties are already becoming exotic.

– Your wife is not jealous of your students and colleagues – because your communication is immense, and there are no plans for the end-of-land?

– I was very lucky with my wife. There is a solid trust between us and no misunderstandings arise. Just me and her have many different creative initiatives and cases. So, there is simply no time for any fun.

– You travel the world a lot as a scientist. An example of this is, in particular, the wonderful meeting of scientists at the University of Montpellier 3 them. The Valerie Fields in France this June, of which she had the good fortune to be. I want to ask you: Is a world possible without ideology, without political parties, competition, the thirst for victory over one another, wars, including information? Is non-violence policy real?

– It may surprise someone, but lately, I have come to the conclusion that the Soviet system, with its irreconcilable socio-class nature and ideology, carries the potential of “warlike conflict”. At least what this system is capable of is compromise, which is essentially a delayed decision. In other words, of all forms of statehood, the totalitarian system is expansive in nature.

Particularly dangerous from this point of view is the transitional state of society from totalitarianism to democracy in its inverse (reverse) state, when there is a departure from proclaimed forms of democracy and a return to dictatorship in politics, economy and culture. We have seen examples of this inversion in post-winter Germany (1933-1945), Chile (1973-1990), and now we see in Russia (2000-2018) and other countries

From this point of view, the liberal democratic system of government is the least vulnerable in terms of state violence, the thirst for victory over one another, wars, etc.

– What values ​​do you think the EU has created that would be implemented in Ukraine? What values ​​do you think Ukraine has to offer to the world, because there are those that are authentic in nature and destiny of Ukrainians and have emerged as traditional natural-historical ways?

– First of all, it is about values ​​and institutions related to providing conditions for the flourishing of individual human forces – educational standards of lifelong learning standards, the right of one to choose, to receive a grant or to replace a vacant position, etc. The latter, unfortunately, is a significant flaw in the post-Soviet space, where the formula of democracy given to us by American political scientist Adam Przeworski is misconstrued. If he says that democracy is a foreseen procedure, but the unintended consequences of applying it (in fact, competition). So here we are: the consequences of applying the procedure are foreseen (we know who we choose!), But unforeseen procedures. The variability of such procedures is explained by the need for reform. Institutions of protection of intellectual property and property rights of human beings, etc. are the property of modern Europe.

 I am sure that Ukraine will build, and very soon, modern institutions that will stand up for the protection of the rights and interests of Ukrainians. Today, however, ours, the Ukrainian oligarchs, who are not ready to share their wealth with society, are in the way. In addition, Ukraine is today the closest offshore for major European business. To overcome this tendency, I think, lies not in the economic but in the psychological plane. After all, the problem is not, in fact, in the oligarchs, but in the “oligarchic post-Soviet consciousness” that dominates the post-Soviet space. In particular, according to monitoring studies of the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, since 1992 is the situation still unchanged? Ukrainians show a psychological willingness to solve their own problems at the expense of another. All this can be seen as a certain legacy of the Soviet era with its state monopoly, which today has automatically become a private monopoly of large capital.

 And yet, the monitoring data from the Ukrainian School of Archetype gives us hope that the situation will change for the better. And in the near future. And the secret of such dynamic change lies not in the economic circumstances that US President Franklin Roosevelt once offered as a recipe for the creation of a “middle class” that has become the basis of economic development in modern society. I think, because of socio-cultural features that, in fact, made possible the existence of the system of the Soviet system and state monopoly, Ukraine with its “median” (golden section) socio-cultural specificity, will demonstrate the newest forms of exit from the crisis of the transition period. With these changes, it will soon bring to the world not only the economic dynamics of development, but also new proposals in the labor market.

– If tomorrow were announced that the planet Earth is moving to a new level, now everything is freedom and unlimited possibilities, what would you take at once and what would you be like? What would the world be like, what was new in it and what would be gone forever? And what would you call the era that follows the metamodern era?

– If such an opportunity really came, he would inevitably use it for the implementation of his numerous projects, the realization of which was hampered by the lack of funds.

 I confess that this motive drives my activity and my life as a whole.

– Thank you for the interview, dear Mr. Edward. I am glad to know you, to learn from you the most important skills of a student, a researcher. Thank you and your assistants for the excellent scientific events of the Ukrainian and international levels, for the outstanding work that the world has just seen – the translation of a Ukrainian book by a famous French sociologist, our contemporary Michel Mafesoli, as well as for personal acquaintance with him and his followers.

Natalia Golovanova

Online newspaper – Horizon