Социальное качество как ресурс выживания государственности

Мы являемся свидетелями и современниками очередного социального распада. Россия это мчащийся по океану «Титаник». Хватит ли у нас исторического времени для стратегического маневра? Неочевидно. У Советского Союза его не хватило. Для опасений есть немалые основания. Новые политические институты в считанные годы наполняются исторически-традиционным содержанием, и переход общества с траектории деградации на траекторию поступательного восходящего развития требует предельной интеллектуальной мобилизацииThe article reveals a typological similarity of Russias socio-historical process based on the analysis of historical events of the late XXth beginning of XXIst centuries. It is argued that with all the differences that have distinguished the changing political regimes in Russia its dominant feature has always been a so-called police-ridden state. Moreover, Russian history provides enough evidence that police has never been a good social integrator. While Russian Empire had been ruled by the representatives of the privileged class, Soviet Union has been ruled by the representatives of common people. However, in both cases the state fell. This is a firm fact, which apparently reveals the low quality of strategic nation-state government and which denotes the invariant socio-cultural basis of society. Russia was unable to find efficient solutions to most of its historical challenges because of the general intellectual deficit. In the beginning of the XXth century the number of educated people was obviously too low to provide the required quality of strategic management. On the other hand, in the late XXth century with all the millions of professionals in science and engineering there was a serious lack of people with rational socio-humanitarian knowledge. Without this, however, it was simply impossible to establish efficient relations between society and its power-holders. There is absolutely no doubt: a political regime, which cannot sustain national development and, thus, provide Russias inter-state competitiveness, will inevitably fall. The nature and scale of conflicts that would precede such fall are, however, uncertain: would it be a full-scale civil conflict similar to the one in the beginning of the XXth century? Or would it be a series of local conflicts like in the late XXth? In both cases, the society had to spare a large number of human lives for its inability to modernize gradually. Besides, the very genesis of the new Russian statehood poses serious threats: the life cycle of each of its subsequent versions has been steadily reducing. All of the above questions the historical sustainability of the post-Soviet Russia. A methodological approach promoted here is based on an integral indicator of social quality, i.e. an ability of large social groups to contribute to societys own survival, development and well-being. The study of tendencies in contemporary Russia with the use of this indicator provide the following evidence: macrosocial strategies of the major social groups in Russia lead to disorganization and disintegration of state. The political and administrative elites are completely stupefied by the multi-billion corruption. The mass strata, who feel unable to influence the policy of the ruling elites, deny any responsibility for the current situation in Russia. Moreover, Russian intelligentsia, which is politically and socially disorganized, seems to be unable to withstand the amorality of the top classes as well. To sustain its own well-being intelligentsia is simply bound to adapt by getting itself involved in corruption. It is well known that the way of thinking shapes certain patterns of conduct; thus, mass way of thinking shapes mass behavior. The official Soviet social science has been forcedly shaping the mass consciousness driving it from one utopia to another: the expectation of a World-wide revolution; the construction of socialism; the rise of communism, etc. However, history had its own verdicts for all of these projects. Nevertheless, this long-lasting program of cultivating irrationalism has had serious effects on the well-being of Russian society in the beginning of the XXIst century. Thus, one of the most important challenges for contemporary Russian socio-humanitarian sciences is to produce and inoculate rational and critical knowledge in society. This implies a tough and uncompromising debate with those, who continue to manipulate the public opinion out of their cynical and selfish purposes.