Stages of development of human life. Stages of human development Who identified three eras of human development

It has become generally accepted to divide the historical path of mankind into:

1. Primitive era;

2. History of the Ancient World;

3. History of the Middle Ages;

4. New time (New history);)

5. Recent times Recent history).

Length primitive era determined more than 1.5 million years. During this era, the formation of a modern type of man takes place (about 40-30 thousand years ago), tools of labor are gradually improved, the transition from hunting, fishing and gathering to agriculture and cattle breeding begins.

History countdown ancient world has been going on since the emergence of states (IV-III millennium BC). It was the time of the split of society into rulers and ruled, haves and have-nots, widespread slavery (although not in all states of antiquity it was of great economic importance). The flourishing of the slave system reached during the period of antiquity (I millennium BC - the beginning of AD), the rise of civilizations Ancient Greece And ancient rome .

In recent years, attempts by the mathematician D.T. Fomenko, to propose his own chronology of the history of the Ancient World and the Middle Ages. They argue that the reconstruction by historians of many events that occurred earlier than the 16th-17th centuries, before the widespread use of printing, is not indisputable, and other versions of it are possible. In particular, they suggest that the written history of mankind has been artificially lengthened by more than a millennium. This, however, is only an assumption that has not received recognition from most historians.

The era of the Middle Ages determined by time frame 5th–17th centuries

1st period era (V-XI centuries) marked by the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the emergence of a new type of social relations - the establishment of a class system in Europe (each class has its own rights and obligations). The predominance of subsistence farming and the special role of religion are characteristic.

II period (mid-XI - end of XV century)- the formation of large feudal states and the growth of the importance of cities - centers of crafts, trade, spiritual life, which is becoming more and more secular.

ІІІ-th period (XV - the middle of the XVII century)- early New time, the beginning of the decomposition of the feudal system. The creation of colonial empires, the development of TAR, the spread of manufactory production, the complication of the social structure of society, which conflicts with class division, are characteristic. The Reformation and the Counter-Reformation mark a new stage in spiritual life. In the context of the growth of social and religious contradictions, the central power is strengthened, absolute monarchies arise.

Civilizations of the Ancient World and the Middle Ages within theories of "growth stages" ( E. Toffler) not demarcated , they are treated as "traditional society" the basis of the economy, life, culture, family structure and politics was the land, subsistence and semi-subsistence agrarian-handicraft economy. In all these countries, life was organized around the village settlement, there was a simple division of labor and well-defined castes and classes: nobility, priests, warriors, slaves or serfs, and the authoritarian nature of power.

Exceptions to the rules described above are considered as special variants of a single phenomenon - an agrarian civilization.

The era of modern times - the era of the formation and establishment of industrial capitalist civilization.

1st period (from the middle of the 17th century)- the time of revolutions that destroyed the foundations of the estate system (the first of them was the revolution in England in 1640-1660s). Of great importance was the Age of Enlightenment, associated with the spiritual emancipation of man, gaining faith in the power of reason.

II period comes after Great French Revolution(1789-1794). industrial revolution, which began in England, covers the countries of continental Europe, where the formation of capitalist relations is proceeding at a rapid pace. This is a time of rapid growth of colonial empires, the world market, the system of international division of labor. With the completion of the formation of large bourgeois states, the ideology of nationalism and national interest is being established in most of them.

3rd period (from the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century)- the rapid development of industrial civilization "in breadth" slows down, due to the development of new territories by it. The capacity of world markets is insufficient to absorb the growing volumes of manufactured products. Time of world crises of overproduction and growth of social contradictions in industrial countries. Aggravation of the struggle for the redivision of the world.

Contemporaries perceived this time as a period of crisis of industrial, capitalist civilization. The indicator was the 1st World War of 1914-1918. and the revolution of 1917 in Russia.

Periodization and the term Recent history are controversial in modern science. For Soviet historians and philosophers, the revolution of 1917 marked the transition to the era of the formation of the communist formation, it was with it that the onset of modern times was associated. Proponents of other approaches to the periodization of history used the term "Modern Time" to imply a period associated with the history of modernity in the 20th century.

Within the framework of the history of modern times, it stands out II main period.

1st period (first half of the 20th century) - early modern times - the process of deepening the crisis of industrial civilization (the Great Crisis of 1929-1932) brought the economies of developed countries to the brink of collapse. Sovereign rivalry, the struggle for colonies and markets for products led to the Second World War of 1939-1945. The colonial system of the European powers is collapsing. The conditions of the "cold war" break the unity of the world market. With the invention of nuclear weapons, the crisis of industrial civilization began to threaten the death of mankind.

II period (second half - end of the 20th century) - qualitative changes associated with the change in the nature of the social, socio-political development of the leading states of the world. With the spread of computers and industrial robots changing nature of work The central figure of production is becoming an intellectual worker. In developed countries, there is socially oriented market economy, changing the nature of human life and leisure. In the international arena, integration processes are underway, the creation of common economic spaces (Western European, North American), the development of the processes of globalization of economic life and the creation of a global system of information communications.

Questions for self-examination:

1. What functions does historical science perform, what methods and principles does it use in the study of historical facts and events?

2. What are the main stages in its development of historical science? Name its leading schools and major representatives.

3. What options for periodization of historical development can you name? Which one seems to you the most reasonable?

The main stages of the development of mankind and the era of world history

Yu.I.Semenov

The main divisions of the history of mankind.

Now that a whole system of new concepts has been introduced, we can try, using them, to draw a complete picture of world history, of course, as short as possible.

The history of mankind, first of all, is divided into two main periods: (I) the era of the formation of man and society, the time of pre-society and pre-history (1.6-0.04 million years ago) and (II) the era of development of a formed, ready-made human society (from 40-35 thousand years ago to the present). Within the last era, two main eras are clearly distinguished: (1) pre-class (primitive, primitive, egalitarian, etc.) society and (2) class (civilized) society (from 5 thousand years ago to the present day). In turn, in the history of mankind, since the emergence of the first civilizations, the era of the Ancient East (III-II millennium BC), the Ancient era (VIII century BC - V century AD), the Middle Ages ( VI-XV centuries), New (XVI century -1917) and Newest (since 1917) eras.

The period of prabschestvo and prehistory (1.6-0.04 million years). Man has separated himself from the animal world. As it is now firmly established, between the animal predecessors of man, on the one hand, and people as they are now (Homo sapiens), on the other, lies an unusually long period of the formation of man and society (anthroposociogenesis). The people who lived at that time were people who were still being formed (pra-people). Their society was just emerging. It can only be characterized as a pra-society.

Some scientists take for the first people (primal people) the Habilis, who replaced the Australopithecus, about 2.5 million years ago, others consider the archanthropes (Pithecanthropes, Sinanthropes, Atlantrops, etc.) to be the first people, who replaced the Habilis, approximately 1 .6 million ago. The second point of view is closer to the truth, because only with the archanthropes did language, thinking and social relations begin to form. As for the Habilis, they, like Australopithecus, were not proto-humans, but pre-humans, but only not early, but late.

At the heart of the formation of man and human society was the process of emergence and development of production activity, material production. The emergence and development of production necessarily required not only a change in the organism of producing beings, but also the emergence between them of completely new relations, qualitatively different from those that existed in animals, relations not biological, but social, that is, the emergence of human society. There are no social relations and society in the animal world. They are unique to humans. The emergence of qualitatively new relations, and thus completely new stimuli of behavior inherent only to man, was absolutely impossible without limitation and suppression, without introducing into the social framework the old, undividedly dominant driving forces of behavior in the animal world - biological instincts. An urgent objective necessity was the curbing and introduction into the social framework of two egoistic animal instincts - food and sexual.

The curbing of the food instinct began with the emergence of the earliest proto-humans - the archanthropes and ended at the next phase of anthroposociogenesis, when they were replaced 0.3-0.2 million years ago by the proto-humans of a more perfect species - the paleoanthropes, more precisely, with the advent of 75-70 thousand years ago. years ago by late paleoanthropes. It was then that the formation of the first form of socio-economic relations - collapsible communal relations - was completed. With the curbing, placing under social control of the sexual instinct, which was expressed in the emergence of the clan and the first form of marriage relations - the dual-clan organization, which happened 35-40 thousand years ago, the emerging people and the emerging society were replaced by ready-formed people and a ready-formed society, the first form of which was primitive society.

The era of primitive (pre-class) society (40-6 thousand years ago). In the development of pre-class society, the stages of early primitive (primitive-communist) and late primitive (primitive-prestigious) societies were successively replaced. Then came the era of transitional society from primitive to class, or pre-class.

At the stage of pre-class society, there were the emerging peasant-communal (pra-peasant-communal), the emerging politary (proto-political), nobilary, dominant and magnar modes of production, the latter two often forming one single hybrid mode of production dominomagnary. (See Lecture VI "Basic and Non-Basic Modes of Production".) Individually or in various combinations, they determined the socio-economic type of pre-class sociohistorical organisms.

There were societies in which the pra-peasant-communal way of life dominated - pra-peasant (1). In a significant number of pre-class societies, the proto-political structure was dominant. These are proto-political societies (2). Societies with dominance of nobilary relations were observed - proton-bilary societies (3). There were sociohistorical organisms in which the domino-magnarian mode of production dominated - proto-domino-magnarian societies (4). In some societies, nobilary and dominomagnar forms of exploitation coexisted and played approximately the same role. These are protonobilo-magnar societies (5). Another type is societies in which domino-magnarian relations were combined with the exploitation of its rank-and-file members by a special military corporation, which in Rus' was called a squad. The scientific term for such a corporation could be the word "militia" (lat. militia - army), and its leader - the word "military". Accordingly, such sociohistorical organisms can be called protomilite-magnar societies (6).

None of these six basic types of pre-class society can be characterized as a socio-economic formation, because it was not a stage of world-historical development. Such a stage was a pre-class society, but it also cannot be called a socio-economic formation, because it did not represent a single socio-economic type.

The concept of paraformation is hardly applicable to different socio-economic types of pre-class society. They did not supplement any socio-economic formation that existed as a stage in world history, but all taken together replaced the socio-economic formation. Therefore, it would be best to call them socio-economic proformations (from the Greek pro - instead).

Of all the types of pre-class society named, only the proto-political pro-formation was able, without the influence of societies of a higher type, to turn into a class society, and, of course, in an ancient political way. The remaining proformations constituted a kind of historical reserve.

The era of the Ancient East (III-II millennium BC). The first class society in the history of mankind was political. It appeared for the first time at the end of the 4th millennium BC. in the form of two historical nests: a large political socio-historical organism in the Nile Valley (Egypt) and a system of small political socio-ditch in southern Mesopotamia (Sumer). Thus, human society split into two historical worlds: the pre-class world, which turned into inferior, and the political world, which became superior. Further development followed the path, on the one hand, of the emergence of new isolated historical nests (the Harappa civilization in the Indus basin and the Shan (Yin) civilization in the Huang He valley), on the other hand, the emergence of more and more new historical nests in the neighborhood of Mesopotamia and Egypt and the formation of a huge system of political sociohistorical organisms that covered the entire Middle East. Such a collection of sociohistorical organisms can be called a historical arena. The Middle East Historical Arena was the only one at the time. It was the center of world historical development and, in this sense, a world system. The world was divided into a political center and a periphery, which was partly primitive (including pre-class), partly class, political.

Ancient Eastern societies were characterized by a cyclical nature of development. They arose, flourished, and then fell into decline. In a number of cases, there was a death of civilization and a return to the stage of pre-class society (Indian and Mycenaean civilizations). This, first of all, was connected with the method inherent in a political society to increase the level of development of productive forces - an increase in the productivity of social production by increasing the length of working time. But this temporal (from Latin tempus - time) method of increasing the productivity of social production, in contrast to the technical method, is a dead end. Sooner or later, a further increase in working hours became impossible. It led to physical degradation and even death of the main productive force - workers, resulting in the decline and even death of society.

Ancient era (VIII century BC - V century AD). Due to the dead end of the temporal mode of development of the productive forces, a political society was unable to turn into a society of a higher type. A new, more progressive socio-economic formation - ancient, slave-owning, ser-war - arose as a result of a process that was above called ultra-superiorization. The emergence of ancient society was a consequence of the comprehensive influence of the Middle Eastern world system on the previously pre-class Greek sociohistorical organisms. This influence has long been noted by historians who have called this process Orientalization. As a result, the pre-class Greek sociors, who belonged to a proto-formation different from the proto-political one, namely the proton-bilo-magnar, first (in the 8th century BC) became domino-magnar societies (Archaic Greece), and then turned into proper antique, server ones. So, along with the two former historical worlds (primitive and political), a new one arose - the ancient one, which became superior.

Following the Greek historical nest, new historical nests arose in which the formation of the servar (ancient) mode of production took place: Etruscan, Carthaginian, Latin. Antique sociohistorical organisms taken together formed a new historical arena - the Mediterranean, to which the role of the center of world historical development passed. With the advent of the new world system, humanity as a whole has risen to a new stage of historical development. There was a change of world eras: the era of the Ancient East was replaced by the Antique.

In the subsequent development, in the IV century. BC. the Middle Eastern and Mediterranean historical arenas taken together formed a sociological supersystem - the central historical space (central space), and as a result, became its two historical zones. The Mediterranean zone was the historical center, the Middle East - the inner periphery.

Outside the central historical space was the outer periphery, which was divided into primitive (including pre-class) and political. But in contrast to the era of the Ancient East, the political periphery existed in ancient times in the form of not isolated historical nests, but a significant number of historical arenas, between which various kinds of connections arose. In the Old World, East Asian, Indonesian, Indian, Central Asian arenas were formed, and, finally, the great steppe, in the expanses of which nomadic empires arose and disappeared. In the New World in the 1st millennium BC. formed the Andean and Mesoamerican historical arenas.

The transition to the ancient society was marked by a significant progress in the productive forces. But almost the entire increase in the productivity of social production was achieved not so much by improving technology, but by increasing the proportion of workers in the population of society. This is a demographic way of raising the level of productive forces. In the pre-industrial era, the increase in the number of producers of material goods within a sociohistorical organism, without an increase in the same proportion of its entire population, could occur in only one way - through an influx of ready-made workers from outside, who, moreover, did not have the right to have families and acquire offspring.

The constant influx of workers from outside into the composition of this or that sociohistorical organism necessarily presupposed equally systematic exclusion of them from the composition of other sociologists. All this was impossible without the use of direct violence. Workers brought in from outside could only be slaves. The considered method of increasing the productivity of social production consisted in the approval of exogenous (from the Greek. exo - outside, outside) slavery. Only a constant influx of slaves from outside could make possible the emergence of an independent mode of production based on the labor of such dependent workers. For the first time, this method of production was established only in the heyday of ancient society, in connection with which it is customary to call it ancient. In chapter VI "Basic and non-basic methods of production" it was called servar.

Thus, a necessary condition for the existence of ancient society was the continuous pumping of human resources from other sociohistorical organisms. And these other sociors had to belong to types different from the given one, and more preferably to a pre-class society. The existence of a system of societies of the ancient type was impossible without the existence of a vast periphery, consisting mainly of barbarian sociohistorical organisms.

The continuous expansion that was a necessary condition for the existence of server societies could not continue indefinitely. Sooner or later it became impossible. The demographic method of increasing the productivity of social production, as well as the temporal one, was a dead end. Ancient society, as well as political society, was incapable of transforming itself into a society of a higher type. But if the political historical world continued to exist almost to the present day, even after leaving the historical highway as an inferior one, then the ancient historical world has disappeared forever. But, dying, the ancient society passed the baton to other societies. The transition of mankind to a higher stage of social development again took place in a way that was above called formational superelevation, or ultrasuperiorization.

The era of the Middle Ages (VI-XV centuries). Undermined by internal contradictions, the Western Roman Empire collapsed under the onslaught of the Germans. There was a superposition of the Germanic pre-class demo-social organisms, which belonged to a pro-formation different from the proto-political one, namely the proto-militomagnar one, on the fragments of the Western Roman geo-social organism. As a result, on the same territory, some people lived as part of demo-social pre-class organisms, while the other part lived as part of a half-destroyed class geo-social organism. Such coexistence of two qualitatively different socio-economic and other social structures could not last too long. Either the destruction of the demosocial structures and the victory of the geosocial, or the disintegration of the geosocial and the triumph of the demosocial, or, finally, the synthesis of both had to take place. On the territory of the lost Western Roman Empire, what historians call the Romano-Germanic synthesis took place. As a result, a new, more progressive mode of production was born - the feudal and, accordingly, a new socio-economic formation.

The Western European feudal system arose, which became the center of world-historical development. The ancient era was replaced by a new one - the era of the Middle Ages. The Western European world system existed as one of the zones of the preserved, but at the same time rebuilt central historical space. This space included the Byzantine and Middle Eastern zones as an inner periphery. The latter as a result of the Arab conquests of the 7th-8th centuries. increased significantly, including part of the Byzantine zone, and turned into an Islamic zone. Then the expansion of the central historical space began at the expense of the territory of Northern, Central and Eastern Europe, filled with pre-class socio-historical organisms, which also belonged to the same pro-formation as the German pre-class societies - protomilitomagnar.

These societies, some under the influence of Byzantium, others under the influence of Western Europe, began to transform and turned into class sociohistorical organisms. But if ultra-superiorization took place on the territory of Western Europe and a new formation appeared - feudal, then a process took place here, which was above called literalization. As a result, two close socio-economic paraformations arose, which, without going into details, can be conditionally characterized as parafeudal (from the Greek para - near, about): one included the Sociors of Northern Europe, the other - Central and Eastern. Two new peripheral zones of the central historical space arose: the North European and the Central-East European, which also included Rus'. Primitive societies and the same political historical arenas continued to exist in the outer periphery as in antiquity.

As a result of the Mongol conquest (XIII century), North-Western Rus' and North-Eastern Rus', taken together, were torn out of the central historical space. The Central-East European zone has narrowed to the Central European. After getting rid of the Tatar-Mongol yoke (XV century), Northern Rus', which later received the name of Russia, returned to the central historical space, but already as its special peripheral zone - Russian, which later turned into Eurasian.

New time (1600-1917). On the verge of the XV and XVI centuries. capitalism began to take shape in Western Europe. The Western European feudal world system was replaced by the Western European capitalist system, which became the center of world historical development. The Middle Ages were followed by the New Age. Capitalism developed in this era both inward and outward.

The first was expressed in the maturation and establishment of the capitalist structure, in the victory of the bourgeois socio-political revolutions (the Dutch 16th century, the English 17th century, the Great French 18th century). Already with the emergence of cities (X-XII centuries), Western European society embarked on the only path that was capable of ensuring, in principle, the unlimited development of productive forces - the growth of labor productivity by improving production technology. The technical method of ensuring the growth of the productivity of social production finally prevailed after the industrial revolution, which began in the last third of the 18th century.

Capitalism arose as a result of the natural development of the society that preceded it in only one place on the globe - in Western Europe. As a result, mankind was divided into two main historical worlds: the capitalist world and the non-capitalist world, which included primitive (including pre-class), political and parafeudal societies.

Along with the development of capitalism in depth, it developed in breadth. The capitalist world system gradually drew all peoples and countries into the orbit of its influence. The central historical space has turned into a global historical space (worldspace). Along with the formation of the world historical space, capitalism spread throughout the world, the formation of the world capitalist market. The whole world began to turn into a capitalist one. For all socio-historical organisms lagging behind in their development, no matter at what stage of evolution they lingered: primitive, political or parafeudal, only one path of development became possible - to capitalism.

These sociologists not only got the opportunity to pass, as we liked to say, all the stages that lay between those they were in and the capitalist one. For them, and this is the whole point of the matter, it became impossible not to bypass all these steps. Thus, when humanity, represented by a group of advanced sociohistorical organisms, reached capitalism, then all other main stages became passed not only for these, but in principle for all other societies, not excluding primitive ones.

It has long been fashionable to criticize Eurocentrism. There is a certain amount of truth in this criticism. But on the whole, the Eurocentric approach to the world history of the last three millennia of human existence is completely justified. If in III-II millennia BC. the center of world historical development was located in the Middle East, where the first world system in the history of mankind was formed - a political one, then, starting from the VIII century. BC, the main line of human development goes through Europe. It was there that all this time the center of world historical development was located and moved, the other three world systems successively changed there - ancient, feudal and capitalist.

The fact that the change of the ancient system from feudal to feudal to capitalist took place only in Europe formed the basis for the view of this line of development as one of the many regional ones, as purely Western, purely European. In fact, this is the main line of human development.

The world significance of the bourgeois system formed in Western Europe is indisputable, which by the beginning of the 20th century. drew the whole world into its sphere of influence. The situation is more complicated with the Middle Eastern political, Mediterranean ancient and Western European feudal systems. None of them covered the whole world with its influence. And the degree of their impact on sociohistorical organisms lagging behind in their development was much less. However, without the Middle Eastern political system, sociohistorical organisms would not have been antique, without ancient there would have been no feudal system, without feudal capitalism would not have arisen. Only the consistent development and change of these systems could prepare for the emergence of bourgeois society in Western Europe and thereby make not only possible but inevitable the movement of all lagging sociohistorical organisms towards capitalism. Thus, in the end, the existence and development of these three systems affected the fate of all mankind.

Starting with the transition to a class society, socio-economic formations as stages of world development existed as world systems of sociohistorical organisms of one type or another, systems that were centers of world historical development. Accordingly, the change of socio-economic formations as stages of world development took place in the form of a change in world systems, which may or may not be accompanied by a territorial displacement of the center of world historical development. The change of world systems entailed the change of epochs of world history.

As a result of the impact of the Western European world capitalist system on all other societies, the world as a whole by the beginning of the 20th century. turned into a supersystem consisting of capitalist, emerging capitalist and just embarked on the path of capitalist development of sociohistorical organisms, which (supersystem) can be called the international capitalist system. The general trend of evolution was the transformation of all sociohistorical into capitalist.

But it would be erroneous to believe that this development led to the cessation of the division of human society as a whole into a historical center and a historical periphery. The center has been preserved, although it has expanded somewhat. As a result of the "transplantation" of capitalism, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand entered it, as a result of the formational rise (superiorization) of the countries of Northern Europe and Japan. As a consequence, the world capitalist system has ceased to be only Western European. Therefore, they now prefer to call it simply Western.

All other sociohistorical organisms formed the historical periphery. This new periphery was essentially different from the periphery of all previous epochs in the development of class society. Firstly, it was all internal, for it was part of the world historical space. Secondly, it was all dependent on the center. Some peripheral sociors became colonies of the central powers, others found themselves in other forms of dependence on the center.

There is every reason to believe that the capitalism of the center and the capitalism of the periphery are two related, but nevertheless different modes of production, the first of which can be called orthocapitalism (from the Greek. orthos - direct, genuine), and the second paracapitalism (from the Greek. para - near, about). Accordingly, the countries of the center and the countries of the periphery belong to two different socio-economic types of society: the first to the ortho-capitalist socio-economic formation, the second to the para-capitalist socio-economic para-formation. Thus they belong to two different historical worlds. Thus, the impact of the system of superior capitalist organisms on inferior organisms, with rare exceptions, resulted not in superiorization, but in lateralization.

The essence of the relationship between the two components of the international capitalist system: the ortho-capitalist center and the para-capitalist periphery lies in the exploitation by the states that are part of the center of the countries that form the periphery. The creators of the theories of imperialism drew attention to this: J. Hobson (1858-1940), R. Hilferding (1877-1941), N.I. Bukharin (1888-1938), V.I. Lenin (1870-1924), R. Luxemburg (1871-1919). Subsequently, all the main forms of exploitation of the periphery by the center were considered in detail in the concepts of dependent development.

By the beginning of the XX century. Russia finally became part of the countries dependent on the center, and thereby the countries exploited by it. Since by the beginning of the XX century. capitalism in Western Europe finally established itself, the era of bourgeois revolutions for most of its countries is a thing of the past. But for the rest of the world and, in particular, for Russia, the era of revolutions has begun, but different than in the West. These were revolutions that had as their objective goal the destruction of dependence on the ortho-capitalist center, directed simultaneously against both para-capitalism and ortho-capitalism, and in this sense anti-capitalist. Their first wave occurred in the first two decades of the 20th century: the revolutions of 1905-1907. in Russia, 1905-1911 in Iran, 1908-1909 in Turkey, 1911-1912 in China, 1911-1917 in Mexico, 1917 in Russia.

Modern times (1917-1991). In October 1917, the anti-capitalist workers' and peasants' revolution won in Russia. As a result, this country's dependence on the West was destroyed and it broke away from the periphery. Peripheral capitalism was eliminated in the country, and thus capitalism in general. But contrary to the aspirations and hopes of both the leaders and participants in the revolution, socialism did not arise in Russia: the level of development of the productive forces was too low. A class society was formed in the country in a number of ways, similar to the ancient political society, but different from it in its technical base. The old political society was agrarian, the new - industrial. Ancient politarism was a socio-economic formation, the new one was a socio-economic paraformation.

At first, industrialopolitarianism, or neopolitarism, ensured the rapid development of productive forces in Russia, which had thrown off its fetters of dependence on the West. The latter turned from a backward agrarian state into one of the most powerful industrial countries in the world, which subsequently ensured the position of the USSR as one of the two superpowers.

As a result of the second wave of anti-capitalist revolutions that took place in the countries of the periphery in the 40s of the 20th century, neopolitarism spread beyond the borders of the USSR. The periphery of the international capitalist system has sharply narrowed. A huge system of neo-political socio-historical organisms took shape, which acquired the status of a world one. But the world and Western capitalist system has not ceased to be. As a result, two world systems began to exist on the globe: neo-political and ortho-capitalist. The second was the center for the para-capitalist, peripheral countries, which together with it formed the international capitalist system. This structure found expression in the 1940s and 1950s. V. so familiar division of mankind into three worlds: the first (ortho-capitalist), the second ("socialist", neo-political) and the third (peripheral, para-capitalist).

Modernity (since 1991). As a result of the counter-revolution of the late 80s - early 90s. Russia, and with it most of the neo-political countries, embarked on the path of restoration of capitalism. The neo-political world system has disappeared. Thus, the coexistence of two world centers, characteristic of the previous era, also disappeared. There was again only one center on the globe - the ortho-capitalist one, and now it is not split, as it was before 1917 and even before 1945, into warring camps. The ortho-capitalist countries are now united under the leadership of one hegemon - the United States, which dramatically increases the importance of the center and the possibility of its influence on the whole world. All the neo-political countries that embarked on the path of capitalist development again found themselves dependent on the ortho-capitalist center and again became part of its periphery. As a result, the capitalism that began to take shape in them inevitably acquired a peripheral character. As a result, they thus found themselves in a historical impasse. A relatively small part of the neo-political countries chose a different path of development and retained independence from the center. Along with the dependent periphery, there is an independent periphery in the world (China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, Belarus). It also includes Iran and Iraq.

In addition to the unification of the center around the United States, which meant the emergence of ultra-imperialism, other changes took place. Now the world has unfolded a process called globalization. It means the emergence on Earth of a global class society, in which the position of the ruling exploiting class is occupied by the countries of the ortho-capitalist center, and the position of the exploited class is occupied by the countries of the periphery. The formation of a global class society inevitably implies the creation of a global apparatus of coercion and violence by the global ruling class. The famous "seven" emerged as a world government, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank as instruments of economic enslavement, and NATO became a special detachment of armed people, with the goal of keeping the periphery in obedience, suppressing any resistance to the center. One of the main tasks facing the center is to eliminate the independent periphery. The first blow, which was inflicted on Iraq, did not lead to the achievement of the set goal, the second, inflicted on Yugoslavia, did not immediately, but was crowned with success.

Neither Russia nor other dependent peripheral countries will ever be able to achieve real progress, will not be able to end the poverty in which the vast majority of their population now finds themselves, without liberation from dependence, without the destruction of paracapitalism, which is impossible without a struggle against the center, against ortho-capitalism. In a global class society, a global class struggle has inevitably begun and will intensify, on the outcome of which the future of mankind depends.

This struggle takes on the most varied forms and is conducted far from being carried out under identical ideological banners. What unites all the fighters against the center is the rejection of globalism and, accordingly, capitalism. Anti-globalization movements are also anti-capitalist. But anti-globalism manifests itself in different forms. One of the currents, which is usually called simply anti-globalization, goes under secular banners. Anti-globalists protest against the exploitation by the center of the countries of the periphery and in one form or another raise the question of the transition from capitalism to a higher stage of social development, which would preserve and assimilate all the achievements that were achieved under the bourgeois form of organization of society. Their ideal lies in the future.

Other currents are aware of the struggle against globalization and capitalism as a struggle against Western civilization, as a struggle to preserve the traditional forms of life of the peoples of the periphery. The most powerful of these is the movement under the banner of Islamic fundamentalism. For its supporters, the struggle against globalization, against dependence on the West, also becomes a struggle against all its achievements, including economic, political and cultural: democracy, freedom of conscience, equality of men and women, universal literacy, etc. Their ideal is a return to the Middle Ages, if not to barbarism.

Lesson of social science 10 "B" class.

“The historical development of mankind: the search for social macrotheory.

Theory of local civilizations»

The purpose of the lesson - to acquaint students with approaches to the study of history, discuss the meaning and direction of social development, explore the typology of civilizations and suggest a forecast for the future;

To develop in students the ability to carry out a comprehensive search, systematize social information on the topic, compare, analyze, draw conclusions, rationally solve cognitive and problem tasks, and contribute to the development of students' civic position;

Explain the concepts and terms "civilization", local civilization, local-civilizational approach to history, cultural-historical type.

Lesson Form – study of a new topic, lesson analysis

Plan for studying a new topic:

The concept of "civilization";
Theory of local civilizations:

Typology of civilizations according to N.Ya. Danilevsky - cultural and historical types;
Typology according to O. Spengler - cultures and civilizations
Typology of civilizations according to A. Toynbee;
General features of the theory of local civilizations

Advantages and disadvantages of the local-civilizational approach

Introductory interview:

In the last lesson, you learned about types of societies.

Question What types of societies did you recognize?

Traditional, industrial and information (post-industrial) societies;

Eastern and Western societies;

Question – What criteria are used in determining the types of societies?

Certain and peculiar qualitative characteristics inherent in different societies;

Comparing traditional, industrial and post-industrial cultures, we examined"vertical cut"world history.

Question - A horizontal dimensionWhat typology do scientists use?

Modern scientists divide human society into the world of the West and the world of the East.

Teacher - Often scientists define them with such a concept as the civilization of the East and the civilization of the West.

Teacher questions for the class:

And what meaning do you put in the concept of "civilization"?

How do you see modern civilization?

What are the framework and prospects of modern civilization?

Teacher - Guys, in order to give a precise definition of the concept of civilization, to see the prospects for the development of modern civilization and to determine the macro-theory (general theory) of the direction of human development, we turn to the history of the issue.

Learning new material

“Face to face you can’t see a face, a big one is seen at a distance”

(S. Yesenin)

Often this expression is used when talking about history. Indeed, it is difficult for us, immersed in the problems of today, to understand our world. Sometimes we have a much better idea of distant times. But, if we talk about ancient civilizations, then they are at such a “distance” from us that we can hardly distinguish them and often the approach to them is inaccurate and subjective.

To characterize the history of society, two main approaches are currently used: local-civilizational and linear-stadial (formational). Today we will get to knowlocal-civilizational approachin the study of history(slide 1).

The teacher reports- The concept of "civilization" entered into scientific circulation in the eighteenth century. thanks to the French enlighteners (Voltaire, D. Diderot, C-L. Montesquieu). After 100-150 years, the civilizational approach was developed in the works of Alfred Weber (1868-1958), Oswald Spengler (1880-1936), Karl Jaspers (1883-1969), Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975) slide 2.

Card #1 choose the most appropriate, in your opinion, the most appropriate correct definition of the concept of "civilization"

Student responses:

The totality of unique manifestations of social orders inherent in a separate historical community (the originality of the material, spiritual, social life of a particular group of countries, peoples at a certain stage of development) - slide 3

Question of the Teacher - What is the relationship between the concepts of culture and civilization?

Students' answers - Culture is the totality of the material and spiritual achievements of mankind in all spheres of public life.

Civilization is a part of world culture that existed at a certain historical stage and a specific territory.

Teacher's story - According to the founders of the civilizational approach, in human society from ancient times to the present day, replacing each other, there have existed and exist"local civilizations" - independent, independent and isolated from each other closed communities. They have their own characteristics in socio-economic and cultural development - slide 4

2. In the 19th century. in the works of Nikolai Danilevsky, Oswald Spengler and Arnold Toynbee, the "Theory of Local Civilizations" was born and became widespread -showing pictures on the board

I appeal to students- Carefully read the excerpt from the work of N. Danilevsky "Russia and Europe" and answer the questions.

1 row - Typology of civilizations according to N.Ya. Danilevsky - cultural and historical types in the work "Russia and Europe"

Questions for group 1:

Student responses:

A) KIT - a set of independent and specific civilizations;

B ) Any tribe or family of peoples, characterized by a separate language or a group of languages that are close enough to each other so that their affinity is felt directly, without deep philological research, constitutes an original cultural and historical type;

Types of civilizations:

Primary
Monobasic
Dibasic
unifying

The leading beginning, the basis of this KIT -religion, culture, politics- (slide number 5-6)

2 row - Typology of cultures and civilization according to O. Spengler

Questions for group 2

Group 2 responses:

cultures living, like living organisms, the periods of origin, formation and death(or childhood, youth, maturity, old age). In it, he clearly distinguished between the concepts of civilization and culture.

The dying of any culture is characterized by the transition from culture to civilization. Hence, the key in his concept -"becoming" - culture and "becoming" - civilization.

Civilizations were understood by him as a stage of decline, the dying of culture, its ossification, the loss of creative forces..

Civilization is the loss of individuality, as societies acquire similar features, the soul of culture begins to die, which is expressed primarily in religion. Instead of religion, atheism is becoming widespread.

Speaking about cultures, O. Spengler emphasized their isolation and independence, highlighting only eight:

Egyptian;
Babylonian;
Indian;
Chinese;
Arab-Byzantine;
Greco-Roman;
Western;
Inca culture

Slides 7-9

3 row - Typology of civilization according to A. Toynbee in the work "Comprehension of History"

Questions for group 3

Group responses:

Toynbee considered world history as a system of conditionally distinguished civilizations, passing through the same phases from birth to death and constituting branches of the "single tree of history"
In his opinion,

Territorial sign

Primary
Secondary
Tertiary

What is the fate of civilizations according to Arnold Toynbee?

Civilizations develop independently of each other
Possible death
Saving civilization by creating a single supreme religion, a "universal church" and a "universal state"

Thus, the main "unit" of the socio-historical process, in their opinion, is local civilizations.

The teacher's question What common features of the theory of local civilizations can you highlight?:

Deeply studies the history of specific societies, peoples in all their diversity;
Studies national characteristics of spiritual, social, political, economic life, psychological characteristics;
The center of research is a person as a creator of history;
Each civilization is unique, carries individual features of development.

Question of the topic - Advantages and disadvantages of the local-civilizational approach

On the basis of what has been studied and the point of the paragraph, students compose an answer to the question “What are the advantages and disadvantages of the local-civilizational approach?”

Advantages:

Allows you to deeply study the history of specific societies and peoples in all their diversity and specificity;
Puts human activity and man at the center of research

Flaws:

With a local-civilizational approach, it becomes impossible to look at world history as a single process of the historical development of mankind as a whole;
It creates the possibility of a complete denial of the unity of human history, the isolation of entire peoples and societies;
Minimizes the possibility of studying the patterns of the historical development of mankind as a whole

Question:

How do you feel about the theory of local civilizations? Do you accept their point of view that in the world since ancient times there have been only local, isolated, independent civilizations, and that every civilization will perish in the future?

What is the fate of modern civilization?

Possible answers:

Even in the ancient world, civilizations were not of a closed, local nature.

They mutually influenced each other (the Egyptian influenced the formation of the civilization of Ancient Mesopotamia, the ancient Greek influenced the ancient Roman civilization)

Civilizations have continued and continue to exist (for example, Chinese civilization, Western European civilization);

Modern civilization under the influence of social processes will change and give rise to a qualitatively new continuation of civilization (Western European civilization, Russian civilization)

Homework:

Answer the document questions on pp. 135-136 prg. 13

Prepare a message with a presentation about K. Marx and O. Toffler

Preview:

Card #1

Working with the presented material, answer the questions.

"Civilization, civilizational approach"

The concept of "civilization" entered into scientific circulation in the eighteenth century. thanks to the French enlighteners (Voltaire, D. Diderot, sh-L. Montesquieu). After 100-150 years, the civilizational approach began to quickly gain popularity thanks to the works of Alfred Weber (1868-1958), Oswald Spengler (1880-1936), Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975), Karl Jaspers (1883-1969).

The main concept is civilization. The definition of civilizations is about 200, and their number is growing. The concept comes from lat. civilis - civil.

Civilization means:

Reflection of a civil society in which freedom, justice and law reign (Voltaire, Sh-L. Montesquieu, D. Diderot);
The stage of the historical development of mankind following savagery and barbarism (L. Morgan, K. Marx, F. Engels);
Society at a certain stage of development (O. Tofler, W. Rostow);
A set of unique economic, social, political, spiritual value and other structures that distinguish one historical community of people from others (A. Toynbee);
The totality of manifestations of culture (S. Huntington, K. Jaspers);
The final stage of the evolution of any culture, which is characterized by the development of industry and technology, the degradation of literature and art, the concentration of people in big cities, the transformation of peoples into faceless masses (O. Spengler)
"Civilization" - a qualitative originality taken in the unity of the socio-economic and cultural characteristics of society at a certain stage of their development.

- Culture is a historically defined level of development of society, creative forces, abilities of people and a person, expressed in the types of organization and activities of people, in the material and spiritual values created by them.

Culture is a set of material and spiritual achievements of mankind in all spheres of public life. An important component of culture is the value-normative system.

Task for card number 1:

Choose the most, in your opinion, the most appropriate correct definition of the concept of "civilization";
What is the relationship between the concepts of culture and civilization?

Lesson vocabulary:

Civilization - qualitative originality taken in the unity of the socio-economic and cultural characteristics of society at a certain stage of their development.
The totality of unique manifestations of social orders inherent in a separate historical community (the peculiarity of the material, spiritual, social life of a particular group of countries, peoples at a certain stage of development, for example, ancient civilization and modern civilization)
Local civilizations- closed civilizations
Local civilizations- a large, historically established community that occupies a certain territory, has its own characteristics of socio-economic and cultural development (for example, Chinese civilization, Western European civilization).
local civilization- a complex system that expresses the cultural, historical, religious, economic and geographical features of individual countries, groups of countries, ethnic groups
Local-civilizational approach- an approach to the historical process, in which the main "unit" of the social historical process is independent, rather closed (local) communities - civilizations

Preview:

Card #2

1. Typology of civilizations according to N.Ya. Danilevsky from the book "Russia and Europe"

Russian thinker of the second half of the nineteenth century. Nikolay Yakovlevich Danilevsky in the book "Russia and Europe" considered world history as a set of independent and specific civilizations orcultural-historical types (KIT) humanity.

He also singled outperiods of development of kits:

Ethnographic(ancient) - begins with the separation of the tribe from its kindred tribes, gaining the ability for independent activity;
Political (state) - the people emerge from the ethnographic form of being, build their own state and ensure their political independence;
Civilizational- provides peoples with the realization of their spiritual ideals in science, art, developed its creative mission, civilization exhausts its strength and dies.

According to N.Ya. Danilevsky, not a single civilization has shown its comprehensiveness. Civilization is creative only in one or a few areas:

Jewish - only in religion;

Greek civilization - in the aesthetic field and philosophy;

Roman - in the field of law and political organization;

Indian - in religion, mysticism and in the realm of imagination, fantasy

As a result¸ N.Ya. Danilevsky identifies 4 types of civilizations:

Primary (they do not have a leading beginning that determines their meaning) - Egyptian, Chinese, Iranian, some others;
Monobasic (having one pronounced beginning, from which all their features originate) - Jewish (religion), ancient Greek (culture), ancient Roman (politics);
Dibasic (based on the predominant development of two principles) - European (politics and culture);
unifying(in harmony developing principles of political, cultural, religious and moral-economic) - Slavic (not yet as a reality, but as an opportunity)

Any tribe or family of peoples, characterized by a separate language or a group of languages, close enough to each other so that their affinity is felt directly, without deep philological research, constitutes an originalcultural-historical type, if in general, according to its spiritual inclinations, it is capable of historical development and has already emerged from infancy.

In civilization, he saw the most creative period in the development of KIT.

Civilizations have their own destiny, their purpose, their history. They are born, flourish and die.

All peoples N.Ya. Danilevsky divided into the following types:

Positive creators of history, creating great whales;
Negative creators of history - the Huns, Mongols, Turks, who did not create Whales, but contributed to the destruction of decrepit civilizations (Rome fell under the blows of barbarians, etc.);
Peoples and tribes that remained as ethnographic material used by creative peoples to enrich their civilizations (former colonies)

Questions for group 1

What did N.Ya. understand by the cultural-historical type? Danilevsky?
What types of civilizations does N.Ya. Danilevsky?
What principle is used to define civilization?

Card #3

2 .Typology of cultures and civilization according to O. Spengler based on the book "The Decline of Europe"

The German philosopher Oswald Spengler published the first part of The Decline of Europe in 1918. Spengler resolutely refuted the generally accepted conditional periodization of history into the Ancient World - the Middle Ages - Modern Times (since they have no meaning for non-European communities).

Spengler offers a different view of world history - as a series of independent from each other cultures living like living organisms periodsbirth, formation and death (or childhood, youth, maturity, old age). In his theory, he clearly distinguished between the concepts of civilization and culture.

Every culture has its own soul - the origin from which all the richness of culture unfolds, a kind of program for the development of the social organism. The birth of culture is the awakening of a great soul.

There is no interaction between cultures, cultures are impenetrable. After reaching the goals of culture, it passes into civilization.

Civilization - loss of individuality, as societies acquire similar features, the soul of culture, which is expressed primarily in religion, begins to die. Instead of religion, atheism is becoming widespread.

Civilization - the last phase of the existence of culture, this is its decline.

The dying of any culture is characterized by the transition from culture to civilization. Hence, the key in his concept is the opposition to “becoming” (cultures) and “has become” (civilization).

Thus, civilizations were understood by him as a stage of decline, the dying of culture, its ossification, the loss of creative forces..

By According to O. Spengler, the Western world was at this stage.

Speaking about cultures, O. Spengler emphasized themisolation and independence, highlighting only eight:

Egyptian;
Babylonian;
Indian;
Chinese;
Arab-Byzantine;
Greco-Roman;
Western;
Inca culture

According to Spengler, civilization is accompanied by processes of “massification” penetrating into all spheres of human life, the globalization of forms and methods of human existence - economy, politics, technology, science, etc. The inevitable companions of "civilization" are world wars, the purpose of which is the global domination of the world by the victorious state.

Questions for group 2

Describe Spengler's understanding of civilization
What types of civilizations does he distinguish?
What processes in society are accompanied by civilization?

Card number 4

3. Typology of civilization according to A. Toynbee based on the book "Comprehension of History"

English historian and philosopher Arnold Toynbee in the 30-60s. 20th century He published the multi-volume work "Comprehension of History". Toynbee considered world history as a system of conditionally distinguished civilizations, passing through the same phases from birth to death and constituting branches of the "single tree of history"

Stages of civilization existence:

Origins
Growth;
Broken;
expansions;
Doom

Birth of Civilization:

As conditions for the emergence of civilizations, Toynbee singled out:

Presence of a creative minority in society;

Favorable environment

Exploring the driving forces of the development of civilization, Toynbee formulatedthe law of "challenge - response".

History (environment) constantly throws a “challenge” to society, obstacles that society must overcome in order to survive, to find the right “answer” to this “challenge”, the problem that has arisen. The search for the right solution is carried out by the creative elite, thereby ensuring the constant movement of society towards civilization. "Challenge" is the force that causes a civilization to change, progress or regress.

Example:

In Africa in ancient times there was a severe drought. Those who did not respond to the call of nature died in the Sahara Desert, and those who responded moved to the Nile Valley, they survived and created the Egyptian civilization.

2) Growth of civilization- the process of internal self-determination, self-expression. In antiquity - aesthetics, Western European civilization - in scientific and technological progress (STP).

3) Broken - a situation where society is not able to cope with the "challenge". The death of civilization does not come from an external enemy, but as a result of its own development. The elite loses the ability to effectively solve problems, it loses its authority and tries to maintain its position by force. In such a period, society does not cope with the challenge, which leads to the breakdown of society.

Example:

After the Second World War, the West made the USSR a technical "challenge". The USSR ignored this "challenge", did not "answer", did not solve the problem of lagging behind, which led to the collapse of the USSR.

4) Decomposition - a period when society loses unity, which contributes to the death of civilization

Example:

Greece did not help the peoples who fought with the Romans, and as a result, she herself died at the hands of the Romans. The lack of unity led to the death of the ancient Greek civilization

In his opinion, civilization is a closed society characterized by two main criteria:

Religion and the form of its organization
Territorial sign

Toynbee identified the following civilizations:

Primary (undeveloped, adapted to life in certain geographical conditions, weak, easily arising and easily dying);
Secondary (arising in response to a “challenge” that changes the conditions of their original existence);
Tertiary (arising on the basis of the formation of common religions and churches from "secondary" civilizations).

By the middle of the 20th century, according to A. Toynbee, no more than 7-8 out of almost 30 civilizations that existed in history (Christian, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc.)

Civilizations develop independently of each other. Their death is inevitableif in the future it is not possible to form a single supreme religion, to create on its basis a “universal church” and a “universal state” (i.e. move to a “tertiary civilization”)

Questions for group 3

How does A. Toynbee view world history?
How does he define the concept of civilization? What are the criteria for determining civilization?
What types of civilizations does he distinguish? What is their possible fate?

At present, the historical path traversed by mankind is divided into the following segments: the primitive era, the history of the Ancient World, the Middle Ages. It is worth noting that today among scientists who study the stages of human development, there is no consensus on periodization. Therefore, there are several special periodizations, which partially reflect the nature of the disciplines, and the general, i.e. historical.

Of the special periodizations, the most significant for science is archaeological, which is based on differences in tools.

The stages of human development of the primitive era are determined in more than 1.5 million years. The basis for its study was the remains of ancient tools, rock paintings and burials, which were revealed during Anthropology - a science that is engaged in the restoration of the appearance of primitive man. In this time period, the emergence of man occurs, it ends with the appearance of statehood.

During this period, the following stages of human development are distinguished: anthropogenesis (the evolution that ended about 40 thousand years ago and led to the emergence of the species of a reasonable person) and sociogenesis (the formation of social forms of life).

The history of the Ancient World begins its countdown in the period of the emergence of the first states. The periods of human development expressed in this epoch are the most mysterious. Ancient civilizations left monuments and architectural ensembles, examples of monumental art and painting, which have survived to this day. This era refers to the IV-III millennium BC. At this time, there was a split in society into the ruled and the rulers, into the have-nots and the haves, slavery appeared. The slaveholding system reached its apogee in the period of antiquity, when the civilizations of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome rose.

Russian and Western science attribute the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, which occurred at the end of the fifth century, to the beginning of the Middle Ages. However, in the encyclopedia "History of Humanity", published by UNESCO, the beginning of this stage is considered to be the moment that appeared already in the seventh century.

In the Middle Ages, they are divided into three time periods: early (5th century - middle of the 11th century), high (middle of the 11th century - end of the 14th century), later (14th-16th century).

In some sources, the civilizations of the Ancient World and the Middle Ages are not distinguished within the framework of the theoretical position on the "stages of growth" and are considered as based on

In the period of modern times, the formation of an industrial and capitalist civilization took place. The stages of human development at this stage are divided into several segments.

First. It originates when revolutions take place in the world aimed at overthrowing the estate system. The first of these took place in England in 1640-1660.

The second period came after the French Revolution (1789-1794). At this time, there is a rapid growth of colonial empires, the division of labor at the international level.

The third period begins at the end of the 19th century and is characterized by rapid development, which occurs due to the development of new territories.

Recent history and its periodization is currently controversial. However, within its framework, the following stages of human development are distinguished. The table available in school textbooks shows that this era consists of two main periods. The first began at the end of the 19th century and affects the entire first half of the 20th century - early modern times.

The great crisis, power rivalry, the destruction of the colonial systems of European states, the conditions of the Cold War. Qualitative changes took place only in the second half of the 20th century, when the nature of labor activity changed with the development of industrial robots and the spread of computers. Changes also affected the international sphere, when cooperation took the place of rivalry.

The main divisions of the history of mankind. Now that a whole system of new concepts has been introduced, we can try, using them, to draw a complete picture of world history, of course, as short as possible.

Thus, the history of mankind should by no means be regarded as a simple sum of the histories of sociohistorical organisms, and socioeconomic formations as identical stages in the evolution of sociohistorical organisms, obligatory for each of them. The history of mankind is a single whole, and socio-economic formations, first of all, are stages in the development of this single whole, and not separate socio-historical organisms. Formations may or may not be stages in the development of individual sociohistorical organisms. But the latter does not in the least prevent them from being stages in the evolution of mankind.
Starting with the transition to a class society, socio-economic formations as stages of world development existed as world systems of sociohistorical organisms of one type or another, systems that were centers of world historical development. Accordingly, the change of socio-economic formations as stages of world development took place in the form of a change in world systems, which may or may not be accompanied by a territorial displacement of the center of world historical development. The change of world systems entailed the change of epochs of world history.

As a result of the influence of the Western world center, bourgeois relations began to penetrate into the countries lying outside it, as a result of the dependence of these countries on the center, capitalism in them acquired a special form, different from the capitalism that existed in the countries of the center. This capitalism was dependent, peripheral, incapable of progressive development, dead-end. The division of capitalism into two qualitatively different forms was discovered by R. Prebisch, T. Dos Santos and other supporters of the theories of dependent development. R. Prebisch created the first concept of peripheral capitalism.
There is every reason to believe that the capitalism of the center and the capitalism of the periphery are two related, but nevertheless different modes of production, the first of which can be called orthocapitalism (from the Greek. orthos - direct, genuine), and the second paracapitalism (from the Greek. para - near, about). Accordingly, the countries of the center and the countries of the periphery belong to two different socio-economic types of society: the first to the ortho-capitalist socio-economic formation, the second to the para-capitalist socio-economic para-formation. Thus they belong to two different historical worlds. Thus, the impact of the system of superior capitalist organisms on inferior organisms, with rare exceptions, resulted not in superiorization, but in lateralization.

The main stages of the development of mankind and the era of world history

Yu.I.Semenov

The main divisions of the history of mankind.

Preview:

Preview:

Editor's Choice