Apocalyptica West gold billion from futurologists

"In the coming new world order there will be losers and winners. Number of losers, of course, will exceed the number of winners. They will seek to have a chance at a decent life, but it is likely that chance will not provide. They will be in the pen, will choke with a poisoned atmosphere, and on them no one would pay attention because of the simple indifference. All the horrors of the XX century will fade in comparison with this picture "

The ideology of globalization, Jacques Attali

"… Our real enemy is humanity itself"

Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider, the report for the "Club of Rome"

Until now, in the public mind the image of the post-industrial society dominated presented in the literature futurological the last 30 years. The case of this literature was elaborated within the framework of a larger project to implement that were involved eminent scientists, analysts and philosophers. A number of books of this genre have become outstanding bestsellers.

In general, this literature was imbued with optimistic expectations of the industrial transformation of society at the end of the XX century in the "knowledge society", rationally organized, due to new computing and communication. J. Ellul wrote: "We live in a technical and rationalistic world. We are all better recognize the dangers of this world. We need some kind of support. And since you can not find a single definitive answer, to find a way out of this world, in a satisfactory manner acceptable predrasschitat future futurists cling to the image of a future that can not be predrasschitat, mentally jump over obstacles, construct an unreal society … The fact that unconsciously offer us futurologists — is radically tehnizirovanny world from which removed only obvious, blatant inconvenience technology; this is an absolute triumph of technical rationality under the guise of dreams "[286, p. 147].

In post-industrial "society of knowledge" technical rationality domination over man, with his needs evolution reaches its full clarity. X. Blumenberg shows a step-by-step nature of technology slipped from view of man and began to dictate the rules of the social order: "I would like to show an example of what is seen and actually opened to the thing itself. I will return to the simple example of the doorbell. There are the old mechanical models of rings to be tugging on the cord or twist: using them, you can experience an immediate sense of the specific creation of the desired effect, as the hand between the current call and there is adequate communication, that is, if I'm standing in front of such a device, I do not know just what I should do, but how to do it.

The situation is different with push-button electric bell: carried a hand pressing a completely non-specific and subject to Heteromorphic effect — we no longer produce the effect, but only call it. The desired effect is, so to speak, for us, is prepared for the machine, and the carefully sheltered from us its conditionality and complexity actuation, inspiring us an idea of the effect does not require much effort. If you instruct us an idea of their constant willingness-to-use, technical world, regardless of all the functional requirements, appears to us as buildings, skins, featureless facades to them. The functional part of human gomogeneziruetsya and ideally reduced to a minimum — to push the button. Mechanization are increasingly turning to non-specific human actions.

Here, I'm not saying anything about a simple physical fact, according to which the difference between the mechanical and electrical bell objective is that in the former case, we have to make our energy required for the process, while the second — use a different energy, already finished. In our case, is decisive phenomenological point of view on how the direct experience are givens. During a "pressing", in fact, triumphant rejection of comprehension (in the literal sense — beholding) and the effect of the order, the order and the product, will and action close to each other at the shortest distance and thus related to each other without any However efforts like the ideal of the Christian lurking productivity, expressed in the words of God: "Let it be", opening the Bible.

In a world that is increasingly characterized by the features on-off, not only increases the interchangeability of persons performing non-specific actions, but also the interchangeability of themselves … The way to self-representation breakers technical subject not only rejects any curiosity about me as an attempt to inspection by the person … but does all seem to generally avoid issues not only with respect to the secrets of the construction and principles of operation, but first of all the issues of the right to exist.

Something a ready-to-use, turn on and off with your finger, does not justify its existence nor its theoretical origin or needs and motives of life, which it serves. It is legitimate only because it is ordered, bought, sold and implemented into production, a prerequisite for their existence are not meaningful needs, but on the other hand requires the emergence of these needs and of sense. Under these conditions it is necessary to artificially create a layer of motifs and important fictions, which, in turn, requires technical costs. The ideal of such manipulation is the conversion of an artificial product for granted, it allows you to mute all the questions as to whether the product is appropriate, meaningful, dignified man justified in any way "[74].

Speaking of futurology "knowledge society", we must remember that he futurism emerged as a utopia of creating "mechanized man." We must return to the manifesto Futurist Marinetti, they are relevant today[4]. In 1912, Marinetti wrote: "It ended the rule of man. Comes the age of technology! But what scientists can besides physical and chemical reactions of the formulas? And we first become acquainted with the technique, and then become friends with her and prepare the emergence of mechanical man COMPLETE WITH REPLACEMENT PARTS "[185, p. 368].

It should immediately be noted that in Russian culture and philosophy directly to the beginning of the XX century, a sharp acceleration of mechanization of the world was to problematize it as a threat to the spiritual realm of man as dehumanization world. Berdyaev defined this point as follows: "beginning of a new relationship of man from nature, technically-machine dependencies" [71]. In "The Meaning of History," he writes of the "magical power" of the machine over man, it "imposes a print of his image on the spirit of man" [69].

Berdyaev sees in technology eschatological beginning — it creates a new man: "Technology has its eschatology back Christian — conquering the world and the organization of life without God and without a spiritual rebirth of man … Industrial technological civilization is an increasing civilized barbarism … Properties technological civilization such that it can use the barbarian exactly the same as a man of high culture "(quoted in [59]).

RK Balandin for his work on the philosophy of technology [59] took the motto these lines from a poem by Maximilian Voloshin (1922):

The car won the person:
Needed a servant to wipe her sweat
To anoint thee with the oil of the crotch,
Coal feed and take litter.
And then she began to require:
Infested bunch of muscles and wills,
Brought up in a hungry discipline
And greedy lout, the spirit of a bad bargain
For the joy of comfort to the middle class.

However futuristic research 70-80-ies of the XX century are different from prophecies and premonitions 20-30s to their systematic and organized character. They themselves have become institutionalized area of knowledge. During the outburst of this research, a whole network of organizations involved in developing an "image of the future" — as for the world, and, most importantly, for the West in the world.

An example of open organization serves as the Club of Rome, which became a prominent book system analysts reports with the scenarios of development of civilization in the medium term. In contrast to the Club of Rome on the initiative of the Rockefeller was created "Trilateral Commission" led by Zbigniew Brzezinski. She has developed projects of the future of society in the "semi-closed" procedure. There were a lot of think tanks and government, and enterprise (known examples — Hudson Institute or corporation "RAND"). Particularly intense this work started at the turn of the 60s and 70s. This step prompted a new type of crises — the excitement of students in 1968 (the first "postmodern revolution") and the oil crisis of 1973

The scale of the futurological activities were great, the West experienced a surge of apocalyptic ("revelation" of the future). For example, in 1970 the Club of Rome ordered the group D. Meadows at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to conduct a "two-year study of the causes and long-term effects of population growth, industrial capital, food production, consumption of resources and environmental pollution." According to Director of the Club of Rome A. Peccei, the task "was to ensure that reveal the disastrous consequences of current trends and encourage political changes that would help them escape."

In 1972, according to the results of this study the book "Limits to Growth" [31]. She immediately went to the 30 languages with a circulation of 10 million copies — an incredible for popular science publications level. More than 1000 training courses at universities used the book as a textbook, indicating that the perception of the report of the scientific elite of the West. The conclusion of the report was that: "It is necessary to take measures to ensure the rationalization of the entire production system and the relocation of industries within the planet."

Thus began the practical development of the modern doctrine globalization. In the scenario "rationalization" of the global production system and its "re-deployment within the planet" to the West to become the center for the generation of knowledge (Science, technology development and design) and the center of outflows information. It is in the annex to the West and then introduced the concept of Information Society and, later, the "knowledge society". These were the sections of the generalized image of the "civilization of the Third Wave", which denotes the word post industrialism.

In the literature futurological 70s, the term "post-industrialism" increasingly expresses formational features anticipates the image of the West, the profile of the image focuses on the organization of production, the social structure of society and the relations of production. Ideologist of post-industrialism D. Bell directly uses the term formation approach and even the theory of value. The essence of political economy of post-industrial society, he sets out as follows: "The knowledge and methods for their practical application replaces labor as a source of surplus value. In this sense, labor and capital were the central variables in an industrial society, because information and knowledge are crucial variables of post-industrial society "[63, p. 332][5].

Type the culture of this future society is generally expressed by the term postmodernism. Here the emphasis is on the fact that the new company will be consolidated by a new type of rationality, which overcome norms, dogmas and ideals of the Enlightenment. Civilizational pathos postmodern much more radical than that of post-industrialism as a whole, it stronglydenial Education. Postmodernism at one time seemed even as a discontinuity in the development of modern societies of the West (modern), although the former, such waves with signs of the counterculture as the crisis re-integrated into the mainstream.

The concept of "knowledge societies" can be regarded as a conservative alternative to the vector of post-modernism. She — a product of civilization rather than formational, look at the historical process. Most philosophers who develop this concept in general rejects the idea of continuity and discontinuity stresses genetic link with New time and science, the Enlightenment and its rationality — within and on the basis of technological industrialism. According to Mr. Bell, "post-industrial society — is an industrial" society of knowledge "."

A. Touraine specifically highlights continuity ties of post-industrial "society of knowledge" with industrial society of modern times: "No one, even the most ardent supporters of the concept of post-industrial society does not deny that it may not be, at least partially, as giperindustrialnoe society. How then, can we combine continuity and continuity in the pursuit of societal types? Necessary to answer this important question to determine the location of the communication society emerging before our eyes, in relation to the industrial society, among which it appears "[242, p. 412]. Here in the correct form is expressed fundamental disagreement with the "sociological" assumptions of most futurists about the social structure of "knowledge societies".

Although futurists saw the transition to post-industrialism as leap forward from an industrial society, in many ways, the concept of "knowledge societies" carries a chargefundamentalism the idea of returning to our roots, to the slogan "Knowledge — the power of" Francis Bacon. D. Bell directly paraphrases the formula Bacon: "Statistics — is power. Access to information is a condition of freedom. " In this relationship the concept of "knowledge societies" neo-liberalism, the fundamentalist doctrine of the West in terms of how stories change economic formations.

All these particular sections of the image of the emerging new West do not exclude each other, they have great potential for the synthesis of what we see in the development of neo-liberalism of many postmodern approaches and standards. Therefore, the concept of "knowledge societies" can not be taken in isolation from the other heads west apocalyptic. Even from the reports of the Club of Rome and continue this series of reports Davos forum can be concluded that that the universalist sense that the phrase "knowledge society" would in the language of the Enlightenment, can not be realized within the framework of globalization as a new world order.

As can be seen from the works of the historical school of Fernand Braudel and Immanuel Wallerstein's predictions, the current globalization is an attempt to strengthen the global capitalist system, built on the principle of "center — periphery". In this system, the periphery of living arrangements can be built as the center. It will have a small enclaves of modern production and life, and resourced by the archaism of production and way of life of the vast majority of the population (see [151]). "Knowledge society" in this manner can not be a "Republic of Letters" as a utopia of the Enlightenment. The Republic of scientists could exist in humanity connected to freedom, equality and fraternity, so that "citizens" of the Republic were not separated insurmountable national and cultural barriers, and could equally indulge in the study and dissemination of objective knowledge.

"Knowledge society" of the West as metropolis of global capitalism separated from the "external proletariat" is not included in the "golden billion", about the same as the enlightened philosophers of Athens were separated from the slaves (this future order and often referred to as "neo-antiquity"). The report of the Club of Rome Laszlo "The goals for the global society" [23] it is a "global geomeostaticheskoy system" controlled "charitable dictatorship technocratic elite." "Knowledge society" — the institution of the technocratic elite.

The report of the Club of Rome's "The First Global Revolution" (1991), in the medium term (to the middle of the XXI century), the future looks like this: "By the middle of the next century in today's industrialized countries will live less than 20% of the total population of the globe. Are we able to imagine the world of the future, in which a handful of wealthy nations, which has the latest weapons, is protected by a huge number of hungry, uneducated, out of work and very evil people living in all the other countries? Such a scenario arising from the current trends of development, does not bode well. Of course, the planet will have a lot of events that we can not foresee today, but the fact that a number of less developed countries will have nuclear weapons of its own production, it is obvious "[135, p. 99-100].

The very terminology of these arguments eloquent.

The President of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Jacques Attali in 1990 wrote a book, "The Millennium. Winners and losers in the coming world order. The horizon line. " It has been translated into Russian in 1993 under the title "On the threshold of the new millennium". [52] It Attali describes the future system: "In the coming new world order there will be losers and winners. Number of losers, of course, will exceed the number of winners. They will seek to have a chance at a decent life, but it is likely that chance will not provide. They will be in the pen, will choke with a poisoned atmosphere, and on them no one would pay attention because of the simple indifference. All the horrors of the XX century will fade in comparison with this picture. "

In his latest book, "A Brief History of the Future," which was published in 2006, Attali refines its forecast based on the experience of the last two decades, he sees the future as a "triumphal march of money." Attali believes that if the march continues, "do away with all the money that can stop them, including the state," they gradually break down (even in the U.S. there will be no chance of survival). Then the market will form what Attali calls giperimperiey — Planetary, creating great wealth and dire poverty. "The nature there is savagely exploited, and all will be private, including the army, police and justice. The human being becomes an artifact, object of mass consumption, consumers who have also become artifacts. Then disarmed, useless for their own creations people disappear. "

But in dealing with the globalization, according to Attali, it is impossible, since this "plunge mankind into the abyss of barbarism regressive and devastating battles with weapons, which today is unthinkable … oppose each other will be the state, religious groups, terrorist organizations and lone gunmen. It can lead to the destruction of mankind "(presented in [284]).

This — Attali forecast for mid-XXI century. He, as it happens with most of the predictions do not come true in their apocalyptic detail, but indicates a possible vector events. But we must note that the forecasts for 2010, which were made almost thirty years ago, is very pessimistic. Commissioned by the Club of Rome, a study was conducted of the food problem in the world (the project of Hans Linnemann). Mathematical modeling of geo-economic situation in the 10 regions for each year up to 2010 showed that the Earth was even made in the 80 years the level of technology is able to feed a lot more people than predicted boldest forecasts — provided that the cash food will be distributed among people more equitably. However, the simulation of real conditions has led to the conclusion that the prevalence of hunger in the world will increase. By 2010, the expected increase in world hunger is more than 3 times.

"Is — exclaims A. Peccei — after the arms and oil food also turn into a political weapon and a means of political pressure, and because we own folly destined eventually to witness such a" solution "of the problem, as a revival of feudal monopoly sort people and nations, and to decide who will receive food and, therefore, will live "[203].

This branch of Western futurology is inherent in radical mondializm — The denial of the sovereignty of peoples over their territories and resources. This led to an important shift in the perception of law. The forces that 'had the economic and military power in order to formulate the principles of the "new world order" in effect declared their right to ownership and management of resources all over the world (in the words of one diplomat, "should avoid the risk of wastage of raw materials by national quarters."

In 1977, A. Peccei said the new economic order, which is a struggle for the mid 70s, will be only a temporary intermediate stage, because "it is based on a system of many largely sovereign states." Already, the report predicted Mesarovic "uncontrollability of the World" and the question of the development of a global "master plan", which can only realize a world government.

Steps to dismantle the system of international law that has developed in the XX century and based on the principle of the sovereignty of nation states, were made under the banner of the right of the Western powers to "humanitarian intervention" to protect human rights. In the report of King and B. Schneider says: "The very concept of sovereignty, proclaimed by all governments shrine is problematic … A new concept of" right to intervene "came into being as a result, the state of the artificial boundaries between tribes and nations. It was proposed by France, and then, with the approval of the UN, it is implemented together with the UK and the U.S. in the form of humanitarian aid the Kurdish population of Iraq. Securing the concept, if it happens in the future, will mean significant evolution of international law, which are increasingly protected humanistic principles, not constitutional law and nationalistic self-centeredness "[135, p. 46 ~ 47][6].

The main source of fear, which pumped the reports — ostensibly to breed with incredible speed and just as quickly, most impoverished people in the "Third World." The residents of the West artificially created "besieged fortress syndrome." The notion that the Earth is overpopulated, formulated more and more tightly. Here is the statement of scientists from the United States. "The growth of the population — the main cause of poverty, and the current pace it has planetary ekopatologichesky process" (D Herrn, 1990). "With the current population of the Earth, more than 5 billion, we are likely to have long exhausted the possibility of sustainable development" (D. Pimentel, 1987). More harshly denied and the sovereignty of peoples over resources, "Property of mankind is the whole planet as a whole, rather than the resources at the individual countries. National sovereignty is unable to cope with problems such as the greenhouse effect, acid rain and pollution of the ocean "(Kheifets, 1991).

A number of claims were total. In the report of King and B. Schneider says, for example: "All the problems in most developing countries are significantly associated with the rapid growth of their population "[135, p. 58]. This is unacceptable distortion of reality. The problem of under-development — one of the well-studied, and population growth — more likely the cause than a consequence (or rather, there is a vicious circle created by colonialism). To quote the famous French biologist Jean Lege: "It is clear that the intentional mixing of the problems associated with the energy crisis, demographic development and pollution of the environment, is nothing but an attempt to disguise the general crisis of capitalism" [160][7].

In the same report, King and Schneider predicted this course of events: "It is not difficult to imagine the countless number of hungry and desperate immigrants disembarking of boats on the northern coast of the Mediterranean Sea … The influx of migrants can cause a sharp increase in" defense "of racism in the entry and facilitate the establishment of a them on a wave of populist dictatorships "[135, p. 100-101]. Brief conclusions are full of pessimism. Technological progress of post-industrialism, according to the authors, will only deepen the divide, for poor countries worse off, "Rose of the North prospects are not as rosy for the South … Technological innovations offer the advantages of best countries to the detriment of those who are at an earlier stage of economic Development "(emphasis ed.) [135, p. 110, 111]. And the crown of all is this: "Thus, our real enemy is humanity itself" [135, p. 162]. This is visible passion authors to hyperbole, and yet we have to admit the conclusion extremely grim.

Thus, the opinion of prominent Western philosophers and futurists in the near-term prospects of development of the metropolitan society (which got the title of "knowledge society") deniesUniversalism Education — in spite of the optimistic assertions of some ideologues of post-industrial globalization. This is indicated at the first "coil" discuss the concept of a future society in the late 70's — early 80-ies of XX century. James P. Grant wrote specifically about the computer technology: "These cars have always been and will remain the instruments, the effect of which is beyond the individual nation states. They will inevitably be instruments of imperialism certain communities in their relations with other communities … In this sense, they are not neutral tools, but ones that exclude certain forms of communities and encourage them to other forms of "[101, p. 158].

In this context, the term "knowledge society" repeats in a truncated form, the meaning of the slogan Bacon. In both declared not just autonomy knowledge of moral values (objectivity, impartiality, knowledge), but also the knowledge of the values of the rule. The documents, which laid the foundation of the concept of globalization, the reports of the Club of Rome can be attributed to the most moderate and humanistic. But they are in their methodology originate from the hard positivism — considering the problems of society is in them apart from the ethical values, norms and constraints.

The second report, writes the author Mesarovich, "sees the world not with the immutable ideological positions and impartially based — as far as is humanly possible — on the data and the scientific method." In the article "Two types of the future of the world" by E. Jantsch (himself a member of the Club of Rome) said that. These studies are based on an almost complete rejection of the values of "deep goals and objectives in life and humanity."

The liberal philosopher John Gray, speaking of the current crisis of industrialism, it points to the side of the "knowledge society": "The legacy of the Enlightenment project — which is also a heritage and Westernization — a world controlled by the calculation and the arbitrariness of that person and do not understand the devastating aimless" [103, s. 282].

Thus, a new wave of mechanization, leading to the formation of rich countries 'knowledge societies' (Information Society), according to the eminent philosophers of post-industrialism, must lead to the following changes in the human civilization:

• Further dehumanization society;

• the use of new technology as a means of a new round of imperialism (Westernization);

• Expanding the withdrawal of resources from poor countries and absolute deterioration of the quality of life of their peoples;

• strengthening the military confrontation between the North and the South;

• shift the political order in the rich countries of the technocratic totalitarianism.

The experience of the 90s showed that the concept of the information society and the "knowledge society" was closely linked with the doctrine of globalization and imbued with Eurocentrism. The growing anti-globalization in non-Western countries and in the West itself, prompting UNESCO, first, to distance themselves from the apology of the information society, and secondly, to replace the concept of "knowledge societies" as a model of post-industrial society of the western concept of "knowledge societies" as a set of co-existing cultural and civilized societies.

At the World Summit on the Information Society (Geneva, 2003) was made a statement: "The position of UNESCO provides for the promotion of the concept of knowledge societies but not of the world Information Society because simply increasing the flow of information does not necessarily lead to new opportunities for the development of the proposed knowledge. In this regard, the need for more sophisticated, comprehensive and coherent vision and clear prospects for development.

There are four principles, the observance of which is indispensable for the development of equitable knowledge societies: cultural diversity, equal access to education, universal access to information in the public domain; Freedom of expression "[92].

The statement declared two principles, sharply contrary to the doctrine and globalization ("cultural diversity"), and approved the concept of Western "society of knowledge" intellectual property law which is inconsistent with the "universal access to information."

This shift in concepts done carefully and politically correct. In an interview with the Deputy Director-General for Communication and Information, Abdul Waheed Khan explains why the concept of "knowledge society" is different from the concept of "information society": "In fact, these two concepts are complementary. The information society is the building block of a knowledge society. In my opinion, the concept of the "information society" is connected with the idea of "technological innovation", while the concept of "knowledge society" encompasses social, cultural, economic, political, and economic and legal aspects of the transformation, and more pluralistic and developmental perspective on the future "[188].

In 2005 published the UNESCO World Report "Towards Knowledge Societies", in the preface to which the Director-General of UNESCO, said: "Today it is recognized that knowledge has become a subject of enormous economic, political and cultural interests, so that can be used to determine qualitatively new state of society , the contours of which we are only beginning to emerge.

"Knowledge society" … If the importance of this concept is no one in doubt concerning its substantive aspect of the situation is not so brilliant. What kind of knowledge (or knowledge) is actually about? Whether to accept the hegemony of the scientific and technical models in determining the legitimate and productive knowledge? And what to do with the imbalance, were observed: in the area of access to knowledge and obstacles along the way both nationally and on a global scale? These are just a few questions that this report, the first UNESCO world report of this kind, trying to find a moral and practical elements of the response, guided by a deep conviction that the emerging society will not be satisfied with the role of simple components of the global information society. To remain human. and resilient, they will have to transform itself into a community of sharing knowledge. The plural here refers to the need to keep in mind the variety of "[119, p. 7].

These issues we'll be back discussing the issues of Sociology of "knowledge societies".

GV Osipov, SG Kara-Murza

Read in full: Knowledge Society: The Story of modernization in the West and in the USSR

Like this post? Please share to your friends: