Globalization processes and choice of modern civilizational development orientations
The article examines the social and philosophical characteristics of globalism and alternative options for the development of the modern world. We have analyzed the globalist principles of development of the modern world, the arguments of defenders and critics of the concept of economic globalization of the world and the consequences of its spread to the social and cultural area. We have given Panarin’s, Shanin’s and Ishikawa’s arguments on the penetration of globalist tendencies into culture. Common problems associated with constructing models alternative to globalism have been revealed. The reasons for “Westernization” of modern culture have been analyzed. Advantages of global governance can be used by hegemons, i.e., the most developed countries; the so-called “catch-up” dependent countries or countries of deep depressive periphery bear the costs. The global system of the world organization is not only the result of joint efforts in forming a single (it is now possible to call it planetary) economic space, but also generates equally large-scale structural problems, and the flip side of globalism is the danger of global instability. Generating more balanced forms of ownership (personal, collective, state), developing long-term programs in the field of culture and education, defining strategic goals and priorities of state policy, reinforcing the tradition of continuity of government and strengthening a reasonable state policy at all levels are particularly important against the background of general globalization trends in world development.