The Functions of Ethnic Culture in the Era of the "New Regionalism" (Socio-Philosophical Analysis)
The article considers and analyzes the phenomenon of ethnic culture in the modern social process. Sociology marks the end of another wave of globalization and the beginning of the formation of local resources, which are accompanied by significant social functions of modern states. The main social institutions are publicly accessible social prospects, etc. Inflation of system-forming functions leads to the fact that individuals actualize the fundamental form of solidarity – the ethnic solidarity.
Two contradictory processes - the disintegration of nations as the leading social communities of the 20th century, and the activation of ethnic group consciousness - form new sociocultural constructs, analyzing which sociology announces the beginning of an era of multiregionalism or “new regionalism”. In search of a theoretical explanation of the mechanisms of this process, the author refers to the concept of culture and related concepts such as “ethnic culture”, “core culture”, “ethno-sociocultural system”, etc.
The generalization of the concept of culture and post-non-classical epistemology allows us to explain the mechanisms of ethnocultural convergence and regionalization as a deep ethno-sociocultural process. This process presupposes the existence of a multitude of local ethno-cultural subjects, deprived of objectivity and legitimizing acts, but capable of narrowing or increasing their social influence. The generator of the rhythms of the social dynamics of ethnic groups is the ethnic culture, which has among its functions the main one - the function of forming the individual personality subjectivity of a person.
2. Arefieva, G. Kalinin, E., Liuskin M. (2002). Postclassical approach to social and ethnic knowledge. Philosophy and society. No. 1, 16–45. https://doi.org/10.29038/2306-3971-2018-01-06-11.
3. Afanasyeva, L., Glinskaya, L. (2018). Intercultural consolidation as a guarantee of national unity and stability in Ukraine. Sociological Studios, No l (12), 6–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29038/2306-3971-2018-01-06-11.
4. Akhiezer, A. (1998). Russia: Criticism of historical experience (Sociocultural dynamics of Russia). Novosibirsk: Siberian Chronograph, 600 p.
5. Beck, U. (2001). What is globalization? The mistakes of globalism are the answers to globalization. Transl. from German. Moscow : Progress Tradition, 304 p.
6. Burlachuk, V. (2002). Symbol and power: The role of symbolic structures in building a picture of the social world. Kyiv : Institute of Sociology, 266 p.
7. Giddens, E. (2005). The arrangement of societies: Essays on the theory of structure. Moscow: Academ. project, 528 p.
8. Grechko, P. (2009). Cultural codes and types of sociality: collectivism, individualism, pluralism. Moscow: Russian political encyclopedia, 440 p.
9. Yemelyanova, Y. (2012). Ethnicity in socio-cultural reality. Sevastopol: Publishing SevNTU, 456 p.
10. Kemerov, V. (2012). Society, social, polysubject. Moscow: Academic Project. Peace Foundation, 252 p.
11. Kuznetsova, А. (2016). The Empirical Representation of the Embodiment of Intercultural Policy on the Example of a Network of European Cities. Sociological Studios. No 2 (9), 6–11. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.29038/2306-3971-2016-02-47-51
12. Otreshko, N. (2009). Pictures of the social world in modern social theory. Questions of social theory: Scientific almanac. T. III. Sociality and culture in a changing world. Issue 1 (3), 125–140.
13. Safonov, A., Orlov, A. (2012). Conceptual problems of the theory of ethnos in the context of globalization. ALMA MATER. (Herald of Higher Education). No 2, 17–21.
14. Sloterdijk, P. (2010). Spheres. Plural spherology. Translation from German K.V. Loschevsky. T. 3., St. Petersburg: Science, 924 p.
15. Stepin, V. (2009). Classics, non-classics, post-non-classics: criteria for discrimination. Post-non-classics: philosophy, science, culture. St. Petersburg: Mir Publishing House, 249–295. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/ 9780199381135.013.2113
16. Toffler, O. (1997). Futurokhok. Transl. from English. St. Petersburg: Lan, 464 p.
17. Hesle, V. (1994). The crisis of individual and collective identity. Questions of philosophy. No 10, 112–123.
18. Chernysh, N., Rovenchak, O. (2005). Socio-cultural approach in the social sciences of humanities: the exchange of meanings. Sociology: theory, methods, marketing. No 4, 92–103.
19. Shirokov, G. (2004). Regionalization: new trends in world development at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. New and recent history. No 4, 55–66.
20. Yakovenko, A. (2011). Archaic meanings as social constructs in the context of globalization. Methodology, theory and practice of sociological analysis of the relevant organization. No 17, 155–160.
21. Börzel, T. A. (2011). Comparative Regionalism: A New Research Agenda. KFG Working Paper. No 28, 37 p.
22. Burawoy, M., Verdery, K. (1999). Uncertain Transition: Ethnographies of Change in the PostSocialist World. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. 322 p. https://doi.org/10.2307/2697064
23. Hettne, B. (2005). Beyond the «new» regionalism. New Political Economy. Vol. 10(4). Retrieved September 16, 2018 from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13563460500344484.
24. Hettne, B., Soderbaum, F. (2000). Theorizing the Rise of Regionness. New Political Economy. Vol 5(3). Retrieved September 16, 2018 from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/713687778. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 713687778
25. Katzenstein, P. J. (2000). Regionalism and Asia. New Political Economy. No 5/3, 353–368. Retrieved September 11, 2018 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233052612_Regionalism_and_Asia. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/713687777
26. Rammer, V. (2016). An analysis of different cultures and their impact on exchange students: A Comparative Study of Austria and Sweden. Retrieved October 23, 2018 from https://www.fh-ooe.at/fileadmin/user_upload/fhooe/ueber-uns/kongresswesen/2016/ccbc/allgemein/docs/fhooe-ccbc2016-B3-B2-rammer-victoria.pdf.