ELztFUITkX

citizens in the Global North and would not worsen the living conditions of the societies in the Global South1.

Peter Evans’ concept of the counter-hegemonic globalization points to the need to work out common interests between very diverse groups, based on opposition to the negative consequences of neoliberalism. Moreover, it also draws attention to the need to seek mutual interdependence between each of these groups (eg. marginalization of women through the deregulation of working conditions that pushes them into informal domestic work). In this way, scattered and heterogeneous groups can create a common platform of action capable of proposing a coherent critique of the sources of domination, which takes into account the internal complexity of the consequences of globalization. Otherwise, each of them would be limited to point changes in the interest of a narrow oppressed group who would enforce their demands at the expense of another (eg. contradictory interests of industry workers and environmentalists). Linking labor, feminist and environmental demands together is the basis of a holistic counternarrative against neoliberal globalization. To gain broader support for this counternarrative, it is necessary to acquire institutional counter-hegemony: the creation of its own global institutions (eg. World Social Forum), pressure groups and the use of existing solutions within the hegemonic model (eg. enforcing existing rights)2.

In contemporary postcolonial theory, the term “subaltern” is defined in a broader way. It is not limited to classes excluded by capitalism, that seek to regain hegemony and create conditions for anti-capitalist transformation. The concept extends to various societies colonized by Western countries. I this case, domination is not limited to unjust economic structures. It is deep-seated in the structures of knowledge shaped by Western modernity, that has defined them as underdeveloped and inferior societies.

Michel Foucault argued that social life is based on struggles between discourses, which claim the right to legitimate the definition of reality. Power is not limited to mere violence and manifests itself through knowledge, which becomes an instrument of domination. Creating knowledge about an object is a process of constructing the truth that influences how that object will be perceived. Referring to Foucault, Edward Said has shown that Non-Western cultures are a Western construct defined by the scientific disciplines of the Western colonial empires. The dominance of the West is based on binary opposition, which defines the East as the complete opposite of the West. A man from the

East, since he has no capacity for speaking about himself, becomes an „other", which can not be treated as an equal partner of man from the West. Because of its dependence, it needs supervision and proper direction from „civilized" socie-

1Ibidem, p. 660-668.

2Ibidem, p. 669.

161

ties. In this way, the colonial rule seems not only acceptable but necessary, because it is beneficial for the colonized societies1.

Dominant discourses marginalize discourses of the colonized societies, transforming them into „subjugated knowledge”, which is treated as subordinate and inferior. Colonization also involved undermining the legitimacy of the epistemology of subordinated cultures2.

Referring to this, Spivak indicated that subalterns were (and still are) the subject of epistemic violence, which arbitrarily disqualified certain epistemologies, showing that Non-Western cultures are not capable of creating worthy knowledge and privileging Western cultures. Consequently, Western modernity and its discourses are closely related to the colonial project, which will always recognize the primacy and objectivity of knowledge created in the West, thereby consolidating its dominance without resorting to explicit violence3.

The concept of counter-hegemonic globalization, formulated by Boaventura de Sousa Santos, points out the necessity of combining both views of subaltern classes. He points out that the critique put forward by the Global Justice movement, referring to the classic concept of subaltern classes oppressed by capitalism, must be much deeper and go beyond current demands of global social justice. Emancipation struggle should be conducted on several levels. It requires an ongoing struggle to overcome all elements of the neoliberal consensus: overcoming the neoliberal model of the economy, the model of the weak state, the limitations of the Western model of liberal democracy strongly linked to the neoliberal economy, and adaptation of the law to the globalization of the market. Besides the social movements struggles and the institutional transformation of the system, it is necessary an in-depth, bottom-up transformation of the social order. Struggles against concrete aspects of neoliberal policies must be accompanied by a long-term process of questioning the universality of the epistemology of the Western modernity and by the empowering of the Non-Western epistemologies. So the struggles for socio-economic, historical, gender, racial, cultural justice (that are undertaken by existing social movements) must be complemented by the pursuit of Cognitive Justice4.

The concept of insurgent cosmopolitanism points to the need to discover socially excluded groups that have no conditions to enjoy neoliberal cosmopolitanism. Excluded groups rely on the concept of a global community not in the name of abstract values, but rather in order to fight various forms of social exclusion and discrimination. In this case, the concept of exclusion is not limited

1E. Said, Orientalism, New York 1978, pp. 26-30.

2M. Foucault, Society Must Be Defended: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975-1976, New York 2003, pp. 6-10.

3G. Spivak, Can the subaltern speak?, In: Marxism and Interpretation of Culture, (eds.) C. Nelson, L. Grossberg, Urbana 1998, pp. 271-313.

4B. de Sousa Santos, Introdução, In: Conhecimento prudente para uma vida decente: Um discurso sobre as ciências revisitado, Porto 2003, pp. 17-25.

162

to economic exclusion but also includes forms of ethnic, racial and gender discrimination. Thus, the goal of insurgent cosmopolitanism is to reveal social exclusion at a local scale and to seek opportunities to fend off these forms of exclusion through global connections. The idea aims to connect different groups subjected to various forms of domination and subordination in order to collectively seek sources of these forms of oppression in global capitalism1.

The key issue is to overcome the division between the global North and the global South. Social emancipation cannot be limited to improving the living conditions in the countries of the North, that would only negatively affect the societies of the global South. Therefore, insurgent cosmopolitanism requires global solidarity networks that would allow local social struggles to be combined with a long-term fight against unfavorable policies rooted in economic institutions, unfavorable legal regulations or structures of state power. Due to the heterogeneous nature of groups of excluded people, insurgent cosmopolitanism does not formulate a general theory of emancipation, a specific strategy of actions attempting to unify their internal diversity, it does not create a homogeneous class of the excluded. Instead, it seeks to discover marginalized experiences of resistance and forms of collective life that remain invisible within the framework of neoliberal common sense. From the point of view of neoliberal common sense, such forms of collective life or resistance (such as the practices of indigenous communities maintaining the ecological sustainability or forms of management based on a fair exchange instead of maximization of profit) are considered as backward, unproductive or irrational. From the point of view of insurgent cosmopolitanism, however, these social practices are the seeds of emerging alternatives to the limitations of the existing social order. The concept is not based on a comprehensive vision of alternative social order. Instead, it points to the need for a mutual dialogue of various alternative visions of social life. The aim of this dialogue is to create conditions for mutual understanding of different worldviews that would allow each group to maintain its own diversity and that would reveal the internal constraints of each perspective (for example, a traditional way of life of indigenous communities and modern workers fighting for a fair economy or working conditions). Such a strong emphasis on dialogue and mutual understanding results from the need to reconcile very heterogeneous groups that criticize the existing social order, so that no marginalized form of resistance would be considered unnecessary and of little value2.

Santos’ concept of subaltern cosmopolitanism indicates that the hegemonic model of globalization implies a significant imbalance of forces in determining the conditions of functioning of the global economic, political and cultural order. It strengthens the advantage of core states over peripheral states, con-

1Idem, A crítica da governação neoliberal: O Fórum Social Mundial como política e legalidade cosmopolita subalterna, “Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais”, pp. 26-32.

2Idem, Conocer desde el Sur. Para una cultura política emancipatória. Lima 2006, pp. 90-96.

163

demning most of the world’s population to precarity. On the other hand, it is accompanied by processes that provide new conditions for global emancipation on the global scale, facilitating communication between different excluded groups regardless of geographic location. Like hegemonic globalization, counterhegemonic globalization is a long-term process which is not limited to the activity of a particular social movement and its particular interests. It emphasizes the importance of the ongoing struggles and social struggles of the subaltern classes, placing them in the context of activism for the profound redefinition of the hegemonic categories contained not only in the neoliberal model but also in the Western modernity project underlining the current model of globalization. In the face of the opportunities created by globalization processes, counterhegemonic globalization is aimed at extending the boundaries of critical theory towards Cognitive Justice. It draws attention to the need to deepen existing critical theories by reaffirming the capacity of non-Western epistemologies to create legitimate knowledge and construct a vision of social justice beyond the critical theory entangled in the categories of Western modernity (eg. progress, scientific rationality, reason)1.

The key element of insurgent cosmopolitanism is the idea of the ecology of knowledge that goes beyond the glorification of the scientific vision of the world formulated within modern theories of emancipation. In this case, the universalization of scientific knowledge is replaced by a dialogue among various forms of knowledge (scientific, non-scientific, local, traditional or common sense), indicating that the valence and usefulness of a given knowledge for a given community results from the local context. Therefore, scientific knowledge should not be a privileged perspective of proper perception of reality. Also because in the past, scientific knowledge has led to a huge impoverishment of the diversity of forms of knowledge, marginalizing all unscientific forms of knowledge as useless or even harmful. It was an instrument of the Western colonial powers and led to the westernization of the world by discrediting local knowledge and forms of social life2.

Insurgent cosmopolitanism seeks to revive the epistemological diversity of non-Western societies, but also to manifest marginalized knowledge within Western societies. The renewal of social emancipation is possible not only through the precise analysis of various forms of domination and resistance to it. It also requires supplementing the existing concepts of domination with those that from the point of view of non-Western societies do not seem important (such as postcolonial justice aimed to reinvent local epistemologies)3.

1Ibidem, pp. 17-33.

2Idem, Refundación del Estado en América Latina. Perspectivas desde una epistemología del

Sur, Lima 2010, p. 44.

3Idem, Epistemologies of the South: justice against Epistemicide, Boulder 2014, pp. 114-115.

164

The idea of cognitive justice, which is a wider frame of the concept of insurgent cosmopolitanism, points to the need to appreciate epistemologies originating from the global South. All visions of social justice guaranteeing the right to equality and differences turn out to be insufficient because they do not take into account the universalization of Western epistemology (based on the Western philosophy and scientific reason). From the point of view of Western epistemology, non-Western epistemologies are only cultural peculiarities that could be studied, but could not be treated as a proper way of perceiving reality. This entails arbitral disqualification epistemologies by showing members of nonWestern cultures as subjects unable to create valuable knowledge1.

The concept of insurgent cosmopolitanism as the key element of the alterglobalist movement is particularly visible in its political manifestation – the World Social Forum. Various discriminated groups participate in the Forum in order to coordinate resistance strategies on a global scale and to conduct a mutual dialogue. Besides the critique of existing reality, they are trying to formulate a vision of an alternative reality that refers to the coexistence of various forms of social life. Participants of the Forum strive to broaden the concept of social emancipation to the issue of epistemology, emphasizing non-Western epistemologies, showing the world from the perspective of non-Western societies and their problems2.

Boaventura de Sousa Santos, as one of the initiators of the World Social Forum, put forward the thesis that this undertaking could become a platform of global resistance in opposition to undemocratic institutions of global governance. The creation of a well-established supranational alterglobalist platform would serve to shape credible alternatives to the four main el e- ments of neoliberalization of social life: neoliberal economy, weak state (susceptible to marketization processes), liberal democracy (perceiving the power of the people primarily as governments through their representatives), neoliberal legal framework (unification of law outside of social control). The Forum would also counteract the increasingly stronger depoliticization of civil society mistakenly understood as a complex of instrumental institutions established to solve social problems resulting from objective cond i- tions of the economy (and not the political space of conflict and the clash of conflicting interests and the struggle of excluded groups against powerful actors)3.

Santos stressed the need to go beyond the horizons of activities li m- ited to western societies and the alternatives proposed. He signaled the pro b- lem of broadening the perspective of the experiences of societies of the

1Ibidem, pp. 164-66.

2Idem, The Rise of The Global Left The World Social Forum and Beyond, London 2006, pp. 35-45.

3Idem, Crítica da governação neoliberal: o Fórum Social Mundial como legalidade cosmopolita subalterna, “Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais” 2005, No. 72, pp. 13-19.

165

global South, which are neglected in the dominant emancipatory approaches, primarily including entities and political activities of the Western world

(workers’ movements, party activities, revolutionary activities, conditions of developed industrial societies). In turn, the experiences of societies of the global South often go far beyond, or even omit, such scenarios of activities, focusing on informal, decentralized activities, aimed at maintaining a decent living environment rather than specific institutional political changes 1Santos’ perspective, therefore, assumes that the Forum should not only go beyond the Western concept of social resistance. It should also become a platform capable of formulating a positive program of transforming the meaning of basic concepts (democracy, economy, state, law), so that they become truly bottom-up, considering the perspective of the subaltern classes in the global South2. In conclusion, the Forum meets the classic idea of cosmopolitanism, which notices the need to create global bonds of solidarity among victims of discrimination and to invent a vision of a new social order that respects the right to equality and diversity.

1J. C. Scott, Weapons of the weak: everyday forms of peasant resistance, New Haven– London 1986, pp. 29-34.

2B. de S. Santos, Crítica da…, pp. 25-26.

166

УДК 316.334.52 ББК 60.59

Е.Н. Шарова

ФГБОУ ВО «Мурманский арктический государственный университет» г. Мурманск, Россия

«КУЛЬТУРА УКОРЕНЕННОСТИ» И «КУЛЬТУРА МОБИЛЬНОСТИ» В СТРУКТУРЕ РЕГИОНАЛЬНОЙ ИДЕНТИЧНОСТИ ЖИТЕЛЕЙ КОЛЬСКОГО СЕВЕРА 1

Аннотация. Результаты социологического исследования особенностей региональной идентичности жителей Кольского Севера, проведенного в 2016 году, позволили эмпирически зафиксировать двойственную природу изучаемого явления, обусловленную взаимодействием культуры укорененности и культуры мобильности. С одной стороны, региональная идентичность населения Мурманской области характеризуется преобладанием эмиграционных установок и ориентацией на временный характер проживания. С другой стороны, жители края высоко оценивают его самобытность и уникальность, тем самым производится маркировка границы «свой - чужой» и локализация идентичности в целом.

Ключевые слова: региональная идентичность, культура укорененности, культура мобильности, миграционные установки

E.N. Sharova

Murmansk Arctic State University

Murmansk, Russia

ROOT CULTURE AND MOBILITY CULTURE IN THE STRUCTURE OF KOLA NORTH INHABITANT’S REGIONAL IDENTITY

Abstract. The results of the sociological research of various manifestations of the Kola

North inhabitants’ regional identity, conducted in 2016, allowed empirically to fix the dual nature of the phenomenon and establish the relationship between the root culture and mobility culture. On one hand, the regional identity of the population of the Murmansk region is characterized by the predominance of emigration attitudes and orientation to the temporary residence. On the other hand, the inhabitants of the region highly appreciate its originality and uniqueness, thereby marking the border of "one's own" and the localization of identity in general.

Key words: regional identity, root culture and mobility culture, migration attitudes

1 Статья подготовлена в рамках проекта № 17-33-01073 «Трудовая миграция в приграничных регионах России: траектории, масштабы и социальные хронотопы» при финансовой поддержке РФФИ

167

В мире нет ничего более постоянного, чем непостоянство.

Джонатан Свифт

В связи с тем, что большая часть жителей Кольского Севера представляет собой так называемое пришлое население, наиболее активно иммигрирующее в 60-70-е годы 20 века, актуализируется вопрос о возможностях закрепления человеческих ресурсов на данной территории и преодоления многих демографических проблем, прежде всего, миграционной убыли. В частности, предлагается искать такие возможности в развитии региональной идентичности, под которой понимается особый вид социальной (групповой, коллективной) идентичности, характеризующийся процессом самоотнесения индивида или группы к определенному территориально ограниченному сообществу1.

Исходной теоретико-методологической предпосылкой данного исследования предлагается избрать принцип дополнительности культуры укорененности и культуры мобильности, выдвинутый М.П. Крыловым.2 В соответствии с этим принципом обосновывается расширительная трактовка региональной идентичности, которая не сводится лишь к проявлениям укорененности на данной территории, а включает в себя различные формы взаимодействия с культурой мобильности.

Соотношение данных культур в структуре феномена региональной идентичности может быть осмыслено также через сопоставление локального и глобального измерений. Характер принадлежности к определенной территориальному (региональному, местному) сообществу может быть описан как через параметры закрепления в границах конкретной территории (локализацию), так и через параметры преодоления указанных границ (глобализацию).

При этом культура укорененности, под которой понимаются как материальные (физическое нахождение на территории), так и духовные признаки оседлости (чувство связи с территорией), соотносится с ориентацией на локальные явления и процессы, а именно усиление самобытности и уникальности идентичности в определенных границах. Культура мобильности, в свою очередь, проявляется в миграционных установках и отражает ориентацию на глобальные явления и процессы, предполагающие размывание исходных идентичностей, нивелирование самобытности. «Укорененность связана с «инновационной», интенсивной стратегией реализации территориальных интересов (привлечение ресурсов и институтов

1См. Недосека Е. В., Шарова Е. Н. Проблемы региональной идентичности населения Кольского Севера. Мурманск, 2016. С.23

2Крылов М. П. Региональная идентичность в Европейской России : автореферат дис. ...

доктора географических наук : 25.00.24 / Ин-т географии РАН. Москва, 2007. 55 с.

168

региона), мобильность – с «миграционной», экстенсивной стратегией – миграцией на предпочтительную территорию, «голосованием ногами»»1.

Всовременных исследованиях региональной идентичности жителей Кольского Севера отмечается наличие таких атрибутов, как «временность»

и«особость»2 , которые не только описывают качественное своеобразие местного сообщества, но и служат объяснительной моделью для понимания механизмов формирования и функционирования его идентичности. Оба атрибута задают противоположные векторы развития региональной идентичности. С одной стороны, «временность» как непостоянство принадлежности к определенному сообществу размывает его границы и, тем самым, соотносится с культурой мобильности. С другой стороны, «особость» как осознание и переживание специфики, напротив, приводит к установлению определенных рамок, стабилизирующих групповую принадлежность, что находит свое отражение в культуре укорененности.

Вкачестве попытки измерения некоторых проявлений культуры укорененности и культуры мобильности в структуре региональной идентичности жителей Кольского Севера весной 2016 г. было проведено кон-

кретное социологическое исследование среди населения Мурманской области в возрасте от 14 лет и старше3.

Надо сказать, что в основу операциональной модели исследования положено именно понятие «укорененности», которое теоретически осмысляется как характеристика субъекта региональной идентичности, отражающая встроенность на глубинном уровне и интеграцию индивида в свое сообщество. Укорененность понимается как процесс осознания себя в качестве «местного» (по рождению и/или по убеждению), задающий «силу», или интенсивность выраженности, региональной идентичности.

Втоже время, «культура мобильности» используется, скорее, как антитеза «культуре укорененности», а обе они образуют своего рода полюса региональной идентичности, представляющей собой некоторую протяженную величину. Более того, проявления взаимодействия обеих культур образуют специфику региональной идентичности жителей Кольского Севера, обозначенную выше через атрибуты «особости» и «временности».

Воснову эмпирического изучения культуры укорененности и культуры мобильности были положены следующие ключевые показатели:

1Цит по: Крылов М. П. Указ. соч. С. 8

2См.: Недосека Е. В., Шарова Е. Н. Указ. соч. С. 36-37; Воронов В. М. Особость как интегративная характеристика региональной идентичности жителей Мурманской области // Социальные и культурные процессы в российском приграничье : сборник научных статей / редкол.: П. Л. Зайцев, Л. А. Закс и др. – Екатеринбург, 2017. С. 225-229

3Сбор данных осуществлялся методом электронного и раздаточного анкетирования. Использовалась стратифицированная по месту жительства модель выборки, совмещенная с квотами по полу и возрасту. Всего в исследовании приняли участие 834 респондента. Ошибка выборки не превышает 2%.

169

1)место рождения и длительность проживания в Мурманской области (как фактическое проявление связи с регионом);

2)идентификация Кольского Севера в качестве малой родины (субъективное проявление связи с регионом);

3)миграционные установки (практическое проявление связи с ре-

гионом).

По результатам проведенного исследования выяснилось, что большинство опрошенных (67,3%) являются коренными жителями, т.е. родились в Мурманской области (см. табл.1). Однако почти каждый третий (32,7%) приехал сюда после рождения.

Таблица 1

Мурманская область как место рождения респондентов

О глубине укорененности людей, рожденных в Мурманской области, свидетельствует вопрос о том, в каком поколении они живут на Севере (см. табл. 2). Большинство оказались коренными мурманчанами в первом поколении (45,9%), чуть менее (38,2%) - во втором поколении. Практически каждый десятый опрошенный (11,8%) проживает на Севере в трех и более поколениях.

Таблица 2

Поколение, в котором коренные мурманчане живут на Севере

Если говорить о тех, кто родился в другом регионе, то большинство респондентов (41,7%) приехали в Мурманскую область в детском возрасте (до 10 лет), почти каждый пятый респондент (19,1%) – в юношестве (от 11 до 20 лет), около трети – в молодом возрасте (21-30 лет) (см. табл. 3).

170