|
Taras PlakhtiyThe Concept of Constructing a Stable Middle Class Society in UkraineKey terms: middle class, socio-political organizations,
iron law of oligarchy, variable
structure, political
myths,
dynamic
networks. Abstract: The article presents an analysis of the archetypical
structure of political myths and reveals that for most of them the ideal
society is that of the “middle class”, the notion based on the archetypical
invariant of “equality”. It is demonstrated that most classical political myths
to a different extent exploit this invariant in its different interpretations –
from the utopian total equality in communist ideology to the equality of rights
and opportunities in liberal democratic ideologies that, unfortunately,
everywhere and always eventually transforms into its opposite – “inequality”.
The article describes the factors that condition such a transformation at the
present historical stage in developed societies. It is demonstrated that the direction and speed of the
change of the middle class quantity and therefore the change of the scope of
power and wealth that belong to it are the key factors that determine whether a
particular society is approaching or moving away from the social ideal. On
these grounds, the conclusion is drawn that so as to transfer from the present
state of affairs to the social ideal it is necessary to alter the direction of
change of the “middle class” quantity and correspondingly its composition and
structure: launch, stabilize and maintain for a long period of time the
processes of increase of the “middle class” and normalization of its
composition and structure. The conducted analysis made it possible to determine
the Mission of Ukraine in the World. It consists in designing a successful
implementation of the concept of evolutionary construction of the social ideal,
i.e. a “middle class society”, from the starting point of oligarchy with an
extremely high level of concentration of authority and administrative powers
and financial resources, stabilization and long-term maintenance of the
processes of the “middle class” increase and normalization of its composition
and structure. Such a mission may be implemented by a range of transformational
political organizations based on a variable organizational structure, i.e.
dynamic network that could grant active participation in the production, taking
and implementation of all decisions for the representatives of the “middle
class” in these organizations and would reliably secure their rightful part of
authority and administrative powers for them. This version: January 14, 2015 First published in Ukrainian: February 21, 2014 (Blog “Òàðàñ Ïëàõò³é
/ Äèíàì³÷í³ ìåðåæ³.
Òåîð³ÿ òà òåõíîëîã³ÿ”, https://tarasplakhtiy.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/378/) Political myths [1] that periodically emerge, spread
and fade away in the human society in the form of religions, ideologies,
national and civilization ideas are to a various extent rooted in archetypical
invariants [2] – i.e. our inborn ideas of justice, liberty, equality, honesty,
dignity, etc, as well as their opposites. Political
myths are always aimed at certain society segments and play a crucial role in molding their identity by outlining the group framework and
subdividing the totality into classes, ethnic groups, religious communities,
etc. The shaped identity clearly defines the circle of åðó
“insiders” – i.e. those to whom justice, liberty, equality, etc. are applied,
unlike everybody else, that is to say “outsiders”, the attitude to whom is
shaped on the basis of notions that are opposite to the above mentioned.
Therefore, the proportion of archetypical invariants and their attitude to
“insiders” and “outsiders” determines the “shade” or intensity of
aggressiveness of this or that political myth. Without a doubt, the fairest
myths are the ones where the circle of “insiders” covers all people on earth:
“Love your neighbour as yourself” (Matthew 22:39). At any stage of the human
history, leaders who are vested with power have usually chosen the most beneficial
for them political myth and used it to accelerate the growth of the circle of
“insiders” so as to release as much social energy as possible in the process of
struggling against “outsiders” and apply it for implementation of their own
objectives, which unfortunately do not always coincide with the objectives of
people involved. However, the social ideal of most popular political
myths – apart from the explicitly misanthropic ones – is a well-to-do, just and
happy society of the “insiders” where every member indirectly via various
political superstructures or directly – by the tools of direct democracy
implements the people power: “We will also rule, my brethren, in our own land”
[3]. Thus, the ideal society of “insiders” according to the
concepts of most political myths is the “middle class” society whose interests
are in this or that way represented by the ruling group. Its definition was
formulated by Aristotle, who claimed [4] that the larger this social layer is
the more stable the society itself will be: “Thus it is manifest that the best
political community is formed by citizens of the middle class… for they do not,
like the poor, covet their neighbors' goods; nor do
others covet theirs, as the poor covet the goods of the rich”. Various political myths provide different definitions
of the structure and composition of the “middle class” but all of them include
its members in the category of “insiders”, those who will become the
beneficiaries of the common resource [5], i.e. the benefits received after
realization of the aims imposed by the given political myth. Therefore, most classic political myth to a different
extent exploit the archetypical invariant of “equality” in its different
interpretations – from the utopist total equality in
communist ideology to the equality of rights and opportunities in liberal
democratic ideologies that, unfortunately, everywhere and always eventually
transforms into its opposite – “inequality”. At the contemporary historical
stage in developed societies it comes about due to the combined influence of
the following key factors: 1) Synergetic
effects in economic systems (when the increase of the scale of economic
structures results in non-linear (accelerated) growth of their profitability indicators); 2) Unchecked
application of aggressive psychogenic demand generating tools by corporations; 3) Irreversible
increase of the cleavage between the starting conditions of children from
common families and those of financial and business elite; 4) Concentration
of administrative and power resources and enormous capital in the hand of a
small number of people who exert influence on legislative processes so as to
artificially create monopolies subordinated to them. The process of such transformation was described as
far back as in the biblical times: “I tell you that to everyone who has, more
will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be
taken away.” (Luke 19:26). A number of nations during their history have even
managed to develop mechanisms of diminishing the acuteness of this phenomenon.
For instance, in the Middle East there was a popular practice of Schmitat Ksafim [6] (erasure of
loans on the 7th year). The described transformation of “equality” into
“inequality” is exacerbated due to “the tragedy of the commons” [7]; since the
key instrument for overcoming it in modern Western countries – i.e.
representative democracy – in the information society is turning into an
imitation, a simulacrum and then transforms into its opposite as a result of
the fact that the powers that be via mass media get an opportunity to solidify
their dominant position, frame the public opinion and manipulate the electoral
masses so as to passivate, de-intellectualize and atomize them. Aristotle’s “middle class” society is identical to its
American ideal. This ideal, as well as the above described dynamics of
transformation of “equality” into “inequality” and the corresponding dynamics
of the change of number and structure of the US “middle class” are represented
in a video [8] and the fact that it has been viewed so many times attests to
the relevance of the issue for this country. And the burst of social activity
in the USA in 2011 that found expression in the large-scale action “Occupy Wall
Street” was directly related to the results of the above described
transformation and became an American counterpart of the Orange Revolution of
2004 in Ukraine. We believe that if American elites don’t make the right
conclusions, in about 20 years (as a result of the purposeful slowing down of
the corresponding social processes by US governmental institutions) this
country may witness a counterpart of the Ukrainian events of 2013–2014. And the
form of these events is likely to be much more acute due to legal weapons owned
by people and absolutely legal grounds contained in the Declaration of Independence [9]
approved by Congress on July 4, 1776: “We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit
of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are
instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of
these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to
institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and
organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness… But when a long train of
abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to
reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to
throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future
security.” Sadly, it has to be admitted that for the 20 years of
independence Ukraine has “caught up and surpassed America” in this respect
since it took the latter more than two
centuries to get to the present condition. The rapidness of the transformation
may be attributed to the lack of protective mechanisms and atomization of the
Ukrainian society, methodical e[termination of its
leading society stratum during the periods of Ruin for many centuries, its
negative selection and setback in development as a result of long-term
colonization by different empires and the totalitarian Bolsheviks’ state. To illustrate the ideal image of the society to be
constructed in the future with the prevailing fraction of the “middle class” of
“insiders” as declared in the program documents of most Ukrainian political
organizations (indeed no Ukrainian party calls for the construction of an
oligarchy!), we will resort to the graphic representation of the distribution
of wealth and correspondingly of authority and administrative powers among the
citizen of ideal Ukraine (chart 1), bearing in mind that such a distribution is
what any existing or new ideology in Ukraine is going to propagate so as to
attract as many followers as possible: Chart
1.
The social ideal of the Ukrainian society:
distribution of wealth and authority and administrative powers among the
“insiders”. Let us modify the static chart by introducing
desirable directions of the quantitative change of the “middle class” – i.e.
the “insiders” – that illustrate the dynamics of its progress towards the
social ideal of most classic ideologies. It should be pointed out that the direction and pace of the process of
the quantitative change of the middle class and the scope of wealth and
authority and administrative powers that belong to it are the key factors that
determine the progress towards or moving away from the social ideal of a
certain society. It is apparent that the process of quantitative change of
the middle class cannot be viewed separately from the process of change of the
gap between the revenues of the rich and the poor in a given society. It is
worth mentioning that the scope of assets that may belong to a citizen is
determined on the basis of direct or indirect authority and administrative
powers that s/he actually has. As it was justly noted by Tetiana
Montian [10], everyone owns only the assets they are
able to protect. In other words, the reduction of the scope
of authority and administrative powers of a citizen or organization results in
the loss of their assets, just like the loss of assets results in the loss of
authority and administrative powers. It is clear that the ability of
people to protect their assets is directly related to the level of independence
of the judicial power in the country, which in its turn depends on the actual
distribution of authority and administrative powers in the society and the
ability of its owners – representatives of the “middle class” – to knowingly
apply these powers as designed. At the same time, we will take into account the
dynamics of modification of the composition of the “middle class” which is
directly connected to the change of its number: its increase will inevitably
result in the redistribution of its composition fractions to the benefit of
entrepreneurs, farmers, managers, scientists, laborers,
peasants, etc. Apart from that, we will take into consideration the dynamics of
modification of the “middle class” structure as a sum of factors pertaining to
the interaction of its components, their organizations and representatives,
communication among them, establishment of the field of trust, etc., i.e. everything
that provides for its subjectness and ability to
effectively defend their interests. Chart
2. Illustration of the actual
distribution of wealth and authority and administrative powers among the
citizens of Ukraine. Chart 2 represents the actual distribution of the
national assets in the Ukrainian society, which in relative (not absolute!)
terms corresponds to the same distribution in the USA and unfortunately is
radically different from the social ideal illustrated by chart 1: less than one
percent of the superrich people – mostly oligarchs – own almost half of the
national wealth of Ukraine. Meanwhile, the share of the middle class is
steadily and irreversibly shrinking due to the increase of the number of the
poor, despite its slight increase due to the reduction of the number of the
rich as a result of legislative changes introduced due to oligarch lobby that
transfer the entire tax load onto the shoulders of the “middle class”. At the
same time oligarchs themselves avoid paying taxes by resorting to various legal
and illegal mechanisms as well as deliberately created legislative loopholes.
This attests to the deliberate rapid diminishment of the “insider” circle and
increase of the circle of “outsiders” in the Ukrainian society, which might be
well illustrated with the principle practically openly applied by the Ukrainian
government today: “Friends get everything, enemies get laws.” At the same time, the composition of the “middle
class” is radically changing. It includes more and more corrupt officials,
law-enforcement officers, criminals and shadow business representatives, that
is to say, those who serve the present oligarch clans. The change of the
structure is just as dramatic as that of the composition: interrelations are
lost, communication stops, and trust among its components is being destroyed. The concentration of power and wealth in the hands of
a small circle of oligarchs is a prerequisite for transformation of oligarchy
into a dictatorship [11] which after long-term social degradation and
stagnation after getting to the point when “the rulers are unable… and the
ruled ones are unwilling”, will rapidly by way of social disruptions transform
into a relatively short-term democracy with the restoration of «equality”
status quo via forced redistribution of
assets, which has always been fraught with bloody wars, revolutions and
collapses of states and empires. However, to shift from the existing condition to the
social ideal it is not enough to restore the «equality” status quo, it is also necessary
to change the direction of development of the processes of quantitative change
of the “middle class” and correspondingly its composition and structure: launch, stabilize and maintain for a long
period of time the processes of increase of the “middle class” and
normalization of its composition and structure. In the world and in Ukraine, various ideologies offer
countless concepts of tackling this issue, but all of them face the problem of
overcoming the resistance of oligarchic groups that have concentrated enormous
wealth, authority and administrative powers in their hands. Such concepts fall
into two broad categories – violent and non-violent ones. If the power elites in possession of assets, authority
and administrative powers realize that for a society to prosper, retain
stability and steadily develop it is necessary to include a certain critical
fraction of the “middle class” and competitive environment, social conflicts
that stem from the transformation of “equality” into “inequality” are settled
in an evolutionary mode, by way of legislatively stipulated redistribution of
the national assets to the benefit to the poorer population layers with the
consent of the elites. For instance, Switzerland – the most progressive country
in this respect – is considering the issue of introducing the monthly
«unconditional basic revenue» [12] of 2000 Euros, which will be granted to all
citizens regardless of their financial stand and employment, which, without a
doubt, is possible only because the power elites of this country have a
political will to effect such redistribution. Otherwise, as history have
proven, «equality” status quo is usually
achieved through social disruptions when the released energy of wide masses literally
overthrows the ruling class so as to substitute them with new leaders who
generously assure that they will give “factories to workers and land to
farmers”. Unfortunately Ukrainian power elites today do nothing
to increase the share of the “middle class” in the society. On the contrary,
they keep on destroying the competitive environment by lobbying corresponding
legislation and influencing decisions of government bodies so as to establish
their subordinate artificial monopolies in different spheres, which results in
general deprivation and correspondingly in the diminishment of the “middle
class”. By so doing, they doom the
country to the violent restoration of the «equality” status quo. This is
why a successful concept of settling the set task in Ukraine is the one that
can provide an evolutionary and non-violent way of achieving the «equality”
status quo in the conditions of reinforcement of the policy of Ukrainian
oligarchic clans aimed at their boundless enrichment via legalized unfair
redistribution of the national assets. Apart from that, unfortunately, history
also provides evidence that re-launch of the transformation of “equality” into
“inequality” is a systemic irreversibility right from the start of
establishment of the new power system that arises after social disruptions. This
is why along with launching the process of quantitative increase of the “middle
class” and normalization of its composition and structure, a key issue of the
set task is stabilization of this process and its long-term maintenance,
ideally until the aim – i.e. the described social ideal – is attained. Thus, the
MISSION of Ukraine in the World may consist in designing and successful
implementation of a concept of evolutionary construction of the social ideal,
i.e. a “middle class society”, from the starting point of oligarchy with an
extremely high level of concentration of authority and administrative powers
and financial resources by way of launching, stabilization and long-term
maintenance of the processes of “middle class” increase and normalization of its
composition and structure. Such a mission provides a simple and clear
answer to the question put by Ukrainian philosopher Serhiy
Datsiuk [13]: “What can Ukraine give to the world?”
At the same time, the designed concept that may bring success will have all
characteristics of a civilization idea [14] according to the philosopher’s
definition, i.e. idea that in the process of its unfolding and implementation
may generate new senses and give the humankind an answer to such questions as
“Why live?”, “Why create?” and “Why give birth?” The key issue is – who has to create such a concept and who can implement it? We
believe that if one or even a couple of authors generate an ideal concept, in
the information society their work it is very likely to be lost in the
avalanche-like information flow. People will not read it; if they do, they
won’t understand it; if they do, they won’t believe it. Only separate
individuals may believe it, unable to act together as an influential political
power so as to implement it. An emasculated form of this concept may also be
employed by old or new powers that be to achieve their own aims, which will
bring the opposite results to the ones expected by people. The above described
lets us claim that in the information society only large groups united in a
subject organization may become collective creators of new conceptual ideas of
the necessary complexity level since they can handle a significant scope of
information, knowledge of various fields and multifaceted understanding, which
is a physical impossibility for one individual, even if s/he is a genius. And
the most important thing is that these ideas as a result of collective work
will be clear and their “own” for the participants of such groups, they will
bear the maximum legitimacy for each of them and will have the potential of
equally motivating all of them to work in an effective and harmonized way so as
to implement the jointly produced aims. Based on the ideas of subject and organization in
different spheres of science, we will formulate an interdisciplinary definition
of the organization-subject. Thus, the
organization-subject is an active, multi-intelligent social
organism endued with senses, consciousness and will, capable of
self-reproduction for a long term that can cognize and change the world: - adequately perceive information from the outside and the
inside environments; - rationally process and analyze it; - realize its own interests; - carry
out cyclic regulative planning for their implementation, which consists in the
open choice of means, tasks, objectives and ideals; and - deliberately act in correspondence with the produced and accepted plans. Therefore, in our opinion, to implement the MISSION of Ukraine in the World it is first of all
necessary to design and construct subject organizations of the “middle class”,
which after their rise in the process of development and self-teaching will
generate and implement a concept of evolutionary construction of the social
ideal, i.e. the “middle class” society. Such an approach is radically different compared to
the traditional approaches to the construction of socio-political organizations
created as an instrument for implementation of the aims of ready-made political
myths; its advantage lies in the participatory democracy characteristic of the
information society, which makes it possible to make the ideology “alive”.
According to the definition of renowned Ukrainian scholar Georgiy
Pocheptsov [15], a “living” ideology gives real,
rather than ritual answers to the questions faced by the society. Obviously subject socio-political organization of the
“middle class” should provide for the equal distribution of authority and
administrative powers among most of its members, i.e. its “middle class” in the
circumstances where it is increasing (as shown in Chart 1). This is the
only way to achieve the social ideal and build the “middle class” society,
since under the Hermetic principle of Correspondence “As above, so below; as
below, so above to accomplish the miracle of the One Thing.” In other words,
using expressions of different disciplines as metaphors we can claim that such
an organization will become: a) a “crystallization center” that
will provide a sample for “crystallization” of the entire society; b) the micro-civilization that will give birth to a new
civilization; c) the new order for arranging the whole social system after
transition into a corresponding attractor; d) one of a
number of organizations that together will change the context of the political
environment in the society, which will open opportunities for global changes,
such as launch of the processes of quantitative increase of the “middle
class” and normalization of its
composition and structure; e) a factor
that will guarantee the establishment of stable loops of positive feedback,
which will result in the non-linear increase of the speed of quantitative
increase of the “middle class” and
normalization of its composition and structure; f) a new system that being more efficient and successful will
dislodge and substitute for the existing system. In the context of the latter point, I wonder if the
opposition leaders, who actively declare their intentions to substitute for the
present regime, realize that if the system of authority powers distribution
within their political organizations doesn’t change, if these powers are not
delegated to local bottom members, all their good intentions will boil down to
cosmetic modifications. The rise of such
subject organizations will be impeded by “the tragedy of the commons” as a
system-generating civilization problem” [16] which consists in the fact that a
large group of people, unlike a small one, cannot attain its interests. According to “The Logic of Collective Action” by Mancur Olson [17], it inevitably results in the formation
of a managing nucleus in a political organization and to concentration of all
authority and administrative powers in its hands in accordance with the “iron
law of oligarchy” by Michels [18] along with the
simultaneous passivation of rank-and-file members. The described principle of
power distribution in elite group organizations will be immediately reflected
in the society; it will launch and maintain its transformation process from the
condition represented in Chart 1 to that described in Chart 2. It is possible to overcome “the tragedy of the
commons” in socio-political organizations only by introducing free-of-conflict
algorithms of collective production, taking and implementation of decisions
within large groups of people that would reliably guarantee their “middle
class” the rightful share of the authority and administrative powers for its
every representative and eliminate the major flaw of traditional hierarchic
organizations, i.e. irreversible directive or informational outside management
of their leaders on the part of existing more powerful organization structures,
such as corporations, special services or criminal world. A sample of a
combination of such algorithms is a dynamic network [19] – a variable structure
of socio-political organizations. At the same time, any democratic society
implies existence of a number of socio-political organizations that unite
bearers of different political myths. Apparently, in the process of attaining
the social ideal by way of launching, stabilization and long-term maintenance
of the processes of increase of the “middle class” and normalization of its
composition and structure, the number of socio-political organizations that
represent interests of various groups and associations will keep on growing and
they will keep on competing for votes. Competition as a cultural archetype is
unstable – under regular conditions it tends to transform into confrontation,
which always results in the moral and social degradation of the society [20].
We believe that the key condition [21] for choosing cooperation strategies by
organized elite groups as opposed to confrontation strategies in the process of
their competitive interaction within the national elite consists in the
systemic elimination of possibilities for direct personal and intergroup
conflicts so as to keep the interaction of elite circles members in the
framework of social and political organizations on the equal-to-equal position
for a long term. It can be implemented only by substituting classic group
dynamics [22] in the primary units of socio-political organizations, for
instance by way of organizing the cooperation of its members at each stage as
that of representatives of different groups that are cyclically established and
dismissed in accordance with the algorithm of work of a dynamic network. Therefore, to
create subject socio-political organizations aimed primarily at the
construction of the social ideal, i.e. the “middle class” society within the
framework of a certain ideology, it is necessary to choose and apply the
organization structures that would provide for the active participation of the
“middle class” members of these organizations in producing, approval and
implementation of all decisions and could reliably secure their share of
authority and administrative powers for them. To attain this aim, it is
necessary to stipulate in the statutory documents the new organizational
structure, master its corresponding organization culture and apply it in the
daily activity of the organization. Without a doubt, it may be implemented only
by the consent of leaders of such organizations, who have to realize that it is
necessary to voluntarily reject the concentration of power in their hands by
introducing the suggested organization changes. In conclusion it may be noted: British philosopher of
Scottish origin Thomas Carlyle claimed that “All revolutions are conceived by
idealists, implemented by fanatics, and its fruits are stolen by scoundrels”.
The same applies to the transformation of “equality” into “inequality”. A simple
way to change such systemic regularities was suggested by American magician
Robert Orben, who said that if you want to have
something you have never had, you have to learn to do something you have never
done. Therefore, only successful long-term training in the sphere of new
organization culture and systemic new-type collective activity will give a
chance to Ukrainian public activists and politicians to qualitatively alter
themselves and their organizations. This, in its turn, will slow down the
process of transformation of “equality” into “inequality” in the Ukrainian
society, open means of social mobility for active citizens, lead to peaceful
and comprehensive harmonization of all social disagreements, which, as a
consequence, will make it possible to nip potential social conflicts in the
bud. References 1. ª. Ëàíþê.
Ôåíîìåí ïîë³òè÷íîãî ì³ôó: òåîðåòè÷íèé àñïåêò // «Çàõ³äíà àíàë³òè÷íà ãðóïà», 13.
12. 2010. – Ðåæèì äîñòóïó: http://zgroup.com.ua/article.php?articleid=4516 2.
Plakhtiy, Taras,
ÎÐÃÀͲÇÀÖ²ÉͲ ²ÍÑÒÐÓÌÅÍÒÈ ÀÐÕÅÒÈÏÍÎÃÎ ÓÏÐÀÂ˲ÍÍß ÑÎÖ²ÀËÜÍÈÌÈ ÑÈÑÒÅÌÀÌÈ (Organizational Tools for Archetypal Management of Social
Systems) (Jun 13, 2014). Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2542837 3.
Ç À Ê Î Í Ó Ê Ð À ¯ Í È «Ïðî Äåðæàâíèé óìí Óêðà¿íè» // ³äîìîñò³ Âåðõîâíî¿ Ðàäè Óêðà¿íè
(ÂÂÐ), 2003, N 24, ñò.163 4. Àð³ñòîòåëü.
Ïîë³òèêà / Ïåð. ç äàâíüîãð. òà ïåðåäì.
Î. Êèñëþêà. - Ê.: Îñíîâè, 2000. - 239 ñ. 5.
Ostrom, Elinor, Governing the
Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge
University Press, 1990. 6.
Çàêîíû ñåäüìîãî ãîäà — Øìèòà // Ðåæèì äîñòóïó: http://toldot.ru/tags/shmita/ 7. Garrett Hardin,
“The Tragedy of the Commons”,
Science, Vol. 162, No. 3859 (December 13, 1968), pp. 1243—1248. 5. 8.
Wealth Inequality in America // Available at YOUTUBE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM 9.
The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
// IN
CONGRESS, July 4, 1776 // Available at http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html 10.
Òåòÿíà Ìîíòÿí. Âëàñí³ñòü òà ìàéíîâ³ ïðàâà â Óêðà¿í³. ³äåîëåêö³ÿ, 22. 07. 2013. http://texty.org.ua/pg/video/movchun/read/47740/Vlasnist_ta_majnovi_prava_v_Ukrajini_Videolekcija 11.
È. Áîùåíêî «Îáðàç Áóäóùåãî» // Ðåæèì äîñòóïà: http://neuroquad.ru/book/iof/ 12.
Ãàçåòà «Ñåãîäíÿ.ua»
// 29. 12. 2013. // Ðåæèì äîñòóïó: http://www.segodnya.ua/world/v-shveycarii-dumayut-uzakonit-vydachu-2000-evro-kazhdomu-grazhdaninu-ezhemesyachno-485811.html 13.
Ñ. Äàöþê, Ñâ³òîâ³ ïðîåêòè òà ì³ñöå Óêðà¿íè â íèõ // Óêðà¿íñüêà ïðàâäà, 16. 10.
2013 // Ðåæèì äîñòóïó: http://blogs.pravda.com.ua/authors/datsuk/525e32b80ffdc/ 14.
Ñ. Äàöþê, ×è ñòàíå Óêðà¿íà öèâ³ë³çàö³ºþ, àáî ʳíåöü íàö³îíàëüíî¿ ³äå¿ //
Êóëüòóðîëîã³÷íèé æóðíàë «¯», ¹39, 2005 // Ðåæèì äîñòóïó: http://www.ji.lviv.ua/n39texts/dacyuk.htm 15.
Ã. Ïî÷åïöîâ, Ãëîáàëüí³ ïðîåêòè: êîíñòðóþâàííÿ
ìàéáóòíüîãî. – Íàâ÷àëüíèé ïîñ³áíèê – Ê.:Óêðà¿íñüêèé öåíòð ïîë³òè÷íîãî
ìåíåäæìåíòó, 2009. – 212 ñ. 16.
Plakhtiy, Taras, 'Tragedy of the
Commons' as a
System-Generating Civilization Problem
and Methods of Overcoming it
(September 8, 2013). Available
at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2323805 17. Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public
Goods and the Theory of Groups, Harvard University Press, Jr., 1965, 2nd ed.,
1971. 18. Michels, R. ([1911] 1962). Political Parties: A Sociological Study
of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. New York: Collier Books. 19.
Plakhtiy Taras, Variable Structure -
Dynamic Network as an Effective Alternative to the Hierarchical Construction of
Socio-Political Organizations (August 08, 2013). Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2308438 20. Ò. Ïëàõò³é. Ïðèðîäà ïðîöåñ³â
ìîðàëüíîãî ³ ñîö³àëüíîãî çàíåïàäó óêðà¿íñüêîãî ñóñï³ëüñòâà òà ñïîñîáè ¿õ ïîäîëàííÿ // «Çàõ³äíà àíàë³òè÷íà ãðóïà», 02. 10. 2012. – Ðåæèì äîñòóïó: http://zgroup.com.ua/print.php?articleid=5257 21. Plakhtiy Taras, Conditions of Choosing
Cooperation Strategies, Rather than Confrontation Strategies, By Organized
Elite Groups in the Process of Their Competitive Interaction (February 7,
2013). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2270791 22. Plakhtiy,
Taras, The Procedure of Group
Work in Two- and Three-Dimensional Dynamic Networks (May 30, 2014). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2544458 Taras Plakhtiy taras.plakhtiy@gmail.com |