| Popis: |
The scientific views of M. Weber and some of his followers on the relations between tradition and modernity, forced modernization and imposition of the capitalist way of life are investigated. The nature of the correlation between Weber’s views and ideas dominating in Marxism and constructivism is determined. The thesis about the conceptual closeness of Weberian, Marxist and constructivist views on the expansion of capitalism and cultural violence is proposed. While Marx formed the theoretical and methodological basis for the ideology of social modernization as a process (and progressive for its time) of the expansion of capitalism into patriarchal communities, Weber substantiated the nature of modernization as a process of institutionalization of the goal-oriented action. Weber’s universalism is a continuation of the Marxist formational approach, from the position of which the stages of the human history correspond to certain methods of production. Marx’s characteristic of the Eurocentrism, expressed in the allocation of criteria of economic and technological progress with a focus on exclusively western (and, for example, not on the middle east) experience of Weber and his followers is transformed into the idea of «specific rationalism» of western economic culture forming the economy and lifestyle of «cultural humanity». There is a fundamental difference in the views of Marx and Weber on the algorithms of economic development on a global scale. Thus, Marx considers western culture a forward of economic progress. In his opinion, the mission of western economic culture is to guide, albeit forcibly, all other cultures on the path of progressive capitalist development because without the capitalist stage it is impossible to move to other, more progressive stages of social development. As for Weber, he is prone to cautious arguments about the weak capacity of non-western cultures to modern forms of economic life. Against this background the concept of the coventational connubium proposed by M. Weber as a specific form of unity of the polyethnic community, although it seems quite new for its time, is nevertheless far from the model of socio-cultural integration, cultural equality and equality of economic opportunities. |
