WEB-ресурс научно-практических конференций

PhD in Sociology Pyanov A.I.

North-Caucasian state technical university

SOCIAL INSTITUTE OF THE FAMILY AND THE DOCTRINE OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN RUSSIA : CONCEPTUAL ASPECT

The basic condition of a survival of the modern world is easing of the basic contradiction of an epoch – between the person and a society. The mechanism of levelling of this contradiction is acceleration of rates of social progress, increase of its social maturity which, in our opinion, is impossible without inclusion in this process of such powerful regulator of social space which the social institute of a family is.

The family as social and cultural a phenomenon represents result and a result of development of all social and historical experience of mankind. It forms a base biological and social precondition of functioning of society as without reproduction of the population and socialisation of generations maintenance of ability to live of a society in all its spheres is impossible.

Owing to the social and cultural of the nature the family is a social phenomenon, boundary inherently, being on crossing macro- and microstructures of society. «The family occupies a certain median position in difficult ensemble of relations of the person and a society that is at an original crossroads personal and social being. This spatial disposition of a family in any society also predetermines its main target and motivational installation – to be the self-sufficient subject of life, life of personal, its members defined by uniqueness and lives social as self-sufficiency is an exit for limits ordinary, there is a way of development of the social world» [1, p.83].

The family as social institute is not doomed to a role of the effectless subject (the social agent) in a society. It possesses the possibilities, allowing to carry out «a reduction societal processes to results of social behaviour of a microhabitat and to deduce from empirically investigated facts trends of global character» [2, p.43]. Through family and demographic structures it can independently influence a course of social and historical changes. Defining family possibilities as social system, follows from «to obvious dependence of public formations on family systems, dictating the forms of government and social control and only during new time transferring these functions to «the supreme power» [3, p.125].

The parity problem in a triad «a society – a family – the person» always existed in the history and caused scientific interest. In ordinary opposition society and person the family acts as the intermediary pulling together their interests, and responsibility to its needs of each of the parties is the indicator of their susceptibility to requirements each other, as transforms a problem of a parity of a family with the person and a society in a sociological problem.

Proceeding from told, «fundamental value of a family consists in its function in an intermediary role. It connects the separate person with social structure» [4, p.295]. Known American sociologist William Good pays attention that «the society is capable to exist only in the event that individuals through family intermediary are based to satisfaction of public requirements. In turn, the family is capable to carry out the intermediary role under condition of support from a society – if macrosystem and family functioning as microsystems mutually supplement each other in the most important relations» [5, p.37].

Research of mechanisms of functioning of institute of a family shows, how the society balances between two extreme social problems – a tendency of a society to totalitarianism and a tendency of person to individualism. Decline of an intermediary role of a family causes double immunity – both and society and person in relation to a family. Without responding to needs of a family as social and cultural integrity, a society and the person remain in private with mutually exclusive tendencies as appear deprived of the amortization support.

In the XX-th century transform processes in a society have kept the orientation. Process of modernization of a family as social institute in industrial societies has been caused by historical transition from a traditional agrarian society to the industrial. It has caused transition from the patriarchal, authoritative, expanded family to equal in rights, matrimonial, nuclear (consisting of two generations: parents and children) a family. The crisis phenomena in its functioning have been caused by this transition. The modern family as the system integrity proving in unity of the intrinsic parties (social institute, small social group and a specific socially-psychological generality) is characterised by structural instability and disorganization of its social functions.

In the Russian conditions the family has appeared at a crossroads of two large-scale processes – modernizations of the institute of a family and, twice within this century, radical institutional changes in social development. Crisis of social institute of a family in Russia has been accelerated and deepened by the policy of the Soviet state directed on destruction of a family, as social institution. This policy has been determined by communistic ideology which did not take away to a place family in «communistic paradise» [6].  

Crisis of social institute of a family finds the display in Russia that:

- a family not in a condition is high-grade to carry out the major for society function of reproduction of the population. It is shown in constant growth of quantity of families with one child, a consequence of that is depopulation. The main reasons of deformation of reproductive function of a family is mass involving of women in sphere of industrial work and as consequence of this process – change social and cultural norms of a considerable quantity of children in a family on norms of small quantity of children in a family;

- the elimination of productive and economic function of a family and the paternalistic policy of the state has generated a mass dependence and unjustified hopes of satisfaction vital requirements of the person at the expense of public distribution, and as a result – to loss of the individual initiative in maintenance of material welfare of a family;

- the nationalization of such functions of a family as socialisation, social control and social adaptation has led to an establishment of the double standard of valuable orientations of the person that has considerably weakened educational potential of a family.

As a result of the state social and economic and cultural and ideological policy the family institute in Russia has appeared in the subordinated position to all other social institutes of a society, practically having lost the autonomy as the subject of social relations, becoming object of manipulation from the state. All it has led to easing of its intermediary role in relations between the person and a society, having strengthened thereby contradictions between them.

Nevertheless, value of a family and a family way of life remains for Russians very high. The modern researches spent among the Russian citizens of different age and, first of all youth, testify to a high rating of a family way of life among the majority of respondents [7]. This results from the fact that in the Russian mentality process of replacement of family values by values of the individual directly is not connected with devaluation of value of children and value of parentship that is the main condition of overcoming of institutional crisis of a family and gives positive hope of revival and stabilisation of its social functions.

The family continues remain leading social institute in formation and development socially significant values and installations of the person, socialisation of rising generations. In a context of social changes the family can and should become effective tool of formation of new values and norms of behaviour. For this reason the state family policy has special value for modern Russia. Its necessity is caused of social requirements. By the nature and mission the family is the ally of a society in the decision of its fundamental issues as she plays a huge role in the statement ethic foundations of the person, socialisation of children and culture and economy development. The society is interested in actively operating family, capable to develop and realize of own vital strategy, to provide not only the functioning, but also development.

Working out and realization of strategy and the mechanisms allowing actively to develop reproductive, economic and educational potential of a family on the basis of fuller realization of its institutional rights and requirements should become the major problem of a family policy. The family policy should add and deepen state social policy. It urged to promote the decision of specific problems of a family as social institute. But to generate the scientifically-proved state family policy, the Russian state should develop own, instead of the borrowed social doctrine.

Under the social doctrine, we understand a version of global technology which defines a country place in geopolitical space. Its presence helps to allocate priorities in realization of radical social interests of this or that nation. In it mechanisms of their realization contain. According to professor V. Ivanov, «the social doctrine is basic for definition of strategic targets of social policy, definition of social reference points of reforming, development of any kind of a policy for expression of interests of citizens. Differently, the social doctrine opens the most general representations about social sphere, about the social purposes of a society and basic mechanisms of its realization» [8, p.43].

The general vector of working out of the modern social doctrine of the Russian society and smooth way of its realization is, in our opinion, korporatism (from a latin: corporatio – association, community) which is considered by us as special type of the organisation of all public life. It is based on principles of joint possession and the joint order by the corporate property, original civil self-management on the basis of contractual relations between a society and the state at which the state delegates the rights of the order resources to other social institutes, including to a family. Therefore korporatism it is understood by us as such way of the organisation of public life where the pyramid of public life, at last, accepts steady position: not only the state initiates society development, and local communities, social groups and the organisations, economic subjects, citizens join in active public life. Becoming co-owners of the property, they create power structures, earn on the social needs, finance culture and, at last, solve the problems under the responsibility, having necessary resources and powers. Proceeding from told, in a basis of the Russian social doctrine, on our deep belief, the western liberally-market paradigm of social development, and corporate should be put not. As in Russia this idea has deep historical roots. Korporatism has put forward and gradually began to confirm in practice other purposes and social development reference points, to master modern values of life: the person, its creative possibilities is not means, and sense of public progress; not the economic capital – the purpose of economic practice, and a human resource, its potential – modern reference points of economy. The economy directed on achievement of such purposes-results as improvement of quality of life of the population, improvements of its physical and spiritual health, safety of the person and its creative self-expression, becomes highly effective, sanguineous, creates modern levers of constant perfection of an economic mechanism. Therefore, from our point of view, the korporatism is the theory and methodology of modern social development of Russia ; it defines the social purposes of its revival and the subsequent development. Proceeding from the social essence, the family, can become one of the basic conductors of introduction of this idea in individual consciousness of the members, and, hence, and in public consciousness. Moreover, on the social and cultural essences, the family is the natural apologist of this idea, therefore its place and a role in development of a modern society will steadily raise.

The list of references:

1. Mitrokhin V.I. Substantial dynamics of family relations and the mechanism of istitutianalization families as subject of a civil society / V.I. Mitrokhin / Family and civil society: the collection of articles. – M., 2005. – P. 81–87.

2. Antonov A.I. Notion of a family: functions and structures: chapter 2 / A.I. Antonov / Sociology of a family / edited by A.I. Antonov. – M., 2007. – P. 43–67.    

3. Zimmerman C. Family and Society / C. Zimmerman. – N. Y., 1935. – 798 p.

4. Thompson P. The voice of the past. Oral history / P. Thompson. – M., 2003. – 512 p.

5. Good W. Sociology of a family / W. Good / Sociology today: the collection of articles. – M., 1965. – P. 29–41.

6. Galetsky V.F. Historical evolution of institute of a family [An electronic resource] / V.F. Galetsky.   – Access mode: http://www.archipclag.ru  

7. An estimation Russians of a family and demographic policy of the state // Materials of sociological poll. – M., 2007. – 68 p.

8. Bases of social management / edited by V.N. Ivanov. – M., 2001. – 205 p.