There is a growing tension in society, the authorities are increasingly showing incompetence, and we feel powerless and afraid. Where to look for resources in such a situation? We are trying to look at social life through the eyes of political scientist Ekaterina Shulman.
More than a year ago, we began to follow with interest the publications and speeches of the political scientist Ekaterina Shulman: we were fascinated by the soundness of her judgments and the clarity of her language. Some even call her a «collective psychotherapist.» We invited an expert to the editorial office to figure out how this effect occurs.
Psychologies: There is a feeling that something very important is happening in the world. Global changes that inspire some people, while others worry.
Ekaterina Shulman: What is happening in the global economy is often referred to as the “fourth industrial revolution”. What is meant by this? First, the spread of robotics, automation and informatization, the transition to what is called the “post-labor economy”. Human labor takes on other forms, since industrial production is obviously moving into the strong hands of robots. The main value will not be material resources, but the added value — what a person adds: his creativity, his thought.
The second area of change is transparency. Privacy, as it was understood before, is leaving us and, apparently, will not return, we will live in public. But the state will also be transparent to us. Already now, a picture of power has opened up all over the world, in which there are no wise men of Zion and priests in robes, but there are confused, not very educated, self-serving and not very sympathetic people who act on their random impulses.
This is one of the reasons for the political changes taking place in the world: the desacralization of power, the deprivation of its sacred halo of secrecy.
It seems that there are more and more incompetent people around.
The Internet revolution, and especially access to the Internet from mobile devices, has brought into public discussion people who had not previously participated in it. From this there is a feeling that everywhere is full of illiterate people who are talking nonsense, and any stupid opinion has the same weight as a well-founded opinion. It seems to us that a crowd of savages has come to the polls and is voting for others like them. In fact, this is democratization. Previously, those who had the resource, desire, opportunities, time participated in the elections …
And some interest…
Yes, the ability to understand what is happening, why vote, which candidate or party suits their interests. This requires quite a serious intellectual effort. In recent years, the level of wealth and education in societies — especially in the first world — has risen radically. The information space has become open to everyone. Everyone received not only the right to receive and disseminate information, but also the right to speak out.
What do I see as grounds for moderate optimism? I believe in the theory of violence reduction
This is a revolution comparable to the invention of printing. However, those processes that we perceive as shocks do not actually destroy society. There is a reconfiguration of power, decision-making systems. In general, democracy works. Attracting new people who have not previously participated in politics is a test for a democratic system. But I see that for now she can withstand it, and I think she will eventually survive. Let’s hope that systems that are not yet mature democracies will not fall prey to this test.
What might meaningful citizenship look like in a not very mature democracy?
There are no secrets or secret methods here. The Information Age gives us a large set of tools to help unite according to interests. I mean civil interest, not stamp collecting (although the latter is fine too). Your interest as a citizen may be that you don’t close down a hospital in your neighborhood, cut down a park, build a tower in your yard, or tear down something you like. If you are employed, it is in your interest that your labor rights are protected. It is striking that we do not have a trade union movement — despite the fact that the majority of the population is employed.
It is not easy to take and create a trade union …
You can at least think about it. Realize that his appearance is in your interest. This is the connection with reality that I call for. The association of interests is the creation of the grid that replaces the underdeveloped and not very well functioning state institutions.
Since 2012, we have been conducting a pan-European study of the social well-being of citizens — the Eurobarometer. It studies the number of social bonds, strong and weak. Strong ones are close relationships and mutual assistance, and weak ones are only information exchange, acquaintances. Every year people in our country talk about more and more connections, both weak and strong.
Perhaps it’s good?
This improves social well-being so much that it even compensates for dissatisfaction with the state system. We see that we are not alone, and we have a somewhat inadequate euphoria. For example, someone who (according to his feeling) has more social connections is more inclined to take loans: “If anything, they will help me.” And to the question “If you lose your job, is it easy for you to find it?” he is inclined to answer: “Yes, in three days!”
Is this support system primarily social media friends?
Including. But connections in the virtual space contribute to the growth of the number of connections in reality. In addition, the Soviet state pressure, which forbade three of us to gather, even to read Lenin, was gone. Wealth has grown, and we began to build on the upper floors of the “Maslow pyramid”, and there there is also a need for joint activity, for approval from the neighbor.
Much of what the state should do for us, we arrange for ourselves thanks to connections
And again, informatization. How was it before? A person leaves his city to study — and that’s it, he will return there only for the funeral of his parents. In a new place, he creates social connections from scratch. Now we carry our connections with us. And we make new contacts much easier thanks to new means of communication. It gives you a sense of control over your life.
Does this confidence concern only private life or the state too?
We become less dependent on the state due to the fact that we are our own ministry of health and education, the police and the border service. Much of what the state should do for us, we arrange for ourselves thanks to our connections. As a result, paradoxically, there is an illusion that things are going well and, therefore, the state is working well. Even though we don’t see him very often. Let’s say we don’t go to the clinic, but call the doctor privately. We send our children to the school recommended by friends. We are looking for cleaners, nurses and housekeepers in social networks.
That is, we just live «among our own», without influencing decision-making? About five years ago, it seemed that networking would bring real change.
The fact is that in the political system the driving force is not the individual, but the organization. If you are not organized, you do not exist, you have no political existence. We need a structure: the Society for the Protection of Women from Violence, a trade union, a party, a union of concerned parents. If you have a structure, you can take some political action. Otherwise, your activity is episodic. They took to the streets, they left. Then something else happened, they left again.
It is more profitable and safer to live in a democracy compared to other regimes
In order to have an extended being, one must have an organization. Where has our civil society been most successful? In the social sphere: guardianship and guardianship, hospices, pain relief, protection of the rights of patients and prisoners. Changes in these areas took place under pressure primarily from non-profit organizations. They enter into legal structures such as expert councils, write projects, prove, explain, and after a while, with the support of the media, changes in laws and practices take place.
Does political science give you grounds for optimism today?
It depends on what you call optimism. Optimism and pessimism are evaluative concepts. When we talk about the stability of the political system, does this inspire optimism? Some are afraid of a coup, while others, perhaps, are just waiting for it. What do I see as grounds for moderate optimism? I believe in the violence reduction theory proposed by psychologist Steven Pinker. The first factor that leads to a decrease in violence is precisely the centralized state, which takes violence into its own hands.
There are other factors as well. Trade: a living buyer is more profitable than a dead enemy. Feminization: more women participate in social life, attention to women’s values is growing. Globalization: we see that people live everywhere and nowhere they are dog-headed. Finally, information penetration, speed and ease of access to information. In the first world, frontal wars, when two armies are at war with each other, are already unlikely.
That is the worst is behind us?
In any case, it is more profitable and safer to live under democracy compared to other regimes. But the progress we are talking about does not cover the entire Earth. There may be «pockets» of history, black holes into which individual countries fall. While people in other countries are enjoying the XNUMXst century, honor killings, «traditional» values, corporal punishment, disease and poverty are flourishing there. Well, what can I say — I would not like to be among them.