Shmueli Eyzenshtadt (1923-2010) - amerikanskiy y izrailiskiy sosiolog.

 

Shmueli Eyzenshtadt

Sryvy modernizasiiy[1]

 

I

Optimizm, sovsem nedavno vdohnovlyavshiy mnogochislennye issledovaniya, posvyashennye slaborazvitym regionam y ih molodym nasiyam, y pozvolyavshiy nastaivati na tom, chto ety novorojdennye strany deystviytelino, pusti medlenno y uryvkami, no prodvigaitsya k polnosennoy modernizasiy y ustoychivomu rostu, v poslednee vremya smenilsya nastorojennostiu y daje pessimizmom. Istochnikom takoy smeny nastroeniya poslujil tot fakt, chto vo mnogih novoobrazovannyh stranah, pervonachalino sumevshih zalojiti osnovy dlya obnovleniya razlichnyh institusionalinyh sfer, vkluchaya politiku, prosess modernizasiy ne prosto zamedlilsya, no koe-gde y vovse ostanovilsya. Ponachalu sformirovannye tam konstitusionnye rejimy zashatalisi, postepenno ustupaya mesto raznoobraznym avtoritarnym ily poluavtoritarnym formam pravleniya. V poslednee vremya eta tendensiya proyavila sebya v takih stranah, kak Indoneziya, Pakistan, Birma y Sudan[2].

Seli dannoy raboty - proanalizirovati prirodu sosialinyh prosessov, vlekushih za soboy izmeneniya, kotorye mojno nazvati sryvamy politicheskoy modernizasiiy.

Shmueli Eyzenshtadt (1923-2010) - amerikanskiy y izrailiskiy sosiolog.

 

Shmueli Eyzenshtadt

Sryvy modernizasiiy[1]

 

I

Optimizm, sovsem nedavno vdohnovlyavshiy mnogochislennye issledovaniya, posvyashennye slaborazvitym regionam y ih molodym nasiyam, y pozvolyavshiy nastaivati na tom, chto ety novorojdennye strany deystviytelino, pusti medlenno y uryvkami, no prodvigaitsya k polnosennoy modernizasiy y ustoychivomu rostu, v poslednee vremya smenilsya nastorojennostiu y daje pessimizmom. Istochnikom takoy smeny nastroeniya poslujil tot fakt, chto vo mnogih novoobrazovannyh stranah, pervonachalino sumevshih zalojiti osnovy dlya obnovleniya razlichnyh institusionalinyh sfer, vkluchaya politiku, prosess modernizasiy ne prosto zamedlilsya, no koe-gde y vovse ostanovilsya. Ponachalu sformirovannye tam konstitusionnye rejimy zashatalisi, postepenno ustupaya mesto raznoobraznym avtoritarnym ily poluavtoritarnym formam pravleniya. V poslednee vremya eta tendensiya proyavila sebya v takih stranah, kak Indoneziya, Pakistan, Birma y Sudan[2].

Seli dannoy raboty - proanalizirovati prirodu sosialinyh prosessov, vlekushih za soboy izmeneniya, kotorye mojno nazvati sryvamy politicheskoy modernizasiiy.

 

II

Ne stoit usmatrivati opredelyaishui harakteristiku razvitiya upomyanutyh molodyh nasiy v tom, chto impulis, polojivshiy nachalo modernizasii, yakoby materializovalsya v nih ne v polnoy mere. Pochty v kajdoy iz etih stran predprinimalisi popytky uchrediti sovremennye politicheskie y sosialinye instituty, a v ryade oblastey - budi to konstitusionnoe stroiytelistvo, sozdanie sovremennoy burokratii, politicheskih partiy ily novyh ekonomicheskih aktorov - udalosi sdelati dovolino mnogo. Krome togo, v molodyh sosiumah fiksiruetsya izmenenie kluchevyh sosialino-ekonomicheskih indeksov, sviydetelistvuiyshih o prosesse modernizasii: sredy nih pokazately urbanizasii, gramotnosti, razvitiya sredstv massovoy informasii, diyversifikasiy zanyatosti. V tom je rusle menyaitsya y strukturnye indeksy, govoryashie ob oslableniy tradisionnyh obshestvennyh svyazey, uglubleniy sosialinoy differensiasii, stanovleniy nekotoryh sovremennyh form politicheskoy organizasiy - takiyh, napriymer, kak partiy y gruppy interesov[3]. I, hotya znachiytelinye segmenty interesuishih nas obshestv eshe ostaitsya tradisionnymy v smysle ih zakrytosty y avtarkicheskoy zamknutosti, ony perejivait dovolino bystroe razmyvanie tradisionalistskih ustoev, preobrazuyasi v bolee shirokiye, differensirovannye y spesializirovannye institusionalinye konstruksii. Vmeste s tem, nesmotrya na perechislennye sdvigi, vo mnogih razvivaishihsya stranah tak y ne slojilisi, osobenno v politicheskoy oblasti, ustoychivye y sovremennye institusionalinye sistemy, sposobnye spravlyatisya s postoyanno menyaishimsya y rasshiryaishimsya spektrom obshestvennyh problem y zaprosov. Mnogie instituty, oformivshiyesya v nachalinyy period modernizasii, segodnya raspalisi y prekratily rabotati, ustupiv mesto menee slojnym i, kak pravilo, bolee avtoritarnym politicheskim rejimam.

Inymy slovami, v interesuishih nas obshestvah nametilisi dovolino serieznye priznaky ekonomicheskoy y politicheskoy modernizasii, nekotorye iz kotoryh iymely prinsipialinui vajnosti. Prejde vsego, zdesi neobhodimo otmetiti zashedshui dovolino daleko differensiasii politicheskih roley y institutov, sentralizasii politii, vyzrevanie spesificheskih politicheskih seley y oriyentasiy. Dalee, politicheskaya modernizasiya v rassmatrivaemyh stranah v selom harakterizovalasi rasshiyreniyem pravotvorcheskoy, administrativnoy y politicheskoy deyatelinosty gosudarstvennogo sentra, vosprinimaemoy vo vseh sferah y regionah. Nakones, modernizasiya soprovojdalasi oslableniyem tradisionnyh elit y tradisionnoy legitimasiy praviyteley, a takje ukoreneniyem predstavleniy ob iydeologicheskoy, a zachastuy y institusionalinoy otvetstvennosty upravlyayshih pered upravlyaemymi, v potensiy vystupayshimy v roly glavnyh derjateley politicheskoy vlasti. Formalinym vyrajeniyem etoy iydey stala utverdivshayasya v bolishinstve sovremennyh stran sistema vyborov.

Bolee togo, vo vseh perechislennyh sferah poluchil osnovatelinoe razvitie eshe odin kluchevoy aspekt modernizasiy - strukturnaya predraspolojennosti k nepreryvnym izmeneniyam. Voorujivshisi etim instrumentariyem, novye strany podhodily k reshayshemu testu modernizasii: k sposobnosty podderjivati ustoychivyy rost v osnovnyh institusionalinyh oblastyah y odnovremenno razvivati institusionalinui strukturu, pozvolyaishui spravlyatisya s takimy izmeneniyamy bez znachiytelinyh potryaseniy y provalov.

Odnako iymenno zdesi ih nastigly naibolee serieznye problemy. Nesmotrya na povyshenie razlichnyh sosialino-demograficheskih y strukturnyh indeksov modernizasii, molodye gosudarstva tak y ne sumely vystroiti jiznesposobnui institusionalinui strukturu, kotoraya mogla by uspeshno spravlyatisya s postoyanno voznikaishimy obshestvennymy vyzovami. V itoge v politicheskoy sfere, po krayney mere, im prishlosi predpochesti ne stoli diyversifisirovannye y bolee jestkie modeli, sposobnye osvaivati gorazdo menee shirokiy krug problem.

V nekotoryh sluchayah, kak, napriymer, v Pakistane i, veroyatno, v Sudane, podobnye "razvoroty" v politiyke ne toliko ne pomeshaly ekonomicheskomu rostu, no daje sposobstvovaly emu. V inyh situasiyah, kak v Indoneziy y Birme, slom prejnih konstitusionnyh rejimov soprovojdalsya ekonomicheskoy stagnasiey.

 

III

Hotya v bolishinstve etih stran nabludaetsya yavnyy otkat k takim sosialinym i, v osobennosti, politicheskim institutam, kotorye kajutsya menee sovershennymy v sravneniy s institutamy pervyh stadiy modernizasii, ny odna iz nih tak y ne vernulasi k prejney, to esti tipichnoy dlya tradisionnogo obshestva, institusionalinoy sisteme.

Eto proyavilosi v neskolikih vzaimosvyazannyh chertah. Nesmotrya na to, chto novye avtokraticheskie ily avtoritarnye elity zachastui vedut sebya vpolne "tradisionno" - v kolonialinoy stilistiyke, kak v Pakistane, ily v duhe dokolonialinoy epohi, kak v Birme, - ily je pytaytsya zanovo aktivirovati tradisionnye simvoly y ustanovki, ony nigde ne staly vosstanavlivati tradisionnui politicheskui strukturu v polnom obeme. Nekotorye vtorostepennye, no vesima vajnye simvoly modernizasii, napriymer, vseobshee izbiratelinoe pravo, pusti daje ploho realizuemoe, a takje inye pravovye konstruksii, prilichestvuishie sovremennosti, ofisialino, po krayney mere, podderjivaitsya. Eshe bolee vajno to, chto novye praviytely predstavlyayt sobstvennuy legitimasii v sekulyarnyh y modernizirovannyh terminah y simvolah - inache govorya, ssylayasi na sosialinye dviyjeniya, pravovui rasionalinosti, politicheskui effektivnosti, a ne na chisto tradisionnye sennosti. Eto verno daje v sluchayah, podobnyh pakistanskomu, gde aksentirovanie nekotoryh aspektov islamskoy tradisiy vsegda bylo dovolino silinym, ily indoneziyskomu, gde poisk novyh simvolov y iydeologiy jestko oblekalsya v tradisionnye formy.

Otvetstvennosti, kotorui novye praviytely nesut pered grajdanami, opisyvaetsya uje ne v terminah bylogo "religioznogo mandata", no v svete osovremenennyh sennostey ily je harizmy, kotoraya hotya by v prinsiype priobshaet prostyh ludey k vlasti. Nesmotrya na vse ogranicheniya politicheskoy deyatelinosti, praktikuemye podobnymy rejimami, ony ne otkazyvalisi ot samoy iydey grajdanina, rezko otlichaisheysya ot staroy (tradisionnoy y kolonialinoy) iydey poddannogo[4].

Analogichnym obrazom, kakimy by antizapadnymy ily antikapitalisticheskimy ny byly iydeologicheskie osnovy priyshedshih k vlasty rejimov, sovremennosti v nih nikogda ne otrisalasi polnostiu. Oni, skoree, pytalisi nashupati kakoy-to sintez togo, chto im kazalosi "osnovopolagaishimi" (v silu istoricheskoy sluchaynosty ily prosto pragmaticheskoy ustanovki) sennostyami, s sovremennymy ustremleniyamy sobstvennyh obshestv. Vprochem, eksperiymenty takogo roda mojno schitati chisto utopicheskim vyrajeniyem blagochestivyh namereniy, ne podkreplyaemyh sposobnostiu ily gotovnostiu zaplatiti tu institusionalinui senu, kotorui potrebovala by ih implementasiya.

Dalee, kakimy by upadochnymy y neeffektivnymy ny stanovilisi institusionalinye praktiky "obnovlennyh" rejimov, ony pochty nikogda ne protivilisi ekspansiy obshestvennoy modernizasiy v takih sferah, kak obrazovaniye, industrializasiya ily razvitie derevniy.

Takim obrazom, naliso sluchai, sviydetelistvuiyshie ne stoliko o polnom otsutstviy modernizasionnogo impulisa ily je neudachnom starte modernizasii, skoliko o nadlome nekotoryh (v osnovnom politicheskiyh) sovremennyh institutov, daje esli, kak v upominavshihsya vyshe sluchayah, takie nadlomy proizoshly na rannih fazah obnovleniya. Y s etoy tochky zreniya puti molodyh nasiy ne slishkom otlichaetsya ot putey, ranee proydennyh nekotorymy sovremennymy obshestvami, - putey, segodnya neredko zabytyh, no prejde, v svoe vremya, vyzyvavshih zametnyy interes sredy shirokoy publiky y uchenyh.

V etoy svyazy srazu je vspominaetsya neudachnyy priymer pervonachalinoy modernizasiy Kitaya, obychno protivopostavlyaemyy bolee blagopriyatnomu opytu Yaponiiy[5]. Obogashaet kartinu y dolgaya istoriya nekotoryh latinoamerikanskih gosudarstv. Hotya vo mnogih iz nih na protyajeniy dliytelinogo perioda smogly proyavitisya lishi zachatochnye priznaky strukturnoy ily sosialino-demograficheskoy modernizasii, v takih stranah, kak Chily ily Argentina (do prihoda generala Perona), pobednoe shestvie modernizasiy iskusstvenno ostanavlivalosi ily daje obrashalosi vspyati[6].

Nakones, zdesi nelizya ne upomyanuti o podeme yaponskogo militarizma, italiyanskogo fashizma y nemeskogo nasizma v 1920-e y 1930-e gody kak samyh vajnyh, veroyatno, priymerah sryvov modernizasii, proishodivshih na vesima vysokih urovnyah razvitiya[7].

Vo vseh perechislennyh sluchayah my iymeem delo s krahom otnosiytelino differensirovannoy y osovremenennoy institusionalinoy osnovy, zamenoy ee bolee primitivnymy institutamy ily vstupleniyem strany v porochnyy krug provalov y sryvov, zachastuy vlekushiy za soboy institusionalinui stagnasii y neustoychivosti, a takje sistemnui utratu sposobnosty vbirati v sebya novye veyaniya. Takie sobytiya proishodyat v ramkah modernizasionnyh prosessov, ostavayasi ih sostavnoy chastiu. Ih mojno schitati patologicheskimy sryvamy modernizasiy ili, kak v sluchae nasizma, daje bezuspeshnymy popytkamy demodernizasiy - no nikak ne proyavleniyamy otsutstviya ily zapazdyvaniya modernizasionnyh impulisov.

 

IV

Vneshne izlojennye vyshe sluchay kajutsya otnosiytelino prostymi, odnoznachnymy y shojimy v samyh obshih chertah y prinsipah, nesmotrya na mnogochislennye razlichiya v detalyah y chastnostyah.

Odnoy iz tipichnyh osobennostey vseh etih istoriy stala neskonchaemaya vnutrennyaya vrajda, konflikt mejdu razlichnymy obshestvennymy gruppami, narastanie protivorechiy y nagnetanie strastey bez kakoy-libo perspektivy obresty ustoychivyy y prodoljiytelinyy modus vivendi. Takie konflikty, v kajdom otdelinom sluchae ostavavshiyesya vesima samobytnymy y nepovtorimymi, byli, kak pravilo, tesno vzaimosvyazany s hronicheskimy trudnostyamy v ekonomiyke y nekontroliruemoy inflyasiey. Krizisy je, v svoi ocheredi, zachastui podogrevalisi samimy etimy raspryami, a takje defisitom konsensusa v predstavleniyah o tom, chto nujno delati v pervui ocheredi.

Neugasaishie obshestvennye neuryadisy, nemoshnaya ekonomika y otsutstvie deesposobnogo rukovodstva, umeishego legitimnym putem sglajivati obshestvennye protivorechiya, a takje narastaishaya, otnudi ne "tradisionnaya" po svoemu razmahu, korrupsiya y vopiishaya neeffektivnosti burokratiy - takovy prichiny, neizmenno figurirovavshie v obiyasneniyah kraha konstitusionnyh rejimov v molodyh gosudarstvah[8].

Vmeste s tem, nesmotrya na vsu dostovernosti takoy kartiny, ee trudno priznati zakonchennoy y polnoy. Po-vidimomu, obshestvennye konflikty ily ekonomicheskie problemy dovolino shirokoy magnitudy sushestvovaly y daje preodolevalisi, pusti chastichno, vo mnogih sovremennyh ily osovremenivaemyh stranah. Prinsipialino vajen tot fakt, chto v gosudarstvah, rassmatrivaemyh v nastoyashey statie, ony ne poddalisi razreshenii ily regulirovanii. V itoge upomyanutye strany popaly v zamknutyy krug neudach y provalov, podorvavshih ih stabilinosti y estestvennoe vyzrevanie sovremennyh institusionalinyh osnov.

 

V

Jelaya ponyati, pochemu sosialinye konflikty v ukazannyh sluchayah tak y ne udalosi razreshiti, my doljny predvariytelino proanalizirovati prirodu nekotoryh masshtabnyh sdvigov, proishodivshih v institusionalinoy sfere interesuishih nas stran. Na nyneshnem etape etot analiz ne vyidet za predely chisto opisatelinyh zadach, ne predpolagaishih vyyavlenie prichin proizoshedshih sobytiy. No on pomojet, kak ya nadeysi, bolee chetko sformulirovati problemy, kotorye predstoit izuchiti.

Nachnem s politicheskoy sfery. Naibolee obshim trendom, proyavivshimsya vo vnutrenney politiyke molodyh gosudarstv, stalo nalichie znachiytelinyh rashojdeniy mejdu zaprosamy razlichnyh grupp - partiy, klanov, burokratii, armii, regionalov - y sposobnostiu sentralinoy vlasty reagirovati na ety trebovaniya.

Uroveni takih zaprosov, kak pravilo, prevoshodil uroveni ih agregasiy sentralinoy vlastiu[9]. V bolishinstve sluchaev zaprosy glavnyh sosialinyh grupp kolebalisi mejdu chetko artikulirovannymy y dovolino rasplyvchatymy politicheskimy prityazaniyami. S odnoy storony, rechi shla o formirovaniy grupp interesov ily politicheskih dviyjeniy, iymeiyshih osoznannye sely y stavyashih zadachi, realizuemye politicheskimy metodami. S drugoy storony, vydvigalisi bolee primitivnye y menee artikulirovannye trebovaniya, v osnove kotoryh lejalo pryamoe davlenie na burokratii, vyrajavsheesya libo v mirnyh apellyasiyah k mestnym y sentralinym praviytelyam, libo v otkrytyh buntah.

V hode modernizasionnyh prosessov vlastnyy ves razlichnyh grupp, vystupaishih s politicheskimy trebovaniyami, zametno vyros. Teperi ih nelizya bylo podavlyati ily ignorirovati; naprotiyv, shel poisk variantov uporyadochennoy integrasiy podobnyh obediyneniy v institusionalinui sistemu. Ponemnogu gosudarstvom nachaly razrabatyvatisya institusionalinye ustanovleniya, pozvolyavshie regulirovati y perevoditi v konkretnye politicheskie shagy raznoobraznye tipy politicheskih zaprosov. Eto bylo neobhodimo, poskoliku samo rukovodstvo partiy ily dviyjeniy bylo ne sposobno agregirovati raznoobraznye interesy y politicheskie ustremleniya skoliko-nibudi uporyadochennym obrazom; stoli je bessilino ono bylo y v razrabotke adekvatnoy politiki, pozvolyavshey rabotati s zaprosamy osnovnyh grupp, a takje s glavnymy problemami, ih porojdavshimiy.

Formalinymy institutamy etih obshestv, prednaznachennymy dlya upomyanutoy agregasiy y formulirovaniya sootvetstvuishey politiki, vystupali, s odnoy storony, sentralinye ispolniytelinye, administrativnye y zakonodatelinye organy, a s drugoy, razlichnye politicheskie partii. No vse ony okazalisi ne gotovymy k effektivnomu osushestvlenii takoy agregasiy ily formirovanii konsolidiruishey politicheskoy liniiy.

Tem ne menee, v rassmatrivaemyh politicheskih sistemah iymelisi segmenty - podobnye, napriymer, strukturam burokraticheskoy administrasii, organam mestnoy vlasty ily tradisionnym obshinam, - kotorye vpolne mogly rabotati s naiymenee artikulirovannymy tipamy trebovaniy. Posle kraha konstitusionnyh rejimov ih znachenie zametno vozroslo; ony snova staly vajneyshim sredotochiyem politicheskih prosessov, kakim yavlyalisi v kolonialinui y daje dokolonialinui epohu. V predshestvuishiy period, odnako, ony proyavlyaly sebya ne slishkom uspeshno, poskoliku nahodilisi v podchiyneniy u bolee peredovyh, no neeffektivnyh gosudarstvennyh slujb, ostavayasi zalojnikamy vsevozmojnyh neopredelennostey, porojdaemyh v ih nedrah. Takim obrazom, y ety organy, osobenno burokratiya, zachastui okazyvalisi y neeffektivnymi, y korrumpirovannymiy[10].

Inache govorya, vajneyshimy harakteristikamy politicheskoy situasii, slojivsheysya v etih stranah, byly ne prosto obremenennosti mnogochislennymy konfliktami, nalichie razlichnyh urovney artikulyasiy trebovaniy ily daje otsutstvie koordinasiy mejdu etimy urovnyami. Vse eto dovolino chasto vstrechaetsya y v otnosiytelino stabilinyh politicheskih sistemah. Glavnoe zakluchalosi v tom, chto v izuchaemyh zdesi gosudarstvah iyz-za nachavsheysya v nih modernizasiy raznye urovny politicheskih trebovaniy y politicheskoy deyatelinosty uje ne mogly prebyvati v otnosiytelinom obosoblenii, kak eto bylo v period, predshestvovavshiy obnovlencheskim usiliyam. Naprotiyv, ony okazalisi vtyanutymy v obshie y edinye institusionalinye ramky politicheskogo prosessa y prinyatiya politicheskih resheniy. No pry etom adekvatnye mehanizmy y prinsipy agregirovaniya interesov ily regulirovaniya konfliktov v etih ramkah otsutstvovali. Drugimy slovami, novye sennostnye oriyentiry, voplosheniya kotoryh jelaly mnogie grajdane etih obshestv, trebovaly otnosiytelino vysokogo urovnya soglasovannosty deystviy individov. Vmeste s tem, podhodyashaya dlya etogo konfigurasiya vlasti, svyazyvaishaya otdelinyh grajdan s novymi, bolee artikulirovannymy trebovaniyamy y deystviyami, tak y ne byla vystroena. V podobnyh usloviyah na krushenie byly by obrecheny ne toliko molodye, no y bolee prochnye y ustoyavshiyesya sistemy.

 

VI

Analogichnaya kartina vyrisovyvaetsya y v teh sluchayah, kogda my nachinaem izuchati prirodu y spektr protestnyh vspleskov y oppozisionnyh dviyjeniy, poluchivshih razvitie v etih stranah. Esly govoriti o soderjaniy simvolov, razrabotannyh podobnymy dviyjeniyamy ily unasledovannyh imi, to ony ne slishkom otlichalisi ot inyh simvolov takogo roda, predlagaemyh na razlichnyh stadiyah modernizasiy v evropeyskiyh, aziatskih y afrikanskih stranah[11]. Po svoemu smyslovomu napolnenii ony ohvatyvaly diapazon ot nasionalisticheskiyh, antikolonialinyh, tradisionalistskih y etnicheskih simvolov do simvolov klassovoy boriby y kuliturnogo obnovleniya, traktuemogo v antizapadnom, religioznom ily obshinnom duhe.

S bolishoy veroyatnostiu, hotya y daleko ne vsegda, intensivnosti vyrajaemogo imy protesta okazyvalasi bolee vysokoy, nejely u simvolov inyh, bolee uravnoveshennyh sosialinyh dviyjeniy. No, pomimo etogo, dviyjeniya molodyh nasiy otlichalisi eshe nekotorymy fundamentalinymy osobennostyamiy[12]. Vo-pervyh, ony byly otnosiytelino razobsheny y izolirovany drug ot druga. Vo-vtoryh, iym, s odnoy storony, bylo prisushe shodstvo s zamknutymy sektami, a s drugoy storony, kratkie periody moshnyh vspleskov postoyanno smenyalisi u nih dolgimy stadiyamy stagnasiy y bezdeystviya. V-tretiiyh, vnutry etih izolirovannyh y vzaimno vrajdebnyh dviyjeniy zachastuy srastalisi y soedinyalisi protivopolojnye po suty sennosty y oriyentiry: kak, napriymer, tradisionalizm y ekonomicheskiy rost ily tradisionalizm y demokratiya. Odnako, kak pravilo, podobnoe srashivanie protivopolojnostey proishodilo takim obrazom, chto ne vyglyadelo osmyslennym, prichem priymeniytelino ne toliko k konkretnym situasiyam, no y k samoy preemstvennosty v prakticheskoy deyatelinosti, formirovanii politiki, ee voploshenii v jizni.

Perechislennye osobennosty slujily vajnym indikatorom togo, chto znachiytelinoy chasty etih dviyjeniy ne hvatalo predraspolojennosty k inkorporirovanii ily vpisyvanii v bolee shirokie institusionalinye ramki, vkluchavshie partiy ily formalinye organy obshestvennogo mneniya, a takje ne dostavalo umeniya adaptirovatisya k vneshnim regulyatoram. Etot defekt sosialinyh dviyjeniy chasto soprovojdalsya nesposobnostiu vlastnyh institutov absorbirovati protestnye simvoly y sennosti, vvedya ih v sobstvennui institusionalinui sistemu.

V itoge sostoyanie protestnyh y oppozisionnyh dviyjeniy v rassmatrivaemyh stranah menyalosi ot apatiy y polnoy utraty interesa k nim so storony krupnyh sosialinyh sloev do moshnyh besporyadkov, v hode kotoryh gosudarstvu prediyavlyalisi samye kraynie zaprosy, vkluchaya polnuu y nezamedliytelinuiy smenu rejima ily totalinoe otstranenie ot vlasty toy ily inoy gruppy.

 

VII

Esly vsmotretisya v strukturu y prosess osushestvleniya kommunikasionnyh svyazey vnutry molodyh nasiy, to obnarujitsya priymerno takaya je kartina. Odnoy iz tipovyh osobennostey vystupaet to, chto razlichnye obshestvennye sloy polizuytsya raznymy kommunikasionnymy kanalami: bolee tradisionnye y zakrytye tipy kommunikasiy priymenyaiytsya v derevnyah, a bolee differensirovannye y slojnye rasprostraneny sredy sentralinyh elit y gorodskih grupp. Vtoraya osobennosti sostoit v tom, chto v kommunikativnoy strukture takih moderniziruishihsya obshestv zachastui otsutstvuit tak nazyvaemye "kommunikasionnye mediatory" ily brokery, obespechivaishie svyazi mejdu razlichnymy urovnyamy kommunikasiiy[13]. Tretiey osobennostiu sleduet priznati predraspolojennosti samyh shirokih grupp y sloev k rezkim metaniyam ot kommunikativnoy apatiy po otnoshenii k sentralinym obshestvennym institutam do kraynego y nesderjivaemogo massovogo vozbujdeniya, porojdaemogo toy ily inoy agitasiey. Nakones, chetvertaya osobennosti vyrajaetsya v nesposobnosty molodyh nasiy vyrvatisya za predely kruga, zadavaemogo chrezmernoy chuvstviytelinostiu k sredstvam massovoy informasiy y neumeniyem absorbirovati poluchaemye ot nih impulisy skoliko-nibudi ustoychivym y posledovatelinym obrazom.

Zdesi, kak y v politicheskoy sfere, vajneyshey harakteristikoy vystupaet ne prosto sosushestvovanie neskolikih urovney ily tipov kommunikasiy, y daje ne slabosti posrednicheskih zveniev mejdu nimi. Glavneyshey chertoy kommunikativnoy struktury etih stran stalo obediynenie razlichnyh vidov kommunikasiy v otnosiytelino edinui konstruksii, delaishui ih otkrytymy dlya vozdeystviya shodnyh ily obshih stimulov, no ne obespechivaishui stabilinogo vospriyatiya y usvoeniya idushih ot nih signalov.

Podobnaya situasiya slojilasi y v ekonomiyke. Vse ekonomicheskie napasty molodyh obshestv byly obuslovleny ne stoliko nedorazvitostiu ih ekonomicheskih sistem ily ih istosheniyem iyz-za neblagopriyatnogo vneshnego vmeshatelistva, skoliko nesootvetstviyem mejdu jelaniyem modernizirovatisya y institusionalinoy nesposobnostiu podderjivati ekonomicheskiy rost, mejdu neuderjimym raspadom tradisionnoy sistemy y nevozmojnostiu obresty spasenie v novoy, modernizirovannoy sisteme.

Vo vseh upomyanutyh sferah nabludaetsya priymerno odno y to je. Razlichnye obshestvennye gruppy shodyatsya vmeste, ih zavisimosti drug ot druga rastet, no v to je vremya ostro oshushaetsya otsutstvie novyh regulyativnyh norm, kotorye mogly by, po krayney mere, do kakoy-to minimalinoy stepeni, obespechiti svyazi mejdu etimy gruppamy y sposobstvovati nalajivanii novyh otnosheniy mejdu nimiy.

 

VIII

Usherbnoe razvitie novyh integrasionnyh mehanizmov proyavilosi y v razlichnyh aspektah institusionalinogo vzrosleniya y vyzrevaniya simvoliky molodyh nasiy.

Odnim iz naibolee znachimyh indikatorov etogo yavleniya, otmechennogo vo vseh sferah, no osobenno v politiyke, stalo rezkoe razmejevanie mejdu temy obshestvennymy deyatelyami, kotoryh mojno nazvati "sozidatelyamy solidarnostiy", y instrumentalino oriyentirovannymy liyderamiy[14].

Ukazannaya dihotomiya ne vsegda sovpadaet s razlichiyem mejdu politikamy y administratorami, poroy peremeshivaya obe gruppy, hotya ochevidno, chto politicheskie deyately bolee sklonny stanovitisya "sozidatelyamy solidarnostiy", v to vremya kak iz chinovnikov chashe poluchaitsya instrumentalino oriyentirovannye rukovodiyteli. Eto protivopostavlenie napominaet o sebe v luboy politicheskoy (y sosialinoy) sisteme, hotya ego lokalizasiya zavisit ot osobennostey konkretnoy politicheskoy struktury. Vyzrevanie takoy dissosiasiy bylo podrobno opisano priymeniytelino k Indonezii, no podobnyy prosess mojno proslediti y v drugih upominaemyh v etoy statie stranah[15]. V nekotoryh novyh gosudarstvah odin iz etih tipov - prejde vsego, otnosiytelino sovremennye y effektivnye administratory - mojet otsutstvovati pochty polnostiu. Vmeste s tem, v podavlyaushem bolishinstve sluchaev udalosi sformirovati dostatochno opytnye kadry, sposobnye organizovyvati praviytelistvennye uchrejdeniya, podnimati novye ekonomicheskie y organizasionnye struktury, pytatisya provoditi politiku novogo stilya. Bólishui chasti etogo kadrovogo resursa sostavlyaly vyhodsy iz kolonialinoy administrasii; ostalinye chinovniky byly vyrasheny v hode ekonomicheskogo razvitiya ily osushestvleniya obrazovatelinyh programm.

Chashe vsego, odnako, pravila, ustanovleniya y politicheskie linii, razrabotannye novymy spesialistami, liyderamy y organizasiyami, ne byly legitimirovany ily podkrepleny novymy obshimy simvolami, ne poluchiv podderjky so storony liyderov ily grupp, zanyatyh razrabotkoy podobnoy simvoliki. Novyy simvolizm, poluchivshiy razvitie v molodyh gosudarstvah, zachastui kazalsya ne iymevshim nikakogo otnosheniya k tem povsednevnym zadacham, na reshenie kotoryh oriyentirovalisi chinovnikiy-"instrumentalisty" y v vidu kotoryh ony sozdavaly novye pravila. I, hotya podobnoe rashojdenie vstrechaetsya, veroyatno, praktichesky v luboy sisteme, v obsujdaemyh zdesi situasiyah ono okazalosi vopiishe ostrym y neterpimym. Eto podtverjdaet opyt vseh upomyanutyh vyshe stran. Na priymere Indoneziy mojno ubeditisya, chto nabor simvolov y sennostnyh oriyentasiy, posledovatelino razrabatyvaemyh preziydentom Sukarno y vedushimy politicheskimy partiyami, ne toliko ne godilsya dlya osmysleniya mnogochislennyh problem modernizasiy strany, no daje ignoriroval ih nalichie y znachimosti - nesmotrya na tot fakt, chto vse ety problemy sostavlyaly samu suti obshenasionalinoy politiki. V Birme kombinasiya buddistskih y sosialisticheskih simvolov, sozdannaya U Nu, v osobennosty posle pervogo voennogo perevorota, kasalasi lishi samyh neznachiytelinyh problem, bespokoivshih birmanskui politiku[16].

V Pakistane konstitusionnye debaty o sushnosty gosudarstva voobshe y islamskogo gosudarstva v chastnosty nikak ne pomogly razreshenii nabolevshih administrativnyh, ekonomicheskih y politicheskih problem, obremenyavshih novui nasii na rannih stadiyah ee razvitiya[17]. V Kitae vremen Gominidana jivuchesti tradisionnyh konfusianskih ustanovok, ne poddaishihsya transformasii, obuslovila smeshenie "tradisionalistskoy" simvoliky s eshe bolee rezkoy antimodernistskoy y antizapadnoy ritorikoy, prichem ny to ny drugoe ne moglo pomochi v preodoleniy trudnostey, soprovojdavshih modernizasii[18].

Polojeniye, slojivsheesya v 1930-h godah v nekotoryh latinoamerikanskih stranah, osobenno v Argentiyne, otlichayasi ot situasiy molodyh gosudarstv v detalyah, obnarujivalo neskoliko shodnyh tendensiy. Starye oligarhicheskie elity lishi do opredelennoy stepeny mogly zanimatisya ekonomicheskimy y politicheskimy problemami, porojdennymy modernizasiey. Slabosti etih elit naryadu s nabiraishey oboroty politizasiey obshestva obuslovila postoyannye metaniya strany ot repressivnyh diktatorov k demagogam. Kajdyy iz etih personajey pytalsya ispolizovati razlichnye simvoly solidarnosti, no pry etom obshim dlya nih ostavalosi to, chto predlagaemyy simvolicheskiy instrumentariy ne iymel tochek soprikosnoveniya s ekonomicheskimi, administrativnymy y politicheskimy problemami, kotorye lishi usilivalisi s rostom immigrasii, rasshiyreniyem kolonizasii, podemom ekonomikiy[19].

Analogichnym obrazom v Yaponiy konsa 1920-h - nachala 1930-h godov razlichnye konservativnye elity, budi to ostatky prejney oligarhiy Meydzi, reaksionnye krugy ily novye militaristskie gruppy, pytalisi, spravlyayasi s sosialinymy problemamy industrializasii, podhvatiti prejnie simvoly patriotizma y imperskoy loyalinosti, kotorye takje byly ne adekvatny novym problemam, stoyavshim pered stranoy[20].

O mejelitnom raskole v Germaniy pered prihodom nasistov y v Italiy nakanune vosareniya fashistov, vyzvannom razlichnym otnosheniyem k sovremennosty y industrializasii, skazano y napisano tak mnogo, chto u menya net neobhodimosty vdavatisya zdesi v podrobnostiy.

 

IX

Shodnymy obstoyatelistvamy soprovojdalsya prosess vyzrevaniya novyh sentralinyh simvolov v sootnosheniy s partikulyarnoy simvolikoy otdelinyh grupp ily segmentov obshestva. Raznoobraznye y chastnye "iskonnye" simvoly mestnyh, etnicheskiyh, kastovyh ily klassovyh sektorov ne inkorporirovalisi v novoe sosialinoe yadro, a reformirovaniye, naselennoe na rasshiyrenie ih iydentifikasiy y priyemlemosti, ne proizvodilosi. IYz-za etogo ukazannye simvoly stanovilisi tochkamy strukturnoy razobshennosti, prepyatstvuya utverjdenii novogo grajdanskogo poryadka.

Prichem reshaishui roli igrala ne stoliko jiznesposobnosti staryh simvolov, skoliko tot fakt, chto novye simvoly ne byly vtyanuty v oformlyavshuy moloduy gosudarstvennosti bolee shirokui simvolicheskui ramku, oriyentirovannui na slojnye y raznoobraznye problemy, perejivaemye novorojdennymy obshestvamy na fone modernizasiy y stimuliruemogo ei rasshiryaishegosya vzaimodeystviya mejdu razlichnymy obshestvennymy gruppami. Ili, drugimy slovami, sentr formiruisheysya gosudarstvennosty ne mog predlojiti nikakoy novoy iydeologicheskoy, sennostnoy, simvolicheskoy sistemy, kotoraya pomogala by osmyslenii novoy sosialinoy realinosty y preodolenii problem, s nei svyazannyh[21].

 

X

Summiruya polojenie del v stranah, proanalizirovannyh vyshe, nevozmojno ne obratiti vnimaniya na dva momenta. Vo-pervyh, vo vseh sluchayah v ih institusionalinoy srede otchetlivo prosmatrivaetsya tendensiya k bolee plotnomu vzaimodeystvii razlichnyh grupp y sloev, vtyagivaemyh v novye, modernizirovannye y differensirovannye, institusionalinye ramki. No pry etom povsudu otsutstvuut adekvatnye mehanizmy, pozvolyaishie reshati problemy, voznikaishie po mere rasshiryaishegosya y uglublyayshegosya soprikosnoveniya razlichnyh grupp mejdu soboy. Rabota po vhojdenii y vpisyvanii raznyh grupp v obedinyaishui sosialinui konstruksii raspredelyaetsya mejdu nimy neravnomerno y realizuetsya razlichnymy putyami. Vmeste s tem, ne prihoditsya somnevatisya v tom, chto v drugih obnovlyaishihsya ily uje osovremenennyh obshestvah, prohodivshih cherez analogichnye stadiy modernizasiy y spravivshihsya s vnedreniyem stabilinoy institusionalinoy osnovy, v svoe vremya nabludalisi analogichnye prosessy.

Kluchevaya problema molodyh nasiy vsegda zakluchalasi ne v uzkom diapazone modernizasionnyh usiliy, a v medlennom stanovleniy novyh institutov y nehvatke reguliruishih y normativnyh mehanizmov, kotorye vnedryalisi by v strategicheskie oblasty obshestvennoy struktury y pozvolyaly by spravlyatisya s razlichnymy vyzovami, voznikaishimy v etih oblastyah. Ispolizuya terminologii Emilya Durkgeyma, zdesi sleduet govoriti ob otsutstviy razvitiya y institusionalizasiy preddogovornyh elementov v kontraktnoy baze sosiuma. Samo chislo raznoobraznyh "kontraktov", to esti razlichnyh sfer vzaimodeystviya - budi to v trudovyh, industrialinyh, administrativnyh otnosheniyah, - v ramkah kotoryh nabludalosi stanovlenie novyh dogovornyh praviyl, postoyanno roslo. No adekvatnye ramki, pozvolyavshie priymenyati normativnye predpisaniya k tem ily inym spesificheskim situasiyam, ne vystraivalisi, y poetomu mnogie kontraktnye dogovorennosty ne nahodily opory v obshepriznannyh sennostyah y oriyentasiyah[22].

IYmenno sochetanie vseh etih momentov vleklo za soboy to, chto odin iz kommentatorov nazval "voynoy vseh protiv vseh vpolne v duhe Gobbsa", to esti vseobshee protivostoyanie vseh vsem, v kotorom otsutstvuit kakiye-libo pravila, obladaishie obshepriznannoy svyazuyshey y obyazyvayshey siloy[23].

Vnovi obrashayasi k Durkgeymu, mojno konstatirovati, chto vo vseh etih sluchayah iymela mesto nesposobnosti utverditi novye urovny solidarnosti, to esti sovershiti perehod ot solidarnosty mehanicheskoy k solidarnosty organicheskoy ily ot slaborazvitoy organicheskoy solidarnosty k bolee ukorenennym ee formam. Prichem dannaya zadacha ne reshalasi, nesmotrya daje na to, chto prejnie instituty solidarnosty uje razrushalisi pod natiskom uglublyaisheysya differensiasiy y rasshiryaishegosya vzaimodeystviya razlichnyh sosialinyh grupp y strat.

 

XI

V predshestvuyshey chasty ya predlojil analiticheskoe opisanie togo, kak razvivalisi molodye nasii. No v moem izlojeniy ne obiyasnyalosi, pochemu v etih obshestvah ne udalosi sformirovati neobhodimye integriruishie mehanizmy. Teperi stoit ostanovitisya na nekotoryh prichinah etogo yavleniya.

Ony otsutstvuyt otnudi ne iyz-za togo, chto praviytely y pretendenty na elitnye doljnosty ne pytalisi obzavestisi imy ily je razlichnye sosialinye gruppy ne byly zainteresovany v sosialinoy y ekonomicheskoy politiyke, rasschitannoy na dolgosrochnuy perspektivu. Naprotiyv, elity vsyachesky stremilisi utverditi v politiyke kakiye-to reguliruishie prinsipy, a takje razrabotati te ily inye splachivaishie obshestvo seli. Zachastui eto delalosi po nastoyanii shirokih sosialinyh sloev. No provedenie podobnogo kursa, kak y sam zapros na nego, ne sposobstvovalo ukreplenii soglasovannosty v ryadah osnovnyh aktorov.

Dlya togo chtoby razobratisya v osnovaniyah podobnoy politiky y oseniti ee rezulitaty, neobhodimo vpisati ee v bolee masshtabnyy kontekst sosialino-politicheskih oriyentasiy samyh shirokih sloev, a takje uchesti osobennosty vzaimodeystviya etih sloev s elitoy.

Kak my uje ubedilisi, harakternoy chertoy vseh molodyh nasiy stala neprekrashayshayasya sosialinaya mobilizasiya[24]. No struktura podobnyh prosessov predpolagala nalichie nekotoryh otlichiytelinyh priznakov. Samym vajnym iz nih vystupalo to, chto shirokie sosialinye sloy y straty, gorodskie y seliskiye, regionalinye y professionalinye, demonstrirovaly kraynuu stepeni kuliturnoy "zakrytosti" y samodostatochnosti, nesmotrya na stepeni ih vozmojnoy zavisimosty ot prochih grupp[25].

Kluchevoy sostavlyayshey etoy zamknutosty bylo preobladanie chisto "adaptivnoy" ustanovky k sosialinomu okrujenii, maksimalino liyshennoy elementov iydentifikasiy ily solidarnosty s niym. Ukazannaya adaptivnosti mogla proyavlyatisya v dvuh protivopolojnyh, na pervyy vzglyad, no po suty blizkih drug drugu fenomenah. Perveyshim iz niyh, chashe obnarujivaemom sredy "tradisionnyh" nizov goroda y derevni, stalo passivnoe otnoshenie k vneshney sosialinoy srede. Zdesi je sleduet upomyanuti y rigidnosti etih sloev v traktovke obshestva v selom, a takje svoego mesta v nem v chastnostiy.

Ety kachestva vo mnogom obuslovleny vnutrenney strukturoy podobnyh grupp - v chastnosti, prisushey im tendensiey minimizirovati vnutrennuu differensiasii y priymeneniyem strogih sanksiy k tem, kto narushaet selostnosti. Zametnyy vklad vnosit y otsutstvie vnutry takih soobshestv gibkih instrumentov samoregulyasii, dopolnyaemoe pochty polnoy nesposobnostiu vstupati v bolee slojnye vnutrennie ily vneshnie otnosheniya[26].

Popadaya v novui, modernizirovannui y differensirovannui, industrialinui ily poluindustrialinui sredu, ety gruppy prinosily s soboy toliko chto upomyanutye elementy sobstvennoy struktury y deyatelinosti. A eto privodilo k konservasiy "tradisionnyh" raznovidnostey obshestvennyh otnosheniy, to esti k paternalistskomu oformlenii industrialinogo konteksta y vzaimodeystviya s predstaviytelyamy vlasti, politicheskimy ily serkovnymy liyderami, k negotovnosty prinimati na sebya otvetstvennosti ily inisiativu v novyh usloviyah, k obshey passivnosty y sujenii interesov[27].

Shodnym obrazom po mere togo, kak u predstaviyteley etih grupp oformlyalisi novye ojidaniya, ony uporno prodoljaly priyderjivatisya prejniyh, ustarevshiyh, otnosiytelino uzkih vzglyadov na problemy professionalinoy zanyatosty ily obshestvennogo statusa. Vnezapno otkryvshayasya u nih sklonnosti k akademicheskoy, administrativnoy y prochey neproizvodstvennoy deyatelinosti, vytesnyaishaya osvoenie tehnicheskih y prochih spesializirovannyh navykov, yavlyaetsya naibolee yarkoy illustrasiey etoy tendensiiy[28].

Vtorym fenomenom, v kotorom otrajalosi upomyanutoe vyshe adaptivnoe otnoshenie k shirokomu sosialinomu okrujenii, stalo to, chto mojno nazvati preuvelichennoy, bezbrejnoy "gibkostiu", vyrajavsheysya v stremleniy poluchiti ot obnovlennogo ustroystva kak mojno bolishe preimushestv, dohodov, vygodnyh pozisiy bez ucheta realinyh vozmojnostey ily interesov inyh obshestvennyh grupp. Naibolee vyraziytelino etu tendensii illustriruit aktivnye urbanizirovannye gruppy v Argentiyne y drugih stranah Latinskoy Amerikiy[29].

Lishi nemnogie sosialinye gruppy, nalichestvuishie v obnovlyaishihsya obshestvah, smogly prodemonstrirovati bolee realistichnyy variant vnutrenney y vneshney prisposoblyaemosti. Samymy vydayshimisya v ih ryadu staly delovye soobshestva, novye professionalinye obediyneniya, differensirovannaya seliskaya elita, nekotorye reformirovannye religioznye organizasii. No v bolishinstve rassmatrivaemyh zdesi stran vse ony ostavalisi slabymi, a takje pochty polnostiu otorvannymy ot sentralinyh institutov y ot bolee shirokih sosialinyh sloev.

 

XII

Naibolee vajnym strukturnym sledstviyem vseh perechislennyh tendensiy stalo sleduyshee. Nesmotrya na to, chto novye tipy spesializirovannyh y differensirovannyh politicheskih partiy, obshestvennyh organizasiy, profsoyzov, poluchivshie rasprostranenie sredy elity y shirokih sloev, vtyagivaly ih v novui sosialinui strukturu, eto ne privodilo k sozdanii ustoychivogo institusionalinogo karkasa.

Upomyanutye obediyneniya ne mogly funksionirovati effektivno, poskoliku im prihodilosi rabotati, ottalkivayasi ot togo, chto ya nazyvai "lojnymy predposylkamiy": novaya sreda ne generirovala nekotorye vajneyshie usloviya ih effektivnoy deyatelinosti. V itoge ony vesima chasto obnarujivaly harakteristiki, govorya yazykom odnogo issledovatelya fransuzskogo tradisionalizma, "uklonyaishihsya soobshestv": obediyneniy, oriyentirovannyh ne na dostiyjenie provozglashaemyh seley, budi to ekonomicheskiy rost, sosialinoe razvitie y tak dalee, a na podderjanie vygodnogo statusa y privychnyh pozisiy vnutry sushestvuyshey sistemy[30].

Bolee togo, daje esly ony pytalisi vnutry kakoy-nibudi institusionalinoy sfery, napriymer, v obrazovaniy ily predprinimatelistve, sozdati putem diffuziy ily cherez pooshrenie osobo aktivnyh grupp bolee ustoychivye y differensirovannye obediyneniya, diapazon prilojeniya ih usiliy okazyvalsya ocheni ogranichennym. Im slishkom chasto prihodilosi ustupati vneshnemu davlenii, vpadaya v dezorganizasii ily prevrashayasi v vysheupomyanutye "uklonyayshiyesya soobshestva"[31].

Podobnye strukturnye harakteristiky sposobny, vo-pervyh, do nekotoroy stepeny obiyasniti prirodu politicheskoy deyatelinosti, tipichnui dlya interesuishih nas obshestv: prejde vsego, monolitnosti preobladaishih zdesi politicheskih ustremleniy, to esti jelanie napravlyati y kontrolirovati vse aspekty sosialinogo razvitiya y vse zony professionalinoy mobilinosti, monopoliziruya pozisii, garantiruishie vlasti y prestiyj[32].

Vo-vtoryh, v otlichiye, kak my ubedimsya niyje, ot Sovetskoy Rossii, Meksiky y kemalistskoy Tursii, dlya Indonezii, Birmy ily Kitaya vremen Gominidana bylo harakterno yavleniye, kotoroe mojno nazvati namerennym "zamorajivaniyem" simvolicheskogo oformleniya obshestvennyh ustremleniy, proishodivshim na fone chrezvychayno ogranichennogo nabora priymenyaemyh simvolov. V bolishinstve svoem ony vely proishojdenie iz predshestvuishih sistem, kolonialinyh ily tradisionnyh. Pry etom lishi nemnogie prejnie simvoly sohranyaly aktualinosti v novom sosialinom kontekste[33].

Nakones, samovospriyatie y samolegitimasiya politicheskih liyderov v nemaloy stepeny fokusirovalisi na stremleniy obespechiti - posredstvom novogo politicheskogo instrumentariya - mnogochislennye priviylegiy y ligoty: kak obshestvu v selom, tak y osnovnym sosialinym sloyam, y v osobennosty tem iz niyh, kto byl liyshen svoey doly obshestvennogo piroga v predydushiy period.

 

XIII

V itoge politicheskaya liniya, realizuemaya praviytelyamy etih obshestv, otlichalasi postoyannymy kolebaniyamy mejdu stremleniyem derjati v svoih rukah vse kluchevye vlastnye pozisii, monopoliziruya tem samym rychagy effektivnogo kontrolya, y regulyarnymy ustupkamy razlichnym obshestvennym gruppam. Priymery takoy politicheskoy neustoychivosty mojno obnarujiti vo mnogih sferah, budi to publichnaya administrasiya, obrazovaniye, agrarnaya reforma, trudovye otnosheniya ily ekonomicheskiy kurs[34].

V selom bolee "tradisionnye" strany, podobnye Pakistanu ily Sudanu, v osnovnom tyagotely k ogranichiytelinoy politiyke v perechislennyh oblastyah, v to vremya kak bolee "sovremennye" gosudarstva, takiye, kak Indoneziya y Birma, sklonyalisi k ustupkam gruppovym trebovaniyam, podchas preuvelichennym, - hotya v kajdom sluchae pry jelaniy mojno nayty sledy obeih tendensiy.

Net nujdy govoriti o tom, chto takogo roda politicheskoe lavirovanie - osobenno v repressivnom y reglamentiruishem ispolneniy - otlichalo mnogie nasii, kak starye, tak y novye; kajdomu konkretnomu politicheskomu nachinanii, predprinimaemomu v Indonezii, Birme ily Pakistane, mojno podobrati analog v rejimah bolee stabilinogo tipa. No vse je samoy vydaysheysya harakteristikoy podobnoy politiki, realizuemoy v rassmatrivaemyh zdesi novyh gosudarstvah, byla ne ta ily inaya spesificheskaya detali, a sam fakt neustannyh kolebaniy mejdu repressivnymy ustanovkami, s odnoy storony, y gotovnostiu k ustupkam obshestvu, s drugoy. A eto yavleniye, v svoiy ocheredi, obiyasnyalosi nedostatochnoy prorabotkoy y nestabilinostiu prioriytetov obshestvennogo razvitiya.

 

XIV

Takim obrazom, v etih obshestvah prosmatrivaitsya iskluchiytelino vajnye parallely mejdu ustanovkamy y deyatelinostiu elit y bolee shirokih grupp y sloev. Y tem y drugim byla prisusha razrabotka v ramkah novyh, osovremenennyh institusionalinyh osnov dovolino jestkih y ogranichennyh sosialinyh, kuliturnyh, politicheskih oriyentasiy, formuliruemyh v stilistiyke predshestvuiyshey sosialinoy struktury ily v terminah bolee "gibkiyh", no nedostijimyh seley.

V konechnom schete, vo vseh rassmotrennyh sluchayah oformilsya odin y tot je porochnyy krug. Nalichnye resursy podvergalisi neuklonno narastaishemu davlenii, obuslovlennomu jestkostiu iydealov y chayaniy obshestvennyh grupp y zachastuy podkreplyavshemusya politikoy, provodimoy sverhu y ne shadivshey resursnyy potensial. V itoge resursnaya baza podtachivalasi, prichem ee ischerpanie proishodilo po chisto "simvolicheskiym" ily iydeologicheskim prichinam, a takje iyz-za stremleniya vlastiyteley takim obrazom podtverditi sobstvennui legitimnosti. Diapazon manevrirovaniya, dostupnogo vlasti, v takih usloviyah rezko sujalsya. V to je vremya iyz-za otsutstviya skoliko-nibudi chetkih prioriytetov vlasti byla sklonna obostryati protivorechiya mejdu razlichnymy sosialinymy stratamy po mere togo, kak vyrajaemye imy chayaniya vozrastali, a ekonomicheskiy potensial ostavalsya statichnym ily daje raspylyalsya.

 

XV

Chtoby v polnoy mere oseniti prirodu preobrazovaniy v rassmatrivaemyh zdesi obshestvah, nam stoiyt, veroyatno, hotya by kratko sravniti ih s Meksikoy, kemalistskoy Tursiey ily Yaponiey epohy Meydzi, ne govorya uje o Sovetskoy Rossiy s ee osobym tipom preobrazovaniy, v kotoryh novye moderniziruishiyesya rejimy smogly na nachalinyh etapah modernizasiy spravitisya s nekotorymy iz zatronutyh vyshe problem. Ih elity sumely ne toliko navyazati shirokim sosialinym sloyam svoi politicheskui linii, no y vtyanuti prochie gruppy v bolee differensirovannui institusionalinui ramku, reguliruya do opredelennoy stepeny hod etoy integrasiiy[35].

V skazannom mojno ubeditisya, rassmotrev politiku meksikanskiyh, tureskiyh, yaponskih elit v razlichnyh oblastyah modernizasii. Napriymer, restrukturirovanie kommunikasionnyh prosessov v etih stranah soprovojdalosi postepennym svyazyvaniyem voedino razlichnyh urovney kommunikasiy y poetapnym inkorporirovaniyem ih v otnosiytelino unifisirovannui sistemu. Vajnoy chertoy plavnogo prosessa inkorporirovaniya bylo to, chto na protyajeniy kakogo-to vremeny razlichnye urovny ily tipy kommunikativnyh svyazey ostavalisi segregirovannymi, no vozdeystvie spesialinyh svyazuishih mehanizmov, podderjivaemyh elitamy dlya obespecheniya otnosheniy s sentralinoy kommunikativnoy sistemoy, postepenno, no neuklonno rasshiryalosi[36].

Analogichnui kartinu mojno bylo nabludati v sfere obrazovatelinoy politiki. Tak, v bolishinstve rassmatrivaemyh sluchaev ekspansiya nachalinogo obrazovaniya na mestnom urovne soprovojdalasi rasshiyreniyem sety novyh, sekulyarnyh y diyversifisirovannyh, elitnyh shkol, v to vremya kak mobilinosti peremesheniya mejdu etimy dvumya urovnyamy utverjdalasi lishi poetapno y nespeshno[37].

Nakones, prinsipialinui vajnosti v kontekste nastoyashego analiza iymeet uporyadochenie prosessa sosialinoy mobilinosty v etih obshestvah. Sootvetstvuishie trendy razvivalisi povsemestno, s neobhodimostiu uprazdnyaya samodostatochnosti y zakrytosti tradisionnyh sosialinyh yacheek y vstraivaya ih v karkas novyh, modernizirovannyh institutov. V selom ojidaniya ot etoy mobilinosty sootvetstvovaly prakticheskim vozmojnostyam ee rasshiyreniya - po krayney mere, rashojdeniya mejdu chaemym y realinym zdesi byly ne tak veliki, kak v molodyh nasiyah. Prosess mobilinosty byl tesneyshim obrazom svyazan s razvitiyem novyh, bolee slojnyh statusnyh y professionalinyh oriyentasiy y ustremleniy. Krome togo, zdesi on chasto vel k uslojnenii vnutrenney differensiasiy vnutry mestnyh - seliskih ily gorodskih - yacheek, podtalkivaya vajnye sdvigy v strukture obshinnogo liyderstva y uchastiya, a takje stimuliruya vzaimosvyazy mejdu nizovymy gruppamy y sentralinymy institutamiy.

 

XVI

Vo vseh upomyanutyh stranah novye praviyteli, razumeetsya, byly takje zainteresovany v podderjaniy vlastnoy monopoliy y konservasiy sobstvennogo statusa. No pry etom ony staralisi podderjivati monopolii, rasshiryaya raznoobrazie simvolicheskih y statusnyh osnov. Krome togo, podcherkivaya znachimosti sobstvennogo politicheskogo polojeniya, ony obychno staralisi proyavlyati uvajenie k novym raznovidnostyam tehnicheskoy y professionalinoy deyatelinosti. Krome togo, ony stremilisi predelino minimizirovati tyagu k uvekovechenii svoih gospodstvuishih pozisiy razlichnymy elitnymy ily burokraticheskimy gruppirovkamiy[38].

Proyavlyaya neobychaynuy gibkosti v podhode k sobstvennomu statusu, ukazannym elitam udavalosi obespechivati y bólishuy splochennosti v sobstvennyh ryadah, y tverdosti v provedeniy namechaemoy politiky - bolee togo, ony mogly pozvoliti sebe ne ustupati zaprosam y prityazaniyam drugih grupp y strat bezogovorochno. V kraynih sluchayah, kak v Rossii, v otnosheniy takih konkuriruishih sloev ispolizovalosi ustrasheniye, no v osnovnom starye elity pytalisi napravlyati trebovaniya obshestva v nujnoe ruslo, manipuliruya imi. Nekotorye iz takih trebovaniy - napriymer zapros na provedenie agrarnoy reformy v Meksiyke - stanovilisi vajnymy simvolamy novyh rejimov. Interesno, chto realinaya politika, vdohnovlyaemaya podobnymy simvolami, ne vsegda polnostiu voploshala potensialinye nadejdy, kotorye na nee vozlagalisi. Tak, napriymer, reformy, provedennye v Meksiyke v agrarnoy sfere, byli, bezuslovno, vajny s tochky zreniya pereustroystva seliskih soobshestv, sozdav v nih novye sosialinye y ekonomicheskie gruppy y raskuporiv kanaly sosialinoy mobilinosti. No vse je v selom etim preobrazovaniyam ne pozvolily zayty nastoliko daleko, chtoby navsegda pokonchiti s korystnymy interesamy otdelinyh grupp, kak staryh, tak y novyh[39].

 

XVII

Vopros o tom, pochemu v Tursii, Yaponii, Meksiyke y Rossiy na nachalinyh stadiyah modernizasiy poyavilisi elity, oriyentirovannye na peremeny y sposobnye provoditi otnosiytelino effektivnui politiku, a v Indonezii, Pakistane ily Birme etogo ne sluchilosi, iskluchiytelino slojen. Faktichesky eto odna iz naibolee ozadachivaishih problem, voznikaishih v hode sravniytelinogo sosiologicheskogo analiza, - prichem my raspolagaem lishi samymy rasplyvchatymy predpolojeniyamy kasatelino togo, kak s ney rabotati. V poryadke gipotezy mojno dopustiti, chto v kakoy-to mere nalichie takoy problemy bylo predresheno mestom etih elit v predshestvuishey sosialinoy strukture, stepeniu ih vnutrenney splochennosty y transformasiey ih sennostnyh oriyentasiy[40].

V bolishinstve rassmotrennyh vyshe molodyh stran novye elity sostoyaly preimushestvenno iz intellektualov, zachastui okazyvavshihsya edva ly ne edinstvenno dostupnym resursom dlya formirovaniya sovremennogo upravlencheskogo klassa. Ety ludy pochty ne iydentifisirovaly sebya kak sosialino, tak y iydeyno ny s nosiytelyamy bolee rannih tradisiy, ny s bolee shirokimy sosialinymy gruppami. Obnovlencheskie ustremleniya etih elit konsentrirovalisi v pervui ocheredi v politicheskoy, a ne v ekonomicheskoy oblasti. Kak ny paradoksalino, zachastuy ony ne udelyaly vnimaniya daje kuliturnoy sfere, ignoriruya pereosmyslenie y reformirovanie sobstvennyh bazovyh sennostey. V itoge ony tak y ne smogly dobitisya vnutrenney splochennosti, a takje naladiti iydeologicheskui y sennostnuy svyazi s inymy potensialino sochuvstvuishimy modernizasiy gruppamy y sloyamiy.

Analogichnym obrazom vo mnogih latinoamerikanskih stranah politicheskie elity ily liydery, kak oligarhi, tak y demagogi, byly v osnovnom otorvany, pusti daje neskoliko inache, ot bolee shirokih sloev, postoyanno vlivaishihsya v sosium ily tesnyashih ego sentralinye instituty. Prosess seleksiy y formirovaniya elit Latinskoy Ameriky byl otnosiytelino jestkim y limitirovannym, a eto vleklo za soboy ih otnosiytelinuiy slabosti, usilivaisheesya otchujdenie ot ostalinogo obshestva, neuverennosti v budushem y defisit splochennostiy[41]. Kak izvestno, pohojie y daje bolee rezkie razmejevaniya mejdu razlichnymy elitamy otlichaly evropeyskie strany v 1920-h y 1930-h godah.

Vmeste s tem, elity Tursii, Yaponiy y Meksiki, a takje naibolee splochennye elity drugih stran, perejivaishih pozdnie stadiy modernizasii, nesmotrya na vse razlichiya mejdu nimi, po selomu ryadu harakteristik vyglyadely sovershenno inache. V ih ryadah okazyvalisi otnudi ne toliko intellektualy, polnostiu otchujdennye ot prejnih elit y ot obshestva v selom; naprotiyv, obychno predstaviytely zdeshnih elit zanimaly vtorostepennye rukovodyashie pozisiy v predshestvuyshih strukturah y tesno kontaktirovaly s aktivnymy sosialinymy gruppamiy.

V iydeologicheskoy y sennostnoy sfere ony stremilisi formirovati novye, bolee gibkie nabory simvolov y kollektivnyh iydentichnostey, ne otrisaya pry etom tradisii, no pereosmyslivaya ee v duhe peremen. Tem samym oni, s odnoy storony, tyagotely k bolishey splochennosti, a s drugoy storony, stimulirovaly sennostnye sdvigy vnutry bolee shirokih grupp y sloev.

 

XVIII

Uglublyayshiyesya prosessy sosialinoy mobilizasii, kotorye ne podkreplyaitsya adekvatnoy integrasiey, no zato soprovojdaytsya raskolom mejdu "instrumentalino" oriyentirovannymy rukovodiytelyamy y liyderami, "sozidaishimy solidarnosti", a takje haosom v sarstve iydeologiy y simvolov, mojno bylo zametiti vo vseh molodyh gosudarstvah, gde iymely mesto sryvy modernizasii, osobenno v politicheskoy sfere. V raznyh stranah takie sryvy proishodily na razlichnyh modernizasionnyh stadiyah.

Obshim itogom, obnarujivaemym v bolishinstve podobnyh prosessov, proanalizirovannyh vyshe, mojno nazvati otkat politicheskih rejimov k menee razvitomu y ne slishkom gibkomu tipu politicheskoy y sosialinoy differensiasii. Eto yarko obnarujivaetsya v tipologiy problem, s kotorymy ony sposobny spravlyatisya. No, s drugoy storony, y eto toje otmechalosi vyshe, mnogie iz stavshih bolee primitivnymy rejimov v toy ily inoy mere sohranily simvoly, sely y institusionalinyy anturaj sovremennosti, nesmotrya daje na predprinimaemye imy popytky vyrabotati aliternativnye iydey y simvoly.

Takaya kombinasiya s neizbejnostiu porojdala potensialinoe protivorechiye, kotoroe moglo razreshatisya neskolikimy sposobami. Odnim iz vozmojnyh variantov okazyvalasi institusionalizasiya otnosiytelino osovremenennoy sistemy, ne slishkom, veroyatno, differensirovannoy, no vse je sposobnoy absorbirovati novye veyaniya y tem samym obespechivati kakoy-to ekonomicheskiy rost. Drugoy variant predpolagaet razvitie stagniruishih rejimov, pochty ne sposobnyh reagirovati na izmenenie vneshney sredy, kotorye, odnako, mogut sushestvovati dovolino dolgo. Inogda, vprochem, ih udelom stanovitsya porochnyy krug nedovolistva, ohraniytelistva y nasiliya. No analiz usloviy, predopredelyayshiy tot ily inoy puti, ne vmeshaetsya v ramky dannoy raboty.

 

Perevod s angliyskogo Andreya Zaharova

 

___________________________________________________

 

1) Nastoyashaya statiya, napisannaya v 1965 godu, opublikovana v kniyge: Eisenstadt S.N. Tradition, Change and Modernity. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1973. P. 47-72.

2) Ob Indoneziy sm.: Feith H. The Decline of Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1962; Hannah W.A. Bung Karno's Indonesia. New York: American Universities Field Staff, 1961; Pauker G.Y. Indonesia, Internal Developments of External Expansion // Asian Survey. 1963. Vol. III. № 2. P. 69-76. O Birme sm.: Pye L.W. Politics, Personality and Nation Building. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962; Walinsky L. Economic Development in Burma, 1951-1960. New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1962; Badgley J.H. Burma: The Nexus of Socialism and Two Political Traditions // Asian Survey. 1963. Vol. III. № 2. P. 89-96. O Pakistane sm.: Sayeed K.B. Pakistan: The Formative Phase. Karachi: Pakistan Publishing House, 1960; Newman K.J. Pakistan's Preventive Autocracy and Its Causes // Pacific Affairs. 1959. Vol. XXXII. № 1. P. 18-34; Sayeed K.B. The Collapse of Parliamentary Democracy in Pakistan // Middle East Journal. 1959. Vol. XXXII. № 4. P. 389-406; Wheeler R. Pakistan: New Constitution, Old Issues // Asian Survey. 1963. Vol. III. № 2. P. 107-116; Tinker H. India and Pakistan. New York: Praeger, 1962; Williams L.F.R. Problems of Constitution Building in Pakistan // Asian Review. 1962. Vol. LVIII. P. 151-160; Callard K. Pakistan: A Political Study. New York: Macmillan, 1957.

3) O razlichnyh traktovkah modernizasii, ispolizovannyh v etom analiyze, sm. sleduiyshie raboty: Eisenstadt S.N. Bureaucracy and Political Development // LaPolambara J. (Ed.). Bureaucracy and Political Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963; Eisenstadt S.N. Modernization, Diversity, and Growth. Bloomington: University of Indiana, 1953; Lerner D. The Passing of Traditional Society. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1958.

4) O Birme sm.: Badgley J.H. Op. cit. O Pakistane sm.: Jennings W.I. (Ed.). Constitutional Problems in Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958; Sherwani L.A., Singhal D.P. The 1962 Pakistani Constitution: Two Views // Asian Survey. 1962. Vol. II. № 8. P. 9-24; Binder L. Religion and Politics in Pakistan. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1961. Ob Indoneziy sm.: Feith H. Op. cit.; Hannah W.A. Op. cit.; Pauker G.Y. Op. cit.

5) Naibolee osnovatelino dannaya problema osveshaetsya v sleduishey rabote: Levy M.J. jr. Contrasting Factors in the Modernization of China and Japan // Kuznets S., Moore W.E., Spengler J.J. (Eds.). Economic Growth: Brazil, India, Japan. Durham: Duke University Press, 1955. P. 496-537; sm. takje: Beckman G.M. The Modernization of China and Japan. New York: Harper and Row, 1963; Chien-Nung L. The Political History of China, 1840-1928. Princeton: Van Nostrand, 1956.

6) Ob Argentiyne 1920-1930-h godov sm.: Pendle G. Argentina. London: Oxford University Press, 1961; Goletti A. La Realidad Argentina en el Siglo XX: La Politica y Los Partidos. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Economica, 1961; Argentina 1930-1960. Buenos Aires: SUR, 1961; Bagu S. La Estructuracion Economica en la Etapa Formativa de la Argentina Moderna // Desarollo Economico. 1961. Vol. 1. № 2. P. 113-129.

7) O Yaponiy sm.: Scalapino R.A. Japan between Traditionalism and Democracy // Neumann S. (Ed.). Modern Political Parties. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. P. 305-354. O Germaniy sm.: Neumann S. Germany: Changing Patterns and Lasting Problems // Ibid. P. 354-394.

8) Detalinoe opisanie etih prosessov v nekotoryh iz upomyanutyh stran sm. v sleduishih rabotah: Feith H. Op. cit.; Callard K. Op. cit.; Wilcox W.A. Pakistan: The Consolidation of the New Nation. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963; Shun-Hsui Ch. The Chinese Inflation. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963.

9) Ponyatiya "artikulyasiya", "agregasiya" y drugie ispolizuitsya zdesi v tom je smysle, chto y v sleduyshey rabote: Almond G., Coleman J. (Eds.). The Politics of the Developing Areas. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960. Razlichnye case studies, predstavlennye v etoy rabote, soderjat bogatyy fakticheskiy material k obsujdaemym v dannoy statie problemam.

10) Sm.: Braibanti R. Reflections on Bureaucratic Corruption // Public Administration. 1962. Vol. XL. P. 357-372.

11) Obzor sootvetstvuyshih iydeologicheskih vzglyadov sm. v sleduishih rabotah: Sigmund P.E. jr. The Ideologies of the Developing Nations. New York: Praeger, 1963; Kautsky J.H. An Essay in the Politics of Development // Kautsky J.H. (Ed.). Political Change in Underdeveloped Countries. London: Wiley, 1962. P. 3-123.

12) Sm.: Eisenstadt S.N. Essays on Sociological Aspects of Political and Economic Development. The Hague: Mouton, 1961. Zdesi je soderjitsya polnaya bibliografiya po dannoy teme.

13) Sm.: Pye L.W. Communication Patterns and the Problems of Representative Government in Non-Western Societies // Public Opinion Quarterly. 1956. Vol. XX. P. 249-257. O strukture tradisionnoy kommunikasiy sm.: Eisenstadt S.N. Communication System, and Social Structure: An Exploratory Comparative Study // Public Opinion Quarterly. 1955. Vol. XIX. P. 153-157; Eisenstadt S.N. The Political Systems of Empires. New York: The Free Press, 1963. Naibolee obstoyatelinoy rabotoy na etu temu mojno schitati sleduishui: Pye L.W. (Ed.). Communication and Political Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963.

14) Sm.: Feith H. Op. cit. P. 113-122; Eisenstadt S.N. Patterns of Political Leadership and Support. Paper submitted to the International Conference on Representation Government and National Progress. Ibadan, 1959; Shils E.A. Political Development in New States. The Hague: Mouton, 1962.

15) Feith H. Op. cit.; Shils E.A. Op. cit.

16) Hannah W.A. Op. cit.; Butwell R. The Four Failures of U Nu's Second Premiership // Asian Survey. 1962. Vol. II. № 3. P. 3-12; Von der Mehden F.R. The Changing Pattern of Religion and Politics in Burma // Sakai R.K. (Ed.). Studies in Asia. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1961. P. 63-74; Sarkisyanz M. On the Place of U Nu's Buddhist Socialism in Burma's History of Ideas // Ibid. P. 58-63; sm. takje: Kitagawa M.M. Buddhism and Asian Politics // Asian Survey. 1962. Vol. II. № 5. P. 1-12; Feith H. Indonesia's Political Symbols and Their Weilders // World Politics. 1963. Vol. XVI. № 1. P. 79-98.

17) Sm.: Binder L. Op. cit.; Sayeed K.B. Op. cit.

18) Sm., napriymer: Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek. Resistance and Reconstruction: Messages during China's Six Years of War. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1943. P. 84 ff., 94 ff., 155 ff.; Idem. China's Destiny and Chinese Economic History. New York: Rov, 1942; sm. takje: Isaacs H.R. The Tragedy of the Chinese Revolution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1957.

19) Ob Argentiyne v kontekste Latinskoy Ameriyke sm.: Germani G. Politica y Sociedad en Una Epoca de Transicion. Buenos Aires: Paidos, 1963; Silvert K. Liderazgo Politico y Debilidad Institutional de la Argentina // Desarollo Economico. 1961. Vol. 1. № 3. P. 155-182; Saravia J.M. Argentina 1959 // Estudio Sociologico. 1959. O bolee shirokih aspektah sosialinoy struktury Latinskoy Ameriki, relevantnyh dlya dannoy diskussii, sm.: Germani G. Op. cit.; Silvert K. The Conflict Society: Reaction and Revolution in Latin America. New Orleans: Hauser, 1961; Vries E. de, Echevarrie M. (Eds.). Social Aspects of Economic Development in Latin America. Paris: UNESCO, 1963; sm. takje: Germani G., Silvert K. Politics, Social Structure, and Military Intervention in Latin America // European Journal of Sociology. 1961. Vol. II. № 4. P. 62-82. Lubopytnye komparativnye dannye soderjatsya v sleduishih rabotah: Di Tella T. Tensiones Sociales de los Paises de la Periferrie // Revista de la Universidad de Buenos Aires. 1961. № 1. P. 49-62; Fernandes F. Mudancas Sociais no Brasil. Sao Paulo: Difusao Europea do Libro, 1960; Furtado C. A pre-Revolucao Brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Fundo de Cultura, 1962; Ahumada J. Hypotheses for the Diagnosis of a Situation of Social Change: The Case of Venezuela. Caracas: CENDES, 1963.

20) Scalapino R.A. Op. cit.; Beckman G.M. Op. cit; sm. takje: Ishida T. The Pattern of Japanese Political Modernization. Proceedings of the Association for Asian Studies. Philadelphia, 1963.

21) Sm.: Geertz C. Ideology as a Cultural System // Apter D. (Ed.). Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press, 1964. P. 47-76; Skinner G.W. (Ed.). Local, Ethnic, and National Loyalties in Village Indonesians: A Symposium. New Haven: Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, 1959; Shils E.A. Primordial, Personal, Sacred, and Civil Ties // British Journal of Sociology. 1957. Vol. VIII. P. 130-145; Idem. Political Development in New States. The Hague: Mouton, 1962. P. 31-37.

22) Priymer Argentiny obnarujivaet predely preemstvennosty y stabilinosty v obshestve, v kotorom predkontraktnye elementy s samogo nachala byly slaby ily nerazvity, a navyky obshestvennoy solidarnosty ne slojilisi. V rezulitate immigrasiy y kolonizasiy Argentiny mejdu 1890-my y 1920-my godamy oformilisi novye, "otnosiytelino modernizirovannye" sosialinye gruppy, takiye, kak novye plantatory ily promyshlennye rabochiye. Ety gruppy, v selom, tyagotely k sosialinoy y kuliturnoy obosoblennosti. Bolee togo, blagodarya prodoljavsheysya ekonomicheskoy ekspansiy na koloniziruemyh territoriyah ony iymely vozmojnosti podderjivati obosoblennoe y zamknutoe sushestvovanie daje v kontekste razvitiya, izmeneniy y modernizasii. Lishi so vremenem ony vplelisi v sosialinye sety vzaimnoy podderjki. V to je vremya kluchevye oligarhicheskie elity, zanimavshie politicheskie vysoty v strane, ne razvivaly novye simvoly, instituty y politicheskie instrumenty, kotorye pozvolily by razreshati vnovi voznikaishie obshestvennye problemy, starayasi podderjivati, vmesto etogo, ustarevshui modeli, slojivshuisya v XIX veke. Tem samym ony prepyatstvovaly polnoy integrasiy upomyanutyh grupp v novuy, modernizirovannui sistemu. Lishi posle togo, kak, s odnoy storony, vzaimootnosheniya mejdu etimy gruppamy staly tesnee, a burnaya ekonomicheskaya ekspansiya, s drugoy storony, zatormozilasi, shatkiy balans sosushestvovaniya byl narushen, ustupiv mesto konfliktam y treniyam 1930-h godov, nestabilinosty peronistskogo rejima y vsem posleduyshim problemam.

23) Sm.: Sayeed K.B. Op. cit. Ch. XIV-XVI.

24) Deutsch K. Social Mobilization and Political Development // American Political Science Review. 1961. Vol. LV. P. 463-515.

25) Wolf E.R. Closed Corporate Peasant Communities in Mesoamerica and Central Java // Southwestern Journal of Anthropology. 1957. Vol. XII. P. 1-8.

26) Ibid.

27) Morse R.N. Latin American Cities: Aspects of Function and Structure // Comparative Studies in Society and History. 1962. Vol. IV. № 4. P. 473-494; Lopes J.F.B. Aspects of Adjustment of Rural Emigrants to Urban-Industrial Conditions in San Paulo, Brazil // Hauser P. (Ed.). Urbanization in Latin America. Paris: UNESCO, 1961. P. 234-249; Germani G. Inquiry into the Social Effects of Urbanization on a Working Class Sector of Greater Buenos Aires // Ibid. P. 206-233; Mafos Mar J. Migration and Urbanization // Ibid. P. 170-191; Pearse A. Some Characteristics of Urbanization in the City of Rio de Janeiro // Ibid. 191-206. O pohojey situasiy v Yujnoy Italiy sm.: Barzini L. Italy, North and South // Encounter. 1962. № 105. P. 7-18; sm. takje: Fernandes F. Mudancas Sociais no Brasil.

28) Sm.: Tiryakian E. Occupational Stratification and Aspiration in an Underdeveloped Country: The Philippines // Economic Development and Cultural Change. 1959. Vol. VII. P. 431-444.

29) Etoy informasiey, a takje ukazaniyem na obshuiy znachimosti gruppovyh ustanovok dannogo tipa ya obyazan sleduishey rabote: Germani G. Politica y Sociedad. Ch. VII.

30) Pitts J.R. Continuity and Change in Bourgeois France // In Search of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1963. P. 254-259.

31) Fernandes F. O Cientista Brasileiros o Desenvolvimento da Cienca // Revista Brasiliense. 1960. № 1. P. 85-121; sm. takje: Riggs F.W. Economic Development and Local Administration // Philippine Journal of Public Administration. 1959. Vol. IV. № 1.

32) Sm.: Eisenstadt S.N. Essays on Sociological Aspects of Political and Economic Development. P. 42 ff.

33) Sm., napriymer: Wang Y.C. Social Mobility in China // American Sociological Review. 1960. Vol. XXV. № 6. P. 843-855.

34) Ob obrazovatelinoy politiyke sm.: Lewis A. Education and Economic Development // Social and Economic Studies. 1961. Vol. X. № 2; Moreira R. Educacao e Desenvolvimento no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, 1960; Fisher J. Universities and the Political Process in Southeast Asia // Pacific Affairs. 1963. Vol. XXXVI. № 1. P. 3-16; Mint H. The Universities of Southeast Asia and Economic Development // Pacific Affairs. 1962. Vol. XXXV. № 2. P. 116-128; Eisenstadt S.N. Education and Political Development. Duke University Commonwealth Seminar series. Durham, 1964. Ob ekonomicheskoy politiyke sm.: Glassburner B. Economic Policy Making in Indonesia, 1950-1957 // Economic Development and Cultural Change. 1962. Vol. X. № 1; Schmitt H.O. Foreign Capital and Social Conflict in Indonesia, 1950-1955 // Economic Development and Cultural Change. 1962. Vol. X. № 2; Mackie J.C. Indonesia's Government Estates and Their Masters // Pacific Affairs. 1961. Vol. XXXLV. № 4. P. 337-360. O problemah burokratizasiy sm.: Feith H. Op. cit.; Panni O. Delema da Burocratizacao no Brasil // Boletim, Centro Latino Americano de Pesquisas em Cienciais Sociais. 1960. Vol. IV. № 3. P. 9-14. O problemah agrarnoy reformy sm.: Felix D. Agrarian Reform and Industrial Growth // International Development Review. 1960. Vol. II. P. 16-22; Carrol T.F. The Land Reform Issue in Latin America // Hirschmann A. (Ed.). Latin American Issues. New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1961. P. 161-201; Ledejinsky W.I. Agrarian Reform in the Republic of Vietnam // Problems of Freedom: South Vietnam Since Independence. New York: The Free Press, 1961. P. 53-77; sm. takje: Economic Reconstruction and the Struggle for Political Power in Indonesia // World Today. 1959. Vol. XV. № 3. P. 105-144; Felix D. Structural Imbalances, Social Conflict, and Inflation: An Appraisal of Chile's Recent Anti-Inflationary Effort // Economic Development and Cultural Change. 1960. Vol. VIII. № 2. P. 113-148.

35) Klassicheskiy analiz politicheskoy modernizasiy v Yaponiy predlojen v sleduyshey rabote: Norman H. Japan's Emergence as a Modern State. New York: Institute of Pacific Relations, 1940. V nekotoryh bolee pozdnih rabotah interpretasiya Normana osparivaetsya; sm., napriymer: Jansen M.B. Sakamoto Ryoma and the Meiji Restoration. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961; Craig A.M. Chosshu in the Meiji Restoration. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961; Bellah R.N. Tokugawa Religion. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1956; Bellah R.N. Values and Social Change in Modern Japan // Asian Cultural Studies.1962. № 3. P. 13-57; Passin H. Stratigraphy of Protest in Japan // Kaplan M. (Ed.). The Revolution in World Politics. New York, 1962. P. 12-113; Dore R.P. Land Reform in Japan. London: Oxford University Press, 1959; sm. takje spesialinyy nomer "City and Village in Japan" jurnala "Economic Development and Cultural Change" (1960. Vol. LX. № 1. Part II). O kemalistskoy Tursiy sm.: Lewis B. The Emergence of Modern Turkey. London: Oxford University Press, 1961; Karpat K.H. Turkey's Politics: The Transition to Multi-Party System. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959; Karpat K.H. Recent Political Developments in Turkey and Their Social Background // International Affairs. 1962. Vol. XXVIII. № 3. P. 304-323; Frey F.W. Political Development, Power and Communications in Turkey // Pye L.W. (Ed.). Communication and Political Development. P. 28-327. O Meksiyke sm.: Cline H.F. Mexico: Revolution to Evolution. London: Oxford University Press, 1962; Scott R.E. Mexican Government in Transition. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1959; Paz O. The Labyrinth of Solitude: Life and Thought in Mexico. New York: Grove Press, 1961; Vernon R. The Dilemma of Mexico's Development: The Roles of the Private and Public Sectors. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1963. Liyteratura, posvyashennaya SSSR, razumeetsya, obshirna, no naibolee vajnye s tochky zreniya nashego analiza punkty mojno nayty v sleduyshih rabotah: Fainsod M. How Russia Is Ruled. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955; Brzezinski Z.K. Ideology and Power in Soviet Politics. New York: Praeger, 1962; Armstrong J.A. The Politics of Totalitarianism: The Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1934 to the Present. New York: Random House, 1961.

36) Sm., napriymer: Frey F.W. Political Development, Power and Communications in Turkey. P. 313-314.

37) Sm.: Frey F.W. Education and Political Development in Turkey // Coleman J.S. (Ed.). Education and Political Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965. O razvitiy yaponskogo obrazovaniya v epohu Meydzy sm.: Anderson R. Japan: Three Epochs of Modern Education. Washington: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1919; Hall R.K. Education for the New Japan. New Haven, 1949; Passin H. Education and Political Development in Japan // Coleman J.S. (Ed.). Op. cit. O razvitiy obrazovaniya v Meksiyke sm.: Cline H.F. Op. cit.; Johnston M.C. Education in Mexico. Washington: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1956.

38) Sluchay Sovetskoy Rossii, veroyatno, naibolee pokazatelen. S odnoy storony, v SSSR mnogie predstaviytely novyh elit - burokraty, injenery, politiky - aktivno proyavlyaly sklonnosti "zamoroziti" sobstvennoe polojeniye, navechno zakrepiv za soboy y za chlenamy svoih semey mnogie sosialinye, ekonomicheskie y obrazovatelinye prerogativy. S drugoy storony, ety tendensiy uravnoveshivalisi popytkamy vysshego politicheskogo rukovodstva slomati podobnui predzadannosti, utverjdaya posredstvom partiynogo verhovenstva neobhodimosti permanentnoy differensiasiy statusnyh y vlastnyh kriyteriyev. Shodnye tendensiy y analogichnaya politika nabludalisi v kemalistskoy Tursii, Meksiyke y Yaponiy epohy Meydzi; sm.: Bereday G.F., Brickman W.W., Read G.H. (Eds.). The Changing Soviet School: The Comparative Society Field Study in the USSR. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1960; Bereday G.F. (Ed.). The Politics of Soviet Education. New York: Praeger, 1960; Anweiler Q. Probleme der Schulreform in Osteuropa // International Review of Education. 1960. Vol. VI. P. 21-35; Goncharov N.K. La Reforme Scholaire in U.S.S.R. // Ibid. P. 432-442; De Witt N. Upheaval in Education // Problems of Communism. 1959. Vol. VIII.

39) O meksikanskoy agrarnoy reforme sm.: Cline H.F. Op. cit.; Maddox J.G. Mexican Land Reform. New York: American Universities Field Staff, 1957; Herzog J.S. El Agrarismo Mexicano y la Reforma Agraria. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Economica, 1959.

40) Sm.: Kautsky J.N. An Essay in the Politics of Development; Benda H. Non-Western Intelligentsia as Political Elites // Kautsky J.N. (Ed.). Political Change in Underdeveloped Countries. P. 235-252; Mansur F. Process of Independence. London, 1962.

41) Sm.: Germani G. Politica y Sociedad...; Silvert K. Liderazgo Politico y Debilidad Institutional de la Argentina; Fernandes F. Mudancas Sociais no Brasil.

http://magazines.russ.ru/nz/2010/6/e4.html