social conflict opposite position

In modern conditions, in essence, each sphere of public life gives rise to its own specific types of social conflicts. Therefore, we can talk about political, national-ethnic, economic, cultural and other types of conflicts.

Political conflict is a conflict over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. This conflict can be covert or open. One of the brightest forms of its manifestation in modern Russia is the conflict between the executive and legislative authorities in the country that has continued throughout the entire time after the collapse of the USSR. The objective causes of the conflict have not been eliminated, and it has entered a new stage of its development. From now on, it is being implemented in new forms of confrontation between the President and the Federal Assembly, as well as the executive and legislative authorities in the regions.

A prominent place in modern life is occupied by national-ethnic conflicts - conflicts based on the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. Most often, these are conflicts related to status or territorial claims. The problem of cultural self-determination of certain national communities also plays a significant role.

Socio-economic conflicts play an important role in the modern life of Russia, that is, conflicts over the means of subsistence, wage levels, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for various benefits, over real access to these benefits and other resources.

Social conflicts in various spheres of public life can take the form of intra-institutional and organizational norms and procedures: discussions, requests, adoption of declarations, laws, etc. The most striking form of expression of the conflict are various kinds of mass actions. These mass actions are realized in the form of presentation of demands to the authorities by dissatisfied social groups, in the mobilization of public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs, in direct actions of social protest.

Mass protest is an active form of conflict behavior. It can be expressed in various forms: organized and spontaneous, direct or indirect, taking on the character of violence or a system of non-violent actions. Mass protests are organized by political organizations and so-called “pressure groups” that unite people for economic purposes, professional, religious and cultural interests. Forms of expressing mass protests can be such as: rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes. Each of these forms is used for specific purposes, is an effective means of solving very specific problems. Therefore, when choosing a form of social protest, its organizers must be clearly aware of what specific goals are set for this action and what is the public support for certain demands.

Social conflicts receive a peculiar manifestation in modern Russian reality. Today, Russia is going through a crisis, the causes of which are diverse and difficult to unambiguously assess them. Changes in social relations are accompanied by an unprecedented expansion of the sphere of manifestation of conflicts. They involve not only large social groups, but also entire territories, both nationally homogeneous and inhabited by various ethnic communities.

Conflicts cover all spheres of the life of Russian society, socio-economic, political, the sphere of interethnic relations, etc. These conflicts are generated by real contradictions in the course of deepening the crisis state of society. Often there are, one might say, "unnatural" clashes, artificially created, deliberately provoked, exaggerated, especially characteristic of interethnic and interregional relations. Their result is bloodshed and even wars, in which, against their will, entire nations are drawn.

Conflicts based on objectively arising contradictions, if they are resolved, contribute to social progress. At the same time, objective contradictions that serve as a source of conflict collisions can be divided into two main types. On the one hand, these are contradictions generated by the socio-economic, material and everyday situation of the members of our society. In the course of deepening this contradiction, various social groups, nations, etc. clash. They are aware of the opposites of their interests, goals, positions. This is manifested in the growing exorbitant contrasts of wealth and poverty, the prosperity of the many and the impoverishment of the majority. On the other hand, political contradictions, primarily due to the rejection of the policy of the authorities. Today, this is reflected in the confrontation of many social forces with the government's course, which is focused on changing the socio-political system.

The main thing that characterizes the social processes in Russia in recent years is a clear disintegration pre-existing social structures and social ties. There has been a process of transition from integration and differentiation of one type to integration and differentiation of another type. As a result of the deep economic and social transformations of Russian society since the early 1990s, its social structure looks different, more differentiated. New social groups are being formed, which can be regarded as a class of owners and entrepreneurs; the bourgeoisie made itself known by creating its own political organizations and by radically changing property relations. There are also such groups as the bureaucracy of the nomenklatura, "shadow companies", and new marginal groups are being formed. The “decomposition” of the social structure is being carried out in the country. Its elements are characterized by an ever-increasing divergence in the nature of work, the amount of income, the level of education, prestige, and so on. Growing and expanding social inequality, it becomes the basis for the emergence of many conflicts.

Obviously, with a variety of factors affecting conflict in society, the main role is played by the contradictions between the three main structural elements - societies mi society and within them. This is about authorities(legislative, executive, judicial) entrepreneurship(state, collective, private, Russian-foreign, comprador, speculative, mafia) and manufacturers(various groups of intelligentsia, employees, workers, peasants, farmers, students, labor veterans, etc.).

The dynamics of social processes in Russian society is due to the fundamental contradictions generated during perestroika, which are even more acute. This is a contradiction between the declared renewal and the further destruction of the social organism; between the desire to enter into civilized scientific and technological progress and the catastrophically deepening crisis of the economy, science, culture, education; between the promised freedom, democracy and the growing alienation of the people from property, from governing the country.

As we can see, the contradictions have become much larger and they have become even sharper, they have taken the form social antagonisms. The antagonistic contradiction expressed itself primarily in the confrontation between the supporters of the socialist and capitalist paths of development. This contradiction has become the core of all spheres of life in our country, the impetus for tough and irreconcilable conflicts. The bulk of the working people felt all the hardships of the formation of market relations, enters into open conflicts with the administration.

Obvious conflict within the intelligentsia. Part of the intelligentsia, participating in the change of political leadership, entering government structures and taking a leading position there, helps the new classes to establish themselves in power. In essence, an alliance is being established between a part of the intelligentsia and the "cadre" elite.

Although domestic bourgeoisie only formed as a class, but its conflict with by other classes and groups is already unfolding around the distribution of loans, privatization mechanisms, tax legislation, and so on. Today, every group of industrialists and entrepreneurs at all levels (in the center and in the regions) seeks to realize their interests. To do this, they use lobbying pressure on the executive and legislative branches.

One can agree with the opinion that conflict has become an everyday reality in modern Russia. The country has become a field of action for social conflicts, ranging from inter-ethnic to social-mass, manifested in many strikes. This is confirmed by the powerful strikes of miners, workers of land, air, rail and sea transport, fisheries, teachers, doctors.

Since 1991, conflicts began to arise in regional scale. They were caused not by the opposition of ordinary workers and the administration, but by the opposition of the population and labor collectives to the central authorities and leadership. The main focus of the strike movement in 1992 was to improve the living standards of the participants in this movement 1 . During the strike struggle in 1992, demands for higher wages and living standards, the elimination of wage arrears and the payment of pensions prevailed. At the same time, the demands connected with the upholding by the workers of their property rights to the property of enterprises are heard more and more loudly.

Analyzing the dynamics of labor conflicts, researchers note a tendency for them to develop from labor conflicts into political ones. Almost always, along with economic demands, there were also political demands. It is impossible not to take into account that different forces and different political orientations interact in the labor movement. All this deliberately politicizes labor conflicts.

Labor conflicts are often a reaction to distortions in the economic and social policy of the government, to its inability to understand the consequences of decisions made. The main content of conflicts in the socio-economic sphere is related to property redistribution and the formation of market relations, which will inevitably lead to the polarization of social groups.

One more feature of socio-economic conflicts can be noted. Mass conflicts in the economic sphere are also connected with the fact that the country still lacks a clear legislative framework for resolving labor disputes. There was an attempt to adopt a law on the resolution of labor conflicts, to determine the mechanism for this resolution. It is based on the principle of conciliation procedures through the relevant commissions and labor arbitrations. The term for consideration of disputes, the obligatory execution of the decisions taken were envisaged. But this law was never adopted. Conciliation commissions and their arbitrations do not fulfill their functions, and administrative bodies in a number of cases do not fulfill the agreements reached. This does not contribute to the resolution of labor conflicts and sets the task of creating a more thoughtful system for their regulation.

This political conflicts about the redistribution of power, the dominance of influence, authority. They can be both hidden and open. The main conflicts in the sphere of power can be called the following:

1) conflicts between the main branches of power (legislative, executive and judicial) in the country as a whole and in individual republics and regions. At the highest level, this conflict initially took place along the line of confrontation, on the one hand, the President and the government, and on the other hand, the Supreme Council and the Councils of People's Deputies of all levels. This conflict resulted, as is known, in the events of October 1993. The form of its partial resolution was the elections of the Federal Assembly and the referendum on the adoption of the Constitution of Russia;

2) intra-parliamentary conflicts between and within the State Duma and the Federation Council;

3) conflicts between parties with different ideological and political orientations;

4) conflicts between different levels of the administrative apparatus.

Political conflicts are most often a normal phenomenon in the life of any society. The parties, movements and their leaders that exist in society have their own ideas about how to get out of the crisis and how to renew society. This is reflected in their programs. But they cannot realize them as long as they are outside the sphere of power. Needs, interests, goals, claims of large groups and movements can be realized primarily through the use of levers of power. Therefore, the authorities, the political institutions of Russia have become the arena of a sharp political struggle.

The contradictions between the legislative and executive powers turn into a conflict only with a certain confluence of objective and subjective factors. At the same time, the struggle is often of an "apical", elitist character.

Conflicts in the upper echelons of executive and legislative power are often resolved by force, pressure, pressure, threats, accusations, as long as the socio-economic and political situation in Russia favors the conflict scenario. It is important to understand the prevailing circumstances and strive to mitigate the conditions for the flow of conflicts. Do not allow them to develop into violent actions of one side or another.

occupy a prominent place in modern life interethnic, interethnic conflicts. They are based on the struggle for the interests of ethnic and national groups. Often these conflicts are related to status and territorial claims. The sovereignty of a people or ethnic group is basically the dominant factor in a conflict.

There is reason to believe that even if there had been positive changes in the economy and political sphere of Russia, the conflict in interethnic and interethnic relations would not have completely disappeared. For it has its own logic of origin and development. Thus, in the minds of living generations, insults inflicted in past times are preserved, and due to present-day injustices (in whatever form they manifest themselves), they are not able to overcome the feeling of national hostility. Therefore, the problem of taking into account and realizing ethnic interests is of great importance. The idea of ​​infringement of national interests and the claims of nations to priority rights are one of the sources of social tension. With the collapse of the USSR, this problem did not disappear. It seemed that with the advent of new states on the former territory of the USSR, conditions were being created for the successful solution of cultural, linguistic and other problems. However, inter-ethnic contradictions are growing and flaring up with renewed vigor (Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, Ossetia, Abkhazia). These conflicts are based on territorial claims. Conflicts are deliberately provoked by various forces of nationalist, separatist, fanatical and religious persuasion.

It must be said that conflicts in Russia, although they occur in various spheres of society and are referred to as political, economic, national, etc., in a broad sense refer to social conflicts. This means that we are talking about confrontations between communities and social groups, forces pursuing their own goals and interests.

The most open form of expression of conflict can be various kinds of classes. your actions: presentation of demands to the authorities by dissatisfied social groups; use of public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs; direct social protests.

Mass protest- an active form of conflict behavior. It can be organized or spontaneous, direct or indirect, take on the character of violence or non-violence. Mass protests are usually organized by political organizations and so-called pressure groups.

Forms of protest may be: rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes, hunger strikes, absenteeism etc. The organizers of social protest actions must clearly understand what specific tasks can be solved with the help of this or that action and what kind of public support they can count on. Thus, a slogan that is sufficient to organize a picket can hardly be used to organize a campaign of civil disobedience.

So, social conflicts act as normal manifestations of social relations. In Russia, a certain intermediate type of economy is being formed, in which the bourgeois type of relations based on private property is combined with state property relations and a monopoly on the definition of the means of production. A society is being created with a new relationship of classes and social groups, in which differences in their incomes, status, culture, etc. will increase. Therefore, social conflicts will be inevitable. We need to learn how to manage them, strive to resolve them at the lowest cost to society.

Topic 14: "Sociological research: concept and types, program and sample"

TEST

by discipline : "The system of public administration"

on the topic : "Social conflicts and emergencies: the legal order and practice of their settlement".

Executor:

Oboymova Yu. I.

4th year student

Specialty G and MU

Record book number 06mgb01692

Supervisor:

Remezova L.S.

Voronezh 2010.

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...…3

1.Characteristics of the social conflict…………………………….…..........4

1.1.Social conflicts in modern society....……………….……..6

2.Social emergencies: causes, types………...………........7

2.1.Management of public emergencies……….…8

3.Conclusion………………………………………………………………....…..11

Literature…………………....……………………………........…………....….12

Introduction

The social heterogeneity of society, differences in income levels, power, prestige, often lead to conflicts. Conflicts are an integral part of social life. Conflicts are born on the basis of daily differences in views, disagreements and confrontation of different opinions, desires, interests, hopes, personal characteristics, lifestyles, which can develop into emergency situations. All this causes close attention to the study of conflicts and emergencies.

Social conflicts in modern Russia are particularly acute and often use violence. Based on the deepening of the crisis state of society, leading to clashes of various forces and communities, social contradictions are exacerbated and their result is social conflicts.

To develop the right line of conduct in various conflict situations, you need to know what conflict is and how people come to an agreement. Knowledge of conflicts increases the culture of communication and makes a person's life not only calmer, but also more stable psychologically.

Characteristics of social conflict.

Before proceeding to a direct consideration of the chosen topic, we will give a definition of the concept of "conflict". Conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, opinions, views, opponents as subjects of interaction. The conflict is always associated with people's subjective awareness of the contradictory nature of their interests as members of certain social groups.

Conflict is a ubiquitous phenomenon. Every society, every social group, social community is subject to conflicts to one degree or another. Conflicts are classified according to their structure and research areas.

Social conflict is a special type of interaction of social forces, in which the action of one side, faced with the opposition of the other, makes it impossible to realize its goals and interests. Its indicators may be unresolved political problems, high crime rates, lack of consumer goods, and so on. The most widespread are conflicts related to the violation of the social and economic rights of citizens, the protection of which is guaranteed by the state.

Reasons for the conflict.

The cause of the conflict is the point around which the conflict situation unfolds. The following types of reasons can be distinguished:
1. The presence of opposite orientations. Each individual and social group has a certain set of value orientations regarding the most significant aspects of social life. Such conflicts can occur in the spheres of economic, political, socio-psychological and other value orientations.
2. Ideological reasons. The ideological cause of the conflict lies in the different attitude to the system of ideas,

3. Causes of the conflict, consisting in various forms of economic and social inequality. Inequality in the distribution of values ​​exists everywhere, but conflict arises only at such a magnitude of inequality, which is regarded as very significant.

4. The reason for social differentiation. Conflicts arise as a result of the different places that structural elements occupy in a society, organization or ordered social group.

Conflict resolution.

The resolution of social conflict is possible only when the conflict situation changes. This change can take many forms. But the most effective change in the conflict situation, which allows to extinguish the conflict, is considered to be the elimination of the cause of the conflict. With a rational conflict, the elimination of the cause inevitably leads to its resolution, but for an emotional conflict, the most important moment in changing the conflict situation should be considered a change in the attitudes of rivals relative to each other.

It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the requirements of one of the parties: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. One of the important conditions is the timely and accurate diagnosis of its causes. And this involves the identification of objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. Another, no less important condition is the mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of the renewal of mutual recognition of the interests of each of the parties. To do this, the parties to the conflict must strive to free themselves from hostility and mistrust towards each other. The third, indispensable, condition is a joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue between the parties, negotiations through an intermediary, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.

Social conflicts in modern society.

In modern conditions, in essence, each sphere of public life gives rise to its own specific types of social conflicts.

political conflict - it is a conflict over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. This conflict can be covert or open. One of the brightest forms of its manifestation in modern Russia is the conflict between the executive and legislative authorities in the country that has continued throughout the entire time after the collapse of the USSR.

occupy a prominent place in modern life national-ethnic conflicts- conflicts based on the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. Most often, these are conflicts related to status or territorial claims. The problem of cultural self-determination of certain national communities also plays a significant role.

play an important role in modern life in Russia. socio-economic conflicts, that is, conflicts over the means of subsistence, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for various benefits, over real access to these benefits and other resources.

One of the main sources of conflict is social and labor relations. A collective labor dispute (conflict) is an unresolved disagreement between employees and employers regarding working conditions, the execution of collective agreements, agreements on social and labor issues.

The procedure for resolving collective labor disputes is regulated by a special Federal Law (November 23, 1995 No. 175-FZ). It provides for the right to put forward the claims of employees, their consideration, the use of conciliation procedures, the participation of intermediaries, the use of labor arbitration, the execution of an agreement based on the results of resolving a collective labor dispute. A non-judicial procedure for considering the claims of the labor collective or trade union rejected by the administration is mandatory. The participation of a state body that facilitates the resolution of a collective labor dispute is envisaged. If necessary, the terms provided for the conduct of conciliation procedures may be extended by agreement of the parties to the collective labor dispute.

A strike as a way to resolve a collective labor dispute is used if conciliation procedures have not led to the resolution of a collective labor dispute or the employer evades conciliation procedures and does not comply with the agreement reached.

Introduction

1 The concept of "social conflict", its essence and causes of occurrence in society

1.1 The concept and essence of social conflicts in society

1.2 The nature of social conflicts and features of their formation

2 Features of social conflicts in modern Russia

2.1 Causes of social conflicts in Russia

2.2 Forms of development of conflict situations in the Russian Federation

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Social conflicts play an important role in the lives of people, peoples and countries. This problem has become the subject of analysis by ancient historians and thinkers. Every major conflict has not gone unnoticed. Many historians singled out as the reasons for military clashes the conflict of interests of the warring parties, the desire of some to seize territory and subdue the population, and the desire of others to defend themselves, defend their right to life and independence.

The causes of conflicts attracted the attention of not only historians. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This problem has become the subject of study of sociologists. In fact, within the framework of sociology, a special direction has developed, which is now called the “sociology of conflict”.

Although few people approve of conflict processes, the majority of the population voluntarily or involuntarily participates in them. If in competitive processes the rivals simply try to get ahead of each other, then in a conflict, attempts are made to impose one's will on the opponent, change his behavior, or even eliminate him altogether. Various criminal acts, threats, resorting to the law to influence the enemy, joining forces in the fight - these are just some of the manifestations of social conflicts.

In conflicts with a less violent form, the main goal of the warring parties is to remove opponents from effective competition by limiting their resources, freedom of maneuver, and reducing their status or prestige. For example, a conflict between a leader and executives, if the latter wins, can lead to the demotion of the leader, the restriction of his rights in relation to subordinates, a decrease in prestige and, finally, to his departure from the team.

The emerging conflict process is difficult to stop. This is explained by the fact that the conflict has a cumulative nature, i.e. every aggressive action leads to a response or retribution, and, as a rule, more powerful than the initial one. The conflict is escalating and expanding. Conflict processes can force people into roles in which they should be violent.

Social conflicts in modern Russian society are organically linked to its transitional state and the contradictions that underlie conflicts. The roots of some of them lie in the past, but they get their main aggravation in the process of transition to market relations.

The emergence of new social groups of entrepreneurs and owners, growing inequality, become the basis for the emergence of new conflicts. A social contradiction is being formed in society between the elite, representing various groups of new owners, and a huge mass of people who have been removed from property and from power.

The relevance of the topic we have chosen is due to the fact that social conflicts in modern Russia are particularly acute and often use violence. Based on the deepening of the crisis state of society, leading to clashes of various forces and communities, social contradictions are exacerbated and their result is social conflicts.

The object of this work is modern Russia and the social changes taking place in it.

The purpose of the work is to find out the nature of social conflicts in Russia.

Objectives: to consider the concept and essence of social conflicts and analyze their features in modern Russia.

1 The concept of "social conflict", its essence and causes of occurrence in society

1.1 The concept and essence of social conflicts in society

Before proceeding to a direct consideration of the chosen topic, we will give a definition of the concept of "conflict". A conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, views of the subjects of interaction. At the same time, the conflict is the most important side of the interaction of people in society, a kind of cell of social life. This is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs.

The essential side of social conflict is that these subjects operate within the framework of some wider system of connections, which is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict.

If interests are multidirectional and opposite, then their opposition will be found in a mass of very different assessments; they themselves will find a “field of collision” for themselves, while the degree of rationality of the claims put forward will be very conditional and limited. It is likely that at each of the stages of the development of the conflict, it will be concentrated at a certain point of intersection of interests.

The situation is more complicated with national-ethnic conflicts. In different regions of the former USSR, these conflicts had a different mechanism of occurrence. For the Baltic States, the problem of state sovereignty was of particular importance, for the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict the territorial status issue of Nagorno-Karabakh, for Tajikistan - inter-clan relations.

Political conflict means moving to a higher level of complexity. Its emergence is associated with consciously formulated goals aimed at the redistribution of power. For this, it is necessary to single out, on the basis of the general dissatisfaction of the social or national-ethnic stratum, a special group of people - representatives of the new generation of the political elite. The embryos of this layer have been formed in recent decades in the form of insignificant, but very active and purposeful, dissident and human rights groups that openly opposed the established political regime and embarked on the path of self-sacrifice for the sake of a socially significant idea and a new system of values. Under the conditions of perestroika, past human rights activities became a kind of political capital, which made it possible to speed up the process of forming a new political elite.

Contradictions permeate all spheres of society - economic, political, social, spiritual. The aggravation of certain contradictions creates "zones of crisis". The crisis manifests itself in a sharp increase in social tension, which often develops into a conflict.

The conflict is associated with people's awareness of the contradictions of their interests (as members of certain social groups) with the interests of other subjects. The aggravated contradictions give rise to open or closed conflicts.

Most sociologists believe that the existence of a society without conflicts is impossible, because conflict is an integral part of people's being, a source of changes taking place in society. Conflict makes social relations more mobile. The population quickly abandons the usual norms of behavior and activities that previously satisfied them. The stronger the social conflict, the more noticeable its influence on the course of social processes and the pace of their implementation. Conflict in the form of competition encourages creativity, innovation and ultimately promotes progressive development, making society more resilient, dynamic and receptive to progress.

The sociology of conflict proceeds from the fact that conflict is a normal phenomenon of social life, the identification and development of conflict as a whole is a useful and necessary thing. Society, power structures and individual citizens will achieve more effective results in their actions if they follow certain rules aimed at resolving the conflict.

1.2 The nature of social conflicts and features of their formation

In the modern literature on the history of sociology, the established sociological trends are divided into two large groups, depending on what place the problem of social conflict occupies in theoretical constructions. We find such a division, first of all, in the highly respected historian of sociology, Geoffrey Alexander. The theories of Marx, Weber, Pareto, and of the living ones - Dahrendorf from this point of view are considered as those in which the problem of conflict occupies a dominant place in explaining social processes and changes. Durkheim, Parsons, Smelser pay special attention to the problem of stability and sustainability. Their theories are focused not so much on the study of conflict as on the justification of consensus.

This division of the directions of sociological theories can be recognized as correct only with a certain degree of conventionality. It is mainly based on Ralf Dahrendorf's contrast between functionalism and the sociology of conflict.

So, the conflict is the most important side of the interaction of people in society, a kind of cell of social life. This is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs. The essential side of social conflict is that these subjects operate within the framework of some wider system of connections, which is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict.

Each side perceives the conflict situation as a problem, in the resolution of which three main points are predominant:

• firstly, the degree of significance of the wider system of relations, the advantages and losses arising from the previous state and its destabilization - all this can be designated as an assessment of the pre-conflict situation;

Thus, the main stages or phases of the conflict can be indicated as follows:

Initial state of affairs; the interests of the parties involved in the conflict; their degree of understanding.

The initiating party - the reasons and nature of its actions.

retaliatory measures; the degree of readiness for the negotiation process; the possibility of normal development and conflict resolution - changes in the initial state of affairs.

Lack of mutual understanding, i.e. understanding the interests of the opposite side.

Mobilization of resources in defending their interests.

Use of force or threat of force (demonstration of force) in the course of defending one's interests; victims of violence.

Mobilization of counter resources; the ideologization of the conflict with the help of the ideas of justice and the creation of the image of the enemy; the penetration of the conflict into all structures and relationships; the dominance of the conflict in the minds of the parties over all other relations.

An impasse, its self-destructive effect.

Awareness of impasse; search for new approaches; change of leaders of the conflicting parties.

Rethinking, reformulating one's own interests, taking into account the experience of a deadlock situation and understanding the interests of the opposing side.

A new stage of social interaction.

The source of the aggravation of conflicts between large groups is the accumulation of dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs, the growth of claims, a radical change in self-awareness and social well-being. As a rule, at first the process of accumulation of dissatisfaction goes slowly and latently, until some event occurs, which plays the role of a kind of trigger that brings out this feeling of dissatisfaction. Dissatisfaction, acquiring an open form, stimulates the emergence of a social movement, during which leaders are nominated, programs and slogans are worked out, and an ideology of protecting interests is formed. At this stage, the conflict becomes open and irreversible. It either turns into an independent and permanent component of social life, or ends with the victory of the initiating party, or is resolved on the basis of mutual concessions by the parties.

Conflicts cover all spheres of life in Russian society. The most acute and dangerous are conflicts in the political sphere, especially in the spheres of power, socio-economic and interethnic relations.

The nature of social conflicts has long been associated with its transitional state and the contradictions that underlie the conflicts that develop under new conditions in the new Russian state and society after the collapse of the USSR. Although in some of them (for example, in interethnic ones) one can also find “residual” contradictions that go back to the totalitarian past, they also received their main impulses from the processes of transition to the market and market relations.

The deep roots of the conflict situation in Russia can be traced, first of all, through the relationship of inequality of large social groups - subjects of relevant interests. The intensive formation of new social groups, primarily the class of owners and entrepreneurs, the “new Russians”, who created their own political organizations, the consolidation of the former nomenklatura on a new basis and the formation of the corresponding political and ruling elite, etc., became the basis for the emergence of many conflicts. There is a new social contradiction in society between the elite, representing various groups of new real owners who dominate market relations, and a huge mass of the people, removed from property in the course of privatization, and from power itself in the course of the political struggle for power.

Conflicts in Russia are particularly acute, with frequent use of violence, and so on. And it's not just the lack of institutional foundations for regulation and the legitimacy of the decisions made. In Russia, a "confrontational political culture" has historically established itself, carrying intolerance towards dissidents and those who act differently. The totalitarian ideology and the formulas “who is not with us is against us”, “if the enemy does not surrender, he is destroyed” and others have taken deep roots in everyday consciousness. Such a political “culture” seems to be reproduced in various structures and institutions of society, state power, not only making it difficult, but sometimes even making it impossible to move from a state of confrontation to dialogue.

The social conflict in the transitional society of Russia was the result and practical expression of such an aggravation of social contradictions in the course of deepening its crisis state, which leads to a clash of various political and social forces and communities - classes, demographic and professional groups, nations, ethnic groups and ethnic groups, movements and etc. - on the basis of awareness by the individuals that make up these communities and forces, the opposition of their interests, goals and social positions in their confrontation with the other side. It is in conditions of crisis and economic decline, rampant inflation that objective opposites quickly develop into subjective confrontations. In the course of the development of opposites into conflict, amorphous quasi-groups, united by the supposed unity of interests arising on the basis of common social positions, are transformed into interest groups with conscious goals and formulated programs.

Social conflicts in Russia are usually emotionally strongly colored, they contain a lot of irrational (especially in interethnic conflicts), far-fetched in the individual's ideas about his own interests as opposed to the interests of the other side. But these representations constitute reality, they move and aggravate the conflict. In any case, they really express, albeit not always clearly, completely, albeit deformed, the essence, the main features of the social contradictions underlying this conflict.

Finally, conflicts in Russia are called social, although they are formed in various spheres of society and are usually referred to as political, socio-economic, spiritual, national, etc. In a broad, general theoretical sense, they all belong to the category of social conflict, which is usually understood as any kind of struggle and confrontation between communities and social forces, groups of people, if they pursue any socially significant goals. It is important that individuals participating in the conflict do not express their purely personal goals, interests and values, but act as typical representatives of a large social group. Otherwise, the conflict would not be social, but socio-psychological, interpersonal, individual.

2 Features of social conflicts in modern Russia

2.1 Causes of social conflicts in Russia

The interests of two sides clash directly in the conflict: for example, two contenders for one seat, two national-ethnic communities or states over a disputed territory, two political parties when voting on a draft law, etc.

However, a closer examination of the situation reveals that this open clash of interests is associated with a more complex system of relations. So, applicants for one place turn out to be not just equal individuals with the same rights and claims to the position. Each of the applicants is supported by a certain group of people. If the position or position for which the competition flares up is related to power, to the ability to dispose of other people, then this position is prestigious, highly valued by public opinion. Therefore, it is not excluded that an open clash of two opposing contenders may be initiated by a third party or a third party, which for the time being remains in the shadows.

Three aspects of the problems of political power in the conflicts of Russian society can be traced:

• conflicts in power itself, confrontation between various political forces for the possession of power;
• the role of power in conflicts in various spheres of society, which somehow affect the foundations of the existence of power itself;
• the role of government as an intermediary.

The main conflicts in the sphere of power in modern conditions are as follows:

• conflicts between branches of government (legislative, executive, judicial);
• conflicts within the parliament (both between the State Duma and the Federation Council, and within each of these bodies);
• conflicts between political parties and movements;
• conflicts between the links of the administrative apparatus, etc.

A potential source of a fierce struggle for power is new social groups claiming a higher position in political life, the possession of material goods and power.

Since 1993, the executive branch has taken a leading position in our country, in whose hands all the fullness of real power is now concentrated. There is a situation where reforms require sufficient freedom for the executive branch, but on the other hand, an uncontrolled executive branch can choose the wrong course, which cannot be corrected.

The executive power is increasingly implementing a policy based on its understanding of the situation and in the interests of self-preservation. Sociological surveys show that the degree of distrust in the current authorities is quite high.

If in most industrialized countries social conflicts involve a contradiction between the welfare system and the labor system, then in Russia the division of the struggle goes not only and not so much along the line of "workers-entrepreneurs", but along the line "labor collectives - government". Along with the demands for higher wages, living standards, liquidation of debts, the demands of the collectives are steadily growing, connected with defending their right to the property of enterprises. Since the main subject of the redistribution of property is the state authorities, the socio-economic actions are directed against the policy of the government both in the center and in individual regions.

Serious prerequisites for conflicts contain socio-economic relations between medium and small entrepreneurs and power structures. Reasons: corruption; the uncertainty of the functions of many civil servants; ambiguous interpretation of laws.

The importance of the nature of relations along the lines of "entrepreneurs - the bulk of the population" is growing. A factor contributing to the aggravation of the situation is the multiple difference in income between the rich and the poor.

Interethnic and interethnic conflicts occupy an important place in Russia's social conflicts. These conflicts are the most complex among social conflicts. To social contradictions, linguistic and cultural problems, historical memory is added, which deepens the conflict.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the contradictions between nations not only did not decrease, but even more increased. The main reason for this can be considered the fact that new states arose as a result of a secret, apex decision of a group of political leaders, inter-ethnic contradictions intensified, conflicts broke out with renewed vigor (Karabakh, Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, Chechnya).

Russia is a multinational country with more than 120 peoples. In many of the republics within the Russian Federation, the indigenous population is a minority. Only in 5 republics its number exceeds 50% (Chuvashia, Tyva, Komi, Chechnya, North Ossetia).

The peculiarity of interethnic conflicts in Russia is mainly due to the fact that the awakened national consciousness is often exacerbated by interethnic contradictions and destabilize the socio-political situation in the country. For the first time in history, the moral well-being of the Russian people, their self-awareness, are significantly impaired when every other, even a small nation, can appear before it as an enemy.

It is likely that in the coming years there may be an increase in the aggressive-offensive mood in the Russian national consciousness. It will be fed by Russian refugees from the former republics of the USSR.

The federal organization of the state of Russia is the breeding ground for all sorts of conflicts. Each specific conflict on an interethnic basis has its own characteristics, its own causes. The conflict with Tatarstan was resolved by constitutional means. With Chechnya, this did not work out, and the political conflict turned into a military conflict with serious social consequences.

In the development of the conflict, in its transition to the stage of extreme escalation, much depends on how exactly the very initial, initial events leading to the development of the conflict are perceived, what importance is attached to the conflict in the mass consciousness and in the consciousness of the leaders of the relevant social groups. To understand the nature of the conflict and the nature of its development, the "Thomas theorem" is of particular importance, which states: "If people perceive a certain situation as real, then it will be real in its consequences." With regard to conflict, this means that if there is a mismatch of interests between people or groups, but this mismatch is not perceived, felt or felt by them, then such a mismatch of interests does not lead to a conflict. And vice versa, if there is a community of interests between people, but the participants themselves feel hostility towards each other, then relations between them will necessarily develop according to the pattern of conflict, not cooperation.

A feeling of hostility of intentions, a reaction to an imaginary or real threat, a state of oppression give rise to preventive or protective actions of the side that feels infringed and associates it with the actions of some other groups or people. Thus the imaginary turns into reality.

The conflict can be caused by significant reasons that affect the very foundations of the existence of the respective conflicting groups, but it can also be an illusory, imaginary conflict, when people believe that their interests are incompatible and mutually exclusive, and "in fact" you can not aggravate the conflict, live in peace and harmony.

When considering the causes of a particular conflict, it must be borne in mind that every conflict is somehow personified. Each of the parties to the conflict has its own leaders, leaders, leaders, ideologists who voice and broadcast the ideas of their group, formulate “their” positions and represent them as the interests of their group. At the same time, it is often difficult to figure out whether this or that leader is put forward by the current conflict situation or he himself will create this situation, since he, thanks to a certain type of behavior, takes the position of leader, leader, “spokesman for the interests” of the people, ethnic group, class, social stratum, political party, etc. In any case, in any conflict, the personal characteristics of leaders play an exceptional role. In each specific situation, they can lead the case to aggravate the conflict or find means to resolve it.

As a rule, the leader is not alone. It is supported by a certain group, but this support is almost always subject to some conditions. Certain members of the "support group" are simultaneously in a relationship of rivalry or competition for positions in the lead. Consequently, the leader is forced to take into account not only the opposite side in the conflict, but also how he will perceive in his own environment, how strong his support is among his own supporters and like-minded people.

World experience allows us to identify some of the most characteristic sources on the basis of which the causes of conflicts are formed: wealth, power, prestige and dignity, i.e. those values ​​and interests that matter in any society and give meaning to the actions of specific individuals participating in conflicts. In different historical contexts, the priority of the corresponding values ​​can be modified, but the content side of the matter does not change very significantly from this. This fully applies to Russia as well.

First, the idea of ​​social differentiation allows every Russian to openly strive not only to get rid of poverty, but also to become rich. In the mass consciousness and in practical life relations, wealth is not just a certain amount of money or property, but the ability to expand the limits of one's activities and influence.

The second, no less important source of conflict is the struggle for power. It is no less attractive than wealth as such, if only because damask steel and gold are constantly arguing with each other. The empirical expression of power positions are government and non-government positions and positions that allow you to control the distribution of resources based on the right to dispose, determine access to significant information flows, and participate in decision-making. The field of power will create a specific environment of communication, entry into which is one of the most important motives for political activity.

In particular, these feelings are aggravated in those situations when a person gets the opportunity to dispose of the means of violence: to give orders for arrest, to determine the movement of military formations, to give orders for the use of weapons. Conflicts in the political space have just as much power of engagement as conflicts over wealth, but they tend to be framed in more grandiloquent phraseology associated with declarations of common - national, state - interests and the interests of progress in general.

Thirdly, the desire to achieve various forms of prestige is among the sources of conflict. The real embodiment of prestige is the fame and popularity of a person, his reputation and authority, the power of influence on decision-making, demonstrating respect for this person and his potential. Prestige in very rare cases can be won without the support of power and wealth, therefore it is, to some extent, a secondary source of conflict. But. the fact is that both wealth and power seem to accumulate in prestige. Neither can maintain its influence without gaining the support of public opinion. The struggle for power and wealth can begin with conflicts over prestige - creating a reputation, or vice versa, discrediting a particular person or group of people in the eyes of public opinion. This is where the idea of ​​the so-called fourth estate, which is concentrated in the media, arises.

Finally, fourthly, it is important to point out the desire to preserve human dignity. We are talking about such values ​​as respect and self-respect, competence, professionalism, representativeness, recognition, moral qualities of the individual. If we reduce everything only to the previous three sources of conflicts, then we get a rather bleak picture of the almost indispensable assertion of evil and vice, the destruction of the moral principle in society.

In the struggle for wealth, power and glory, a person should not forget about the boundaries of his choice, separating the humane, humane, cultural beginning from the inhuman and immoral. And these boundaries pass within each specific individual. Anyone who crosses these boundaries loses, first of all, the right to self-respect, and at the same time undermines his personal dignity, his civil and professional honor.

In this regard, in the struggle for power and wealth, for social prestige, a strategy either to elevate the individual or to humiliate human dignity occupies a special place. With the help of the strategy of the second type, a criminal environment is created, communities of scum are formed, acting in the name of the interests of the owner. Usually, the mobilization mechanisms for creating such an environment are associated with the formulas “money does not smell”, or “politics is a dirty business”. However, the moral conflict associated with the definition of ultimate values ​​or the meaning of human existence permeates all other conflicts.

The problem of moral conflict is usually associated with the choice of means to achieve their goals in a particular conflict.

One of the reasons for the aggravation of conflicts between large groups of people in Russia is the accumulation of dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs, the growth of claims, a radical change in self-consciousness and social well-being. As a rule, at first the process of accumulation of dissatisfaction goes slowly and latently, until some event occurs, which plays the role of a kind of trigger that brings out this feeling of dissatisfaction.

Such dissatisfaction, which takes on an open form, stimulates the emergence of a social movement, during which leaders are nominated, programs and slogans are worked out, and an ideology of protecting interests is formed. At this stage, the conflict becomes open and irreversible. It either turns into an independent and permanent component of social life, or ends with the victory of the initiating party, or is resolved on the basis of mutual concessions by the parties.

The reasons for the maturation of the conflict may be historical, socio-economic and cultural factors, culminating in the actions of political structures and institutions. Each of them has its own characteristics.

Socio-economic conflict arises on the basis of dissatisfaction, first of all, with the economic situation, which is considered either as a deterioration in comparison with the usual level of consumption and standard of living (real conflict of needs), or as a worse situation in comparison with other social groups (conflict of interest). In the second case, conflict may arise even with some improvement in living conditions, if it is perceived as insufficient or inadequate.

In the development of the political conflict at the macro level, the interweaving of the sources of these three conflicts, the establishment of links between movements of various kinds, was of particular importance. Thus, the most important element in the defeat of Gorbachev's course was the nomination by the striking miners and their leaders of the demand for the resignation of the President of the USSR, which will be presented by the conflicting parties as the main subject of the conflict.

Each of the parties perceives the conflict situation as a certain problem, in the resolution of which three main points are predominant:

• firstly, the degree of significance of the wider system of relations, the advantages and losses arising from the previous state and its destabilization - all this can be designated as an assessment of the pre-conflict situation;
• secondly, the degree of awareness of one's own interests and the willingness to take risks for the sake of their implementation;
• thirdly, the perception by the opposing sides of each other, the ability to take into account the interests of the opponent.

The usual development of the conflict assumes that each of the parties is able to take into account the interests of the opposing side. This approach creates the possibility of a relatively peaceful development of the conflict through the negotiation process and making adjustments to the previous system of relations in the direction and scale acceptable to each of the parties.

At the same time, in our country it often happens that the party initiating the conflict proceeds from a negative assessment of the previous state of affairs and declares only its own interests, not taking into account the interests of the opposite side. The opposing side is forced in this case to take special measures to protect its interests. As a result, both sides may suffer some damage, which is attributed to the opposing side in the conflict.

Such a situation is fraught with the use of violence: already at the initial stage of the conflict, each of the parties begins to demonstrate force or the threat of its use. In this case, the conflict deepens, since the impact of force necessarily meets with opposition associated with the mobilization of resources to resist the force.

At the same time, the greater the desire to use force is observed in the conflict, the more difficult its resolution, i.e. access to new parameters of social relations. Violence creates secondary and tertiary factors of deepening the conflict situation, which sometimes displace the original cause of the conflict from the minds of the parties.

Each of the parties develops at this phase its own interpretation of the conflict, the indispensable elements of which are the idea of ​​the legitimacy and validity of their own interests and the actions taken in their defense and the accusation of the opposite side, i.e. creating an image of the enemy. Consequently, at this stage, an ideological design of the conflict is created, which for each of its participants acts as a certain amount of criteria. The entire social world is, as it were, divided into friends and foes. Forces that are neutral, conciliatory, are perceived in this case as allies of the opposite or hostile side.

As a result, a new phase of the conflict arises - a deadlock. In practice, this leads to paralysis of actions, ineffectiveness of the decisions made, since each of the parties perceives proposals and actions aimed at overcoming the crisis as a unilateral gain for the opposite side.

The emerging situation tends to self-destruct. A way out of it can only be found by means of a radical revision of the existing situation. As a rule, such a revision is associated with a change of leaders, first of one and then of the other conflicting side. New opportunities are opening up for the negotiation process, which should be based on a new awareness of one's own interests, based on the experience of deploying a conflict situation and understanding the common losses incurred by the parties at the stage of aggravation of the conflict, its ideologization and impasse.

Ethnic tension and conflict in Russia will be influenced by two fundamental factors. First of all, the social structuring in our society has not been completed: there is practically no clear understanding of group interests. At the same time, in our country there is a discrepancy between liberal democratic ideologies and real economic and socio-political relations. In this situation, a kind of vacuum is created in the knowledge of the certainty of interests. This vacuum can be filled by solving two ideological problems.

One of them is statehood. Now the vast majority of Russians are pinning their hopes on it. And the second is ethnic. It is adopted by political parties and associations that do not attach importance to the structuring of social interests that is weakly expressed in reality. When the main vector of post-totalitarian socio-economic development runs along two determinants: statehood and ethnicity, it is possible to predict the deepening of all types of conflicts.

2.2 Forms of development of conflict situations in the Russian Federation

Conflicts cover all spheres of life of Russian society - socio-economic, political, the sphere of inter-ethnic relations, etc. They are generated by real contradictions in the course of deepening the crisis state of society. Often there are artificially created and deliberately provoked clashes, especially characteristic of interethnic and interregional relations. Their result is bloodshed and even wars, in which, against their will, entire nations are drawn.

Social conflicts receive a peculiar manifestation in modern Russian reality. Russia is experiencing a systemic crisis, the causes of which are diverse and difficult to unambiguously assess them. Changes in social relations are accompanied by an unprecedented expansion of the sphere of manifestation of conflicts. They involve not only large social groups, but also entire territories, both nationally homogeneous and inhabited by various ethnic communities.

Conflicts based on objectively arising contradictions, if they are resolved, contribute to social progress. At the same time, social contradictions that serve as a source of conflict collisions can be divided into two main types. On the one hand, these are contradictions generated by the socio-economic situation of the members of our society. In the course of deepening these contradictions, there is a clash of various social groups, nations, and other ethnic groups. These contradictions are manifested primarily in the exorbitant contrasts of wealth and poverty, the prosperity of the few and the impoverishment of the majority. On the other hand, these are political contradictions, caused, first of all, by the rejection of the policy of the authorities. Today, this is reflected in the opposition of many social forces to the government's course, focused on changing the socio-political system.

The most significant conflicts unfolding in the space of Russia and the CIS are three: political, social and national-ethnic. A separate consideration of these three forms of conflict allows us to state that they unfold over values ​​that are of a different nature.

Political conflict is a conflict over power, dominance, influence, authority. Social conflict - in the narrow sense of the word - a conflict over the means of subsistence: the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for various benefits, over real access to these benefits and other resources.

The subject of clashes and conflicts in the third area are the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. Often these conflicts are associated with status and territorial claims. The sovereignty of the people or ethnic group is in this case the dominant idea in the conflict.

All of the above forms are interpenetrating conflicts, each of them is a breeding ground for the other. For example, the mining strikes mentioned earlier show exactly how a social conflict turned into a political one. Observers and researchers of miners' strikes note that in many cases the situation was artificially aggravated due to political interests.

To an even greater extent, socio-political problems intertwined in national-ethnic conflicts. Undoubtedly, the dynamics of ethnic conflicts was largely determined by how strong the claims to power of the new elites, who grew up within the framework of the old structures and were cut off both from participation in power and from the cultural self-determination of the respective national communities. The local ethnocracy, supported by the center, did not allow representatives of the new elite to take part in the decision-making process, due to which they were forced to clothe their claims to power in the form of national-ethnic or nationalist interests.

The development of conflict issues at the level of special sociological theories allows us to come to a conclusion regarding the dominance of political conflict in all currently unfolding conflict situations. The practical consequence that follows from this is the need to rationalize politics, to increase the political culture of the new political elite.

One can agree with the opinion that conflict has become an everyday reality in modern Russia. The country has become a field of social conflicts.

Labor conflicts are often a reaction to distortions in the economic and social policy of the government, to its inability to understand the consequences of decisions made. The main content of conflicts in the socio-economic sphere is associated with the redistribution of property and the formation of market relations, which inevitably lead to the polarization of social groups.

A large number of conflicts in the economic sphere is also due to the fact that the country still lacks a clear legislative framework for resolving labor disputes. Attempts were made to adopt a law on the resolution of labor conflicts, to determine the mechanism for this resolution. It is based on the principle of conciliation procedures through the relevant commissions and labor arbitrations. The period for consideration of disputes, the obligatory execution of the adopted decisions were envisaged. But this law was never adopted. Conciliation commissions, their arbitrations do not fulfill their functions, and administrative bodies in a number of cases do not fulfill the agreements reached. This does not contribute to the resolution of labor conflicts and sets the task of creating a more thoughtful legislative system for their settlement.

Conflicts in the socio-political sphere are conflicts over the redistribution of power, dominance, influence, and authority. They can be both hidden and open. The main conflicts in the sphere of power can be called the following.

Conflicts between the main branches of government (legislative, executive and judicial) in the country and in individual republics and regions. At the highest level, this conflict initially took place along the line of confrontation, on the one hand, between the president and the government, and on the other hand, the Supreme Council and councils of people's deputies at all levels. This conflict resulted, as is known, in the events of October 1993. The form of its partial resolution was the elections of the Federal Assembly and the referendum on the adoption of the first Constitution of Russia.

Intra-parliamentary conflicts between and within the State Duma and the Federation Council.

Conflicts between political parties with different ideological and political orientations.

Conflicts between different parts of the administrative apparatus.

Political conflicts are quite a normal phenomenon in the life of any society. The parties, movements and their leaders that exist in society have their own ideas about how to overcome the crisis and renew society. This is reflected in their programs. But they cannot realize them as long as they are outside the sphere of power. The needs, interests, goals, claims of large groups and movements can be realized primarily through the use of levers of power. Therefore, the authorities, the political institutions of Russia have become the arena of a sharp political struggle.

The contradictions between the legislative and executive powers turn into a conflict only with a certain confluence of objective and subjective factors. At the same time, wrestling often has an "apical", elitist character. Conflicts in the upper echelons of the executive and legislative authorities are resolved by force, pressure, pressure, threats, and accusations. So far, the socio-economic and political situation in Russia favors a conflict scenario. It is important to understand the current circumstances and strive to mitigate the conditions for the course of conflicts, not to allow them to develop into violent actions of one side or the other.

Contradictions in interethnic and interethnic relations exert a noticeable influence on social conflicts in modern Russia. They are based on the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. An analysis of interethnic conflicts within the Russian Federation allows us to group them into three main types:

First, these are constitutional conflicts. Three republics adopted constitutions that contradict the past and present constitutions of the Russian Federation: Sakha (Yakutia), Tyva, Tatarstan. But Bashkortostan held a referendum and, judging by the upcoming constitution, there will also be contradictions here. The first contradiction lies in the fact that the constitutions speak of the supremacy of the laws of the republic over the federal ones, the second is connected with control over the use of natural resources, the third - with direct access to the international arena.

A number of republics are pursuing a policy that is close to economic nationalism. They do not want to leave the Russian Federation, but they want to have the right to enter the international arena. Another circumstance is related to the fact that the Federal Treaty, as is known, was not fully included in the constitution. But it was written by the federal government and the subjects of the Federation. The struggle will unfold around specific clauses of the treaty that are not included in the Constitution.

In some subjects of Russia, the question of secession from Russia and full state independence is being raised. Here the most striking example is the Chechen crisis. Similar trends took place in Tatarstan before the conclusion of an agreement on the delimitation of powers between the federal and republican authorities, despite the absence of any external borders for Tatarstan.

Until the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993, almost all regions struggled to improve their status: autonomous regions sought to turn into republics, the republics declared their sovereignty and independence.

The claim to higher status becomes a political reality. A conflict of this type may not be directly related to the national interests of any ethnic entities. The national aspect of such conflicts is revealed only in relation to the problem of the integrity of Russia and the recognition or non-recognition of the authority of the Russian state. An example of such conflicts is the proclamation of the Ural Republic, which was recognized as incompetent by the Decree of the President that followed this action.

Second, there are territorial conflicts. There are now 180 disputed zones in Russia. Local military operations are already underway around some of them. It is quite possible for them to reach the interstate level. Territorial claims play a dominant role here. They concern neighboring peoples and ethnic groups and can become very acute. An example of this type of conflict is the Ossetian-Ingush and Dagestan-Chechen conflicts.

Third, intergroup conflicts. Social instability, political contradictions within the republics and between the republics and the Center stimulate such conflicts. Tension also exists in relations between Chechens and Cossacks, Ingush and Ossetians, Kabardians and Balkars, and in youth groups in Yakutia and Tuva.

Two strategic approaches to solving both ethnic and national problems and the social conflicts connected with them are quite possible. One approach is demonstrated by the presidential team in the form of the territorial division of Russia into seven districts. The essence of this approach is to bring the republics closer to the regions of Russia and somehow extinguish nationalism. Still, it is impossible to count on a calm solution of the issue with such an approach.

At the same time, Russian law is poorly adapted to their resolution due to the underdevelopment of procedures for resolving legal disputes and, in general, procedural norms and institutions.

The formation of a general procedural branch of "conflict law" with a wider scope and content will cover the principles and norms of restoring broken ties within the legal system. And here it is appropriate to pay attention to the need for intensive development and use of conciliation procedures. These can be both stable procedures recognized by the Constitution and the law (for example, provided for in Articles 78, 85, 105 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), and procedures created for a specific conflict situation. Parity representation and coordination of decisions makes them an effective way to resolve legal conflicts.

Conclusion

Social conflicts are increasingly becoming the norm of social relations. In Russia, there is a process of formation of a certain intermediate type of economy, where the bourgeois type of relations based on private property is combined with relations of state ownership and state monopoly on certain means of production. A society is being created with a new balance of classes and social groups, where differences in income, status, culture, etc. will increase. Therefore, conflicts in our lives are inevitable. We need to learn how to manage them, strive to resolve them at the lowest cost to society.

Bibliography

1. Parsons T. Essay on a social system // On social systems. M., 2002. S.545-687.
2. Merton R. Social structure and anomie // Sociology of crime (modern bourgeois theories). M., 1966. S.299-313.
3. Dahrendorf R. Modern social conflict. M., 2002. S. 225.
4. Touraine A. The Return of the Acting Man. Essay on sociology. M., 1998. S.144-157.
5. Aggression // Myers D. Social psychology. 6th international edition. Publishing house "Peter". SPb., 2002. S.463-514.
6. Structural processes as a source of violent conflicts // A.V. Dmitriev, I.Yu. Zalysin. Violence: A Socio-Political Analysis. Moscow, 2000.
7. The specifics of violence as a political means // A.V. Dmitriev, I.Yu. Zalysin. Violence: A Socio-Political Analysis. Moscow, 2000.
8. Social determinants of aggression // Baron R., Richardson D. Aggression. Publishing house "PITER". St. Petersburg, 2001. C. 126-157
9. Social conflicts in transforming societies. M., 1996.
10. Social Conflict: Modern Studies. M., 1991.
11. Turner J. Structure of sociological theory. M., 1985.
12. Utkin E.A. Conflictology. Theory and practice. M., 1998.
13. Frolov S.F. Sociology: cooperation and conflicts. M., 2005
14. Chumikov L.N. Conflict management and conflict management as new paradigms of thinking and action // Sotsis. 1995. No. 3.

PhD, Associate Professor

Vladimir State University named after Alexander Grigorievich and Nikolai Grigorievich Stoletovs

• ECONOMY
• POLICY
• SOCIAL CONFLICTS

This article discusses the conflicts that modern Russia is subject to. The author discusses the method of solving social conflicts and problems arising in the modern information society. The problems of social, economic, demographic, problems of stratification of society are considered.

• Fundamentals of formation of the budget policy of the municipality and evaluation of the effectiveness of its implementation
• Interregional links and mechanisms of interaction in the development of tourism

The problem of social conflicts is the most relevant at the present time. First you need to define what social conflict is. The definition of social conflict, in its most general form, may look as follows. Social conflict is a conflict that arises both between individuals and between entire social groups, the reason for these conflicts is the contradictions in the views of the parties, each of which seeks to take a leading position to promote its interests.

Social conflict is the norm for any society, an element of the social system. Sociologists divide conflicts into: socially destructive (negative) and socially constructive (positive). Destructive conflicts lead to the destruction of the social system, structure, negatively affecting both its individual elements and the system as a whole. Constructive ones, on the contrary, contribute to the development of the system and reduce tension in the social environment.

The internal content of conflicts is also different, sociologists divide them into: rational and emotional. Rational conflicts, in contrast to emotional ones, cover those areas of human relationships in which there is no sensual and emotional background.

Russia is one of those countries in which, at the present time, social conflicts are most clearly manifested. Almost all social conflicts in Russia have a causal relationship with the peculiarities of the national culture, as well as the socio-political history of our country.

Social conflicts in Russia are more emotional and take place with a vivid expression of aggression, which sometimes turns into violence.

There are several types of social conflicts.

Political conflicts - associated with the struggle for political power, influence and authority.

Socio-economic conflicts - these are conflicts related to the distribution of economic and material resources, as well as means of life support. The struggle for access to spiritual goods and a high social position.

National-ethnic conflicts - arise when negative relations between various ethnic and national groups are aggravated, each pursuing its own interests and actively trying to put them into practice.

Considering the modern Russian reality, one can notice an increase in the number of social conflicts.

Observing the history of the development of our country, we can say with confidence that the most important conflicts between individuals and social groups are concentrated in the sphere of politics. Political conflicts "surface" in 1991. The collapse of the USSR, a sharp, unprepared and painful change in the structure of life, economy and ideology plunges the already former Soviet society into shock. Post-Soviet Russia, having lost its stable support, in the form of the policy of the rulers of the USSR and the communist system, was thrown into a world of chaos, social problems and crises, interethnic strife, pronounced class inequality and an unstable economy moving towards capitalism.

Problems in the agrarian sector of the economy, lack of an ideology that bound society, failure to build popular capitalism, sharp impoverishment of several social groups at once, unjustified price increases, delays in paying wages, pensions and benefits, devaluation of the ruble, inflation, increased crime and unemployment, decline in production , corruption, the deplorable state of the environment, the weakness of state power, the crisis of morality, culture, the threat of extremism, the unstable, crisis situation in Chechnya and its surrounding regions - all this gave rise to hostility towards the authorities and resulted in new conflicts. This is the characteristic of the 90s and early 2000s.

On December 31, 1999, Russians receive an unexpected "new year gift" from President Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin. Congratulating his compatriots on the beginning of the new year and the millennium, Yeltsin, unexpectedly for many, resigns from his duties as president of the Russian Federation and transfers power, until the next election, to Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Now the responsibility for the fate of Russia falls on his shoulders. It was from him that they expected the estates of the course of politics, which actually happened. At the moment, Putin's policy, like himself, has a controversial assessment, in my opinion, even with the passage of time, this will not change. Someone believes that he "raised Russia from its knees", returning people stability and confidence in the future. Others treat him negatively, believing that his policy is destructive and is a continuation of Yeltsin's activities. Be that as it may, after the beginning of his reign, we are seeing positive changes in many areas of society, unemployment and crime are decreasing, Russia is working to strengthen and develop capitalism. The figure of Putin is twofold, his reign can be safely divided into two periods. The first period is from 2000 to 2008. And the second, respectively, from his return to the presidency.

Currently, one can notice the growth of discontent in society. Politically, Russia has split into two camps, one for Putin, the other against. An interesting trend is being observed, the boundary between the previously opposing parties is being erased, it doesn’t matter anymore whether you are for Yabloko, for the Communist Party of the Russian Federation or for the LDPR, and perhaps even for new politicians such as Prokhorov, Udaltsov, Navalny and others, now none of that matters. Parties and new political leaders, practically uniting, stand up to fight Putin and United Russia. Now the Russians are either in favor of United Russia, or stand in opposition to it, while others are completely apolitical. One gets the feeling that Russia is again arriving in a civil war, but without the use of weapons. “And brother went to brother...”, and indeed, as in 1917-1922, Russia seems to be splitting into three camps, only now instead of red, green and white we have oppositionists and United Russia and apolitical citizens.

In modern Russia, political life is in full swing. Suffice it to recall recent rallies. The first mass protests in Moscow and St. Petersburg began on the evening of 4 December. A rally of thousands took place in Moscow on December 5, 2011. On December 10, 2011, protests were held in 99 cities of the country and 42 cities abroad. The Moscow opposition rally on Bolotnaya Square became the most massive in the last decade (according to other sources, the largest since the early 1990s). On December 24, an even larger rally took place on Academician Sakharov Avenue in Moscow and new rallies took place in other cities of Russia. The demands of the protesters were supported by many famous people, politicians and artists.

In late February and March 2012, mass protests continued. On February 26, a general civil action took place in Moscow in a mass audience known as the "White Ribbon". The events of December 2011 - March 2012 received the name "Snow Revolution".

On Bolotnaya Square, a rally was held on May 6 with up to 70 thousand participants, a series of actions “Occupy”, “Walk with Writers” on May 13 with up to 20 thousand participants, a rally on June 12 on Sakharov Avenue with up to 100 thousand participants. The last mass action took place on May 6, 2013, on Bolotnaya Embankment in Moscow, a rally was held under the slogan “For Freedom!”, in defense of political prisoners in the Bolotnaya case, which gathered from 8 thousand to 30 thousand people. At the rally, a resolution was adopted, generally repeating the main demands of the protesters put forward back in December 2011.

As for the economic problems of modern Russian society, the situation here is even more complicated than in politics.

The fight against corruption, perhaps, is not a feasible task for Russia; the budget of both the whole country and individual regions suffers from bribery. A lot of taxes go into the pockets of bureaucrats, sometimes you wonder, is it possible, finally, to satisfy the exorbitant appetite of corrupt officials? Entrepreneurs say that Russia is not the country in which they can develop their small business. The inability to develop pushes entrepreneurs either to export their business abroad (which also leads to a worsening of the budget, a lack of potential jobs), or to violate the law and hide their income, the unresolved nature of these problems entails others, maintaining tension in society. The agricultural sector of the economy is suffering, just a few years ago, Soviet Russia exported agricultural products, and now it buys them. Factories stood up, now in their place are shopping and entertainment centers. The entire Russian economy lives only thanks to rich raw materials. And what will we do when gas and oil run out?

Now Russia is experiencing a powerful ethnic conflict. What happened to international Russia? Now, walking along the streets of almost any city, you can often meet people of Caucasian nationality and citizens of Tajikistan. And sometimes you get the feeling that you are not in Russia, but, for example, in one of the cities of the North Caucasus. Such dominance is already causing hostility towards the southern peoples. Since they are a cheap labor force, many employers are more willing to give preference to them. Such an employer most often does not care about the quality of the service or product he produces, his main goal is profit, and in this case illegal immigrants are an excellent means of saving money. Now that the "guests" compete in the labor market, they cause even more negative emotions among the indigenous population. To all the reasons listed above, the negative attitude of Russians towards immigrants from the south, one can add the delinquent behavior of the Caucasians themselves. Arriving in our homeland, they try to establish their own rules here, and the Russians do not tolerate when they "climb with their charter into someone else's monastery." In addition, statistics on rape and robbery show that, on average, about 3.6% of crimes are committed by illegal immigrants, and these are only official statistics. Such behavior of migrants creates tension in Russian society, it is not surprising that the so-called “Russian fascism” is now manifesting itself, and along with this, many young people declare that they adhere to a policy of nationalism. Many argue like this: "if the government does not want to deal with this problem, which is acute in modern society, then I will solve it myself." Hence we have violent conflicts based on racial hatred. Which adds even more problems to the already "long-suffering" Russian society.

Some believe that social conflicts in modern Russia can be assessed as constructive. The unrest that is now taking place in the life of Russian society shows us that a new generation has grown up in Russia that no longer wants and will not tolerate lawlessness and violence against themselves and others. A citizen of the new Russia is fighting for his rights, demanding respect for the constitution and respect for himself. There is hope that the dissatisfaction expressed by citizens will push the government to change the current policy, which is literally dragging Russia to the bottom, pushing it into a world of class and ethnic wars, forcing people not to live, but to survive on the principle: “man is a wolf to man.” The fact that Russians have learned to fight for their right to a decent existence is an absolute plus for Russia. Now, when people realize that they have the right to demand any action from the government as the elected people, the situation in Russia becomes less depressing and there is hope for a better future for our country.

Bibliography

1. Chigaeva V.Yu., Volkhina V.A. - “Social conflicts in Russia since the 90s. 20th century to the present: types, spheres, causes, evolution» p. 1
2. Zerkin D.P. - "Fundamentals of Conflictology" p. 450
3. Chigaeva V.Yu., Volkhina V.A. - “Social conflicts in Russia since the 90s. page 4
4. Chigaeva V.Yu., Volkhina V.A. - “Social conflicts in Russia since the 90s, p. 2
5. Foreign media stated that Russia is tired of Putin
6. Round table of the Neva magazine, No. 3, 2013.
7. Bolotnaya Square posters, slon.ru
8. The state of crime - January-October 2012, the website of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation.