The increasing role of natural-sciences-based social engineering in the changed World.
The mirror got cracked; what is behind that mirror? (ref Behind the Mirror by Konrad Lorenz)
“Any correct answer to the question "What is sociology?" would start with the words "Sociology - is Multiparadigm science ..." – from the lecture on the Sociology faculty of the MSU
Recently one of the EU political leaders, Angela Merkel after the constantly increasing number of conflicts with new immigrants makes assuming that attempts to build a multicultural society in Germany have "utterly failed,". http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,6118859,00.html Crowds of new immigrants from the Third World countries, mainly Muslim ones, deny getting integrated into German society. Rather otherwise, instead of the integration they tend changing social conditions around according their traditions.
Not the same but the similar things are going on now in France, as with immigrants from its former colonies, Algeria for instance, so with Gypsies.
The problems with Gypsies occurred not in France alone, it happens also in the Czech Republic.
One friend of mine, currently writing PhD in social sciences wrote me in despair that it made him wondering if the enthusiasm for social engineering that developed in the last few decades is coming to an end
I am eagerly convinced that in fact it means that the real work of social engineers is just starting now! That meant Angela Merkel while saying "The failures of the last 30 or 40 years cannot be resolved so quickly." The policy that was in use till now could be called whatever, but real social engineering. It was more like socialism. The 20th century history proves perfectly well, that socialism model always fail without powerful state constrains in use.
If not being urged to enter new society, to integrateit, peoples after quite natural psychological reasons prefer staying within the habitual commune with the structure they are accustomed to. If they had to work in the surrounding society they would have to enter from the commune to the outer world.
However the present European state children allowances of today allow them well to give up working if they have 4 or more children- and that is quite common situation for those immigrant families. May be it would not be some chic life, but definitely better than in the places they come from. Hence there is no need to change anything, is it not?
The first official leader that got brave enough to admit the failure of previous policy was Angela Merkel from the EAST Germany
Since frau Merkel is from the East Germany, the region that had already met the similar problem. This region that was for about 50 years cut off the West and governed under the hard pressure of the big autocratic state, Soviet Union, For several years after two Germanies reunion in 1989, the united German society experienced serious problems of the cultural disbalance – in other words, in the social life traditions disbalance, so called “West and Esat confrontation” . Only by nowadays that disbalance was overcome. Merkel just realize the problem better than the most somewhat “left” Western intellectuals.
Despite the common origin of “Wests” and “Easts” Germanies peoples and the relatively short time of forced separation, it took a lot of efforts to cure that disbalace, the break the traditions of Soviet social living - NB here I say no the Communists ones, but those, promoted by Soviet Union. The special policy of social engineering was applied to achieve that goal. And that was not merely socialism. Like no-frustracion children education create a child no motive for the socially accepted character development, so the socialism well-being provide peoples of the society with no motives for social development.
The recent steps taken toward the Gypsies social integration in Czech Republic are to be closer regarded by future social engineer.
That social development contradicts the traditions of the previous development stage social life. Peoples are usually scared of any changes in the common things around them, are they not? The changes in the World that occurred of the result of this development are enormous – as prof Roslig show in Gapminder presentation 200 years that changed the World http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPt8ElTQMIg
These changes mean that this New Word needs using new governing strategies. However the traditional state power bodies, that get benefits of their current position, are usually interested in preserving the current situation as well. As long as common peoples are still obeying the authority of their leaders, this social upgrade would meet severe resistance. Till now in the Russian Federation the results of this social retarding are still not overcome, and the modernization meets severe resisting.
So if speaking of the Muslim countries the problem would be even harder to solve. Just there is no other way. The Middle East Muslim countries suffered from the delay of social evolution since the 16th century or even longer. Approximately since the Reconquista times. The Middle East countries of those times were much more gorgeous than the European ones, so they lacked stimulus for further development, for the social evolution first of all. That did not stimulate further natural sciences evolution either – ref the articles of Pakistan phisisist Perves Hoodboy Science and the Islamic world http://scitation.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_8/49_1.shtml?bypassSSO=1The science-technical evolution in the Western World –moved by economical reasons first of all – promoted those moderns changes in the world, which are also called Globalisation. That made the “sovereign states” paradigma out-of-date. By now it were impossible to revive it due to that total incorporation of the developed states.
However so-called “non-West” countries got isolated from the social evolution mainstream Word changes for some reasons. So social pattern got retarding.
So now the power bodies, that developed within that obsolete social pattern are badly keen that isolation going on. Instead national sovereign states paradigm they turn to the new form of self-isolation - religious form of nationalism raising. The most evident is the Islamism extremism. However it is not just Islamism alone, but the Russian State Orthodoxy too, and many others.
Their transit to that stage meets the severe resistance as from common peoples so from the ummutable states structure that benefit from its present state situation.
Why those power bodies have so much influence on common peoples that make them neglecting personal interest? To find it out the historical analisis is to be carried out.
What made Pipes-father uniting the Soviet Union and the Nazi Germany? At the first glance they were that different, main conflicting parts in course of the Second World War. So what could be common?
However in fact these states had a lot of common. That is the prevailing of the state ideology to common peoples life and the folk devotion to the state leaders proclaiming those ideologies.
That was very close among them. And it is close to most of the modern Muslim countries except apparently the Oman state - see this http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/opinion/14kristof.html?_r=2&scp=2&sq=oman&st=cse However the current situation in Oman is not final equilibrium at all. As more and more young Omanis return from education abroad, it seems likely that the traditional, tribal-based political system will have to be adjusted. So it may turn in something like the European bourgeois revolutions that crashed the rests of feudalism in the West. The Hive Psychology is regarded for instance by Jonatan Haight, University of Virginia in his lectures Hive psichology, group selction an leadership http://people.virginia.edu/~jdh6n/publications.html In his work MORAL PSYCHOLOGY AND THE MISUNDERSTANDING OF RELIGION he also show how it is related with the religion
Following those feudal autocratic structures has apparently some relations to the Hive mind organization. In fact in tactic straggle with some enemies those Hive societies usually win because they are able to consolidate their people forces for one winning stroke. So it was when the SU won Germany.
Just they can’t get the strategy victory, Simply because the immutable social system is not able to meet the challenges of the constantly Changing world.
Unfortunately it seems that this Hive psychology is closely related with cults and religion, especially with its most common ritual parts.
The system which is more adjusted to constant changes have developed on the West. It was moved by economical motives first of all. However currently that development made the West falling into the hardest sort of autocracy , the Market Autocracy. That led to economical crisis. Currently many talks occurs on how to fix Capitalism by many prominent capitalism leaders, for instance Bill Gates or George Soros. So apparently the system is still keeping certain potential to mutations.
. Due to this industrialization changes in the traditional way of life occurred and thus the following characteristics of the traditional society got changing
The traditional communities have the following features
• dominance of the agrarian
way of life;
• stability of the structure;
• rigid class stratification of the society;
• Low mobility;
• high mortality;
• high fertility;
• low life expectancy.
Now any feature does not meet the modern conditions.
That led to the significant decrease of social structures stability. So fallowing the ancient ancestors’ traditions got impossible. The further the faster these changes are going on.
Currently the up-to-date social pattern is to meet simultaneously too challenges – to be not rigid one while sustaining internal equilibrium.
What would be the next evolution state can not been seen from the previous one. Just now the global human population is undergoing the risky process of transition. The leaders of that evolutionary transit are West-oriented Countries the next evolutionary stage may be harly forecasted from the previous one. My be it would be something reminding eusociality in other species. There are tends that point to following that direction, However simultaneously there are a lot of trends that contradict it
This transition needs strategy paradigm changing.
The Social evolution of H. Sapiens is very complicated problem. As the results of social development affect the genetic biochemical mechanism, so in vice versa, the biochemistry affects the evolution direction. Recently in scientific biological magazines occurred several works on that subject.
Evolution
in Four Dimensions
Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and
Symbolic Variation in the History of Life
Eva Jablonka and
Marion J. Lamb
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=10470
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN
GENETIC AND CULTURAL TRAITS
IN POPULATIONS OF HUMANS
Borinskaya S.A.1, Korotaev A.B.2
Vavilov Institute of General Genetics, RAS, Moscow, Russia
http://www.bionet.nsc.ru/meeting/bgrs_proceedings/papers/2002/BGRS_2002_4_025.pdf
Nature Reviews Genetics 11, 137-148 (February 2010) | doi:10.1038/nrg2734 http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v11/n2/full/nrg2734.html
So the mission of real social engineer is in fact to facilitate that evolutionary transition
Since the H sapiens being may develop ib human beings just inside some society. The human evolution is the social evolution first of all. It express in other ways, however the ways of this evolution are still those, described by the Darwinists. It remind the equation with a lot of interacting unknowns. In Physics too there are equation with many unknowns, but none of them increases degree of freedom. In anthropology there is one - this is the independent mind acrivity. That feature makes human beings density get out of the out of the curve size-density correlation of other species ( Kapiza, oral report) that unknown guarantee the decrease of human beings from biotope carrying capacity.
So the role of modern social engineer had increased in fact had increased significantly/ Just it would meet severe resistance of the obsolete social patterns.
Unfortunately the presented here concept contradicts that sharp all the modern realpolitik methods that it’s hard could be expected being following by political leaders.
However it does not mean at all that there is no use to stand for it!
After all most of the of the 20st century crisises were the results of that realpolitics applying! How to fix it?