Abasov Mir Faraj
PhD of political sciences, doctoral researcher in economics, Azerbaijan University of Tourism
and Management, Baku, Azerbaijan
THE DIGITAL ERA
Earlier 20 century, sociologist Pitirim Sorokin suggested a theory of socio-cultural dynamics as follows:
development of social systems and their transition from one state into another occurred under the influence
of values prevailing in society. Note that social and cultural values are generating one or another type of
society (even civilization) while evolution of values leads society to a turning point of development where
these values compulsorily disintegrate or go to a new level of functioning. Cited as example may be the
collapse of the USSR and radical transformation of the Chinese economy.
Added to this can be an interesting conclusion: values may contribute to the further development of
society and equally to its destruction. An eloquent testimony to the alternative cited above is the 50th World
Economic Forum in Davos marked by conflict of values of US President Donald Trump and young opponent
of «climatic apocalypse» from Sweden, Greta Tundberg:
«We must say «по» to restless prophets of the judgment day. Now’s not the time for pessimism. Now is
the time for optimism. The United States is joining the international initiative «One trillion trees» meant to
restore forests across the globe» -
«Planting trees is a good cause, yet, it’s not enough ...Our house is on fire, and your inactivity is stirring
up the fire. And we ask you to get started as if you love your children best of all» -
What’s happened to the mankind? It has lost its progressive advance, and moves toward a period of
permanent stagnation and system crises. Our reply to this question is positive; however, it is not sufficient,
for it is essential to find out the cause of the current situation and identify causers. Neoliberalism as the last
stage of capitalism development is charged with the situation. But why?
Well-known post-capitalism follower Paul Mason noted that «In a short span of time the information
revolution collides with all aspects of civil life: work and leisure became low-observable concepts; work and
wage are in lower dependence; mutual relation between the production of commodities and services and
capital accumulation is no longer axiom. It ought to be noted that digital networks originally anticipated to
pave the way for a new dynamic era of capitalism fell short of these expectations and began smashing
traditional structures (1).
According to Mason (2), this collapse runs through four directions: effect of zero financial costs nullifies
cost price of information goods which, in turn, leads to parallel drop of cost price in production area and
services; radical automation of physical work winds up approx. 47% of job creation or 45% of traditional
professions; large-scale network effect in the information production redefining the nature of relations
between employers and employees with all ensuing consequences for capitalism; beginning of permanent
process of potential democratization of information proper.
As is seen, the information revolution shook capitalism foundations and gave grounds to predict onset
of a new formation capable of operating without market or on condition of its radical transformation (3). Note
that instead of the fourth industrial revolution there developed parasitical and poorly operating information
capitalism with its threadbare and ineradicable monopoly profits and anti-competitive behavior. It takes a
revolution to change the human worldview. What needs to be done for the development of new formation?
What are conditions promoting revolution in the human worldview?
In turn, Francis Fukuyama, once prophet of neoliberalism, believes that the system has fallen into
decline. The US democracy has been caught in a bind due to some factors. In particular, Fukuyama touches
upon the system of elections in the United States held by an electoral college which do not always reflect
views of the majority: they twice elected President of the country, a nominee that received a minority of votes
than his opponent. Or impeding access by the banking sector in the course of US economy development
through efforts of lobbyist organizations. Fukuyama admits that the world he imagined to be after a fall of
communism (a unified world without borders and with liberal principles-based economy) is far from being
transformed into reality, hence, there is something wrong with evolution. To his thinking, «something wrong»
is the crisis of identity, fear of losing original history, national values and singularity.
It will be remarked that modern economists (mainly far rights) prefer at best to bury capitalism as was
made by Samir Amin. He voiced criticism of global capitalism infinitely exploiting resources of country’s
periphery and protesting against the dehumanizing effect of the market, atomizing the society and destroying
the solidarity. In so doing, he described the capitalism as «not end but departure» from history.
To be noticed is that liberal and vocal supporter of capitalism, Paul Krugman, in his article lays an
emphasis on the current state of economic and tax system of the United States. Note that even most devoted
advocates of capitalism fall prey to it in the course of struggle for resources and power. An eloquent testimony
to this is the case of Muhammad Yunus, father of present-day microfinancing, recipient of the Nobel Peace
Prize for the creation of a model of economic and social development «from bottom». Allegedly emancipator
of poor Bangladesh residents from collapse and requisitions, Yunus actually changed their forms by
substituting large credits for smaller ones with more loyal rates. In so doing, he turned usury into a main
instrument of money making for the rich. The bottom line was that he was suspended from managing his own
progeny - Grameen Bank.
In the meanwhile, the new system is in the process of its formation and approbation. Actively self-
developing, most virtual and simultaneously really life-integrated, the system is called the political-economic
system of digitalism. Like capitalism or communism, the system of digitalism has its own «prophets», Engels
and Marx - Zuckerberg, Gates and Jobs.
We had first faced with a term «digital» at the turn of the two centuries. Remark though that related
terms - digital recording, data medium, digital signal, computer systems and information transmission systems
are widely used and deeply integrated into all spheres of our life. Unnoticeably, quite real objects and subjects
of inter-human activity have been imbued with virtual elements. As a result, the traditional world is likely to
get absorbed, reprocessed and built in a new world formation. If earlier systems presupposed unification of
individuals for furthering global goals, the digitalism is standing aside large human congregations.
One must bear in mind that «digitals» are groups of self-contained extraverts living in their own life
unprepared to share their views within the general public. For communication purposes they prefer to rely on
their own communication lines and social networks. In so doing, they are all in comfort, independently
regulate and specify their relations with the outside world.
Henceforth, the digitalists (consciously or unconsciously) are engaged in pursuing a sole aim: to liberate
the humanity from physical work and completely break off any real ties between groups of persons and
separate individuals. In other words, it is as follows: plants without workers; cars without drivers; hotels
without hotel servants, etc. The mankind not merely tames neuronets and robots, as was the case with
mechanical systems, steam engines, electricity and ...animals. The mankind merely coalesces with this
system. In fact, there is integration of the virtual system into biomass.
It must be acknowledged that social networks (low level of digital world) are currently responsible for
greater number of issues than political parties. Besides, social networks have their own leaders, measures of
success (number of subscribers); they are capable of making immediate estimates of one or another
information. At present, social networks cope well with many functions of the state, political parties,
educational institutions, mass media, etc.
It should be remembered that today elections to municipalities are unessential: it is possible to vote on
the basis of IP address and a single registration by means of «likes» and «dislikes» for any idea or proposal
of your district residents.
The essential point to remember is that at present mass media is dying away, individuals are poised to
read, hear, «stream» online, so outdated education process will soon be thrown on the scrap-heap. Why should
we pay tuition fees for a prestigious university if we can now download, connect and watch online, ask
questions. Even better, tomorrow we can program in our brain the strength of F. Fukuyama or Bill Gates’
intellect copied on a data medium in their lifetime. There’ll be no need in studies, it’ll be suffice «to inject
into the brain» a mentality of a thinker you are in need of; the same is true of languages where you can avail
of online translation (in use already); there’ll be no need in any jobs: it’s enough to press a button and a robot
will take it as a signal to start working. This will happen tomorrow.
Today we are faced with intriguingly political and economic processes as precursors of digitalism. From
now onward, we are aware of Twitter-Diplomacy; we need no press-secretaries; we keep abreast of one or
another leader in Twitter or Facebook. Also, all issues will be brought up for censure at social networks, and
these issues will be heard by the powers that be with prompt response. The point is that the old generation
does not fully understand who this - social networks is, and for this reason they remain wary of it.
We have seen revolutions made by means of social networks. The point to be emphasized is that Maydan,
«Arab spring», etc. would be held differently if there were not a single center for protesters coordination. We
see pre-verbal children who are skillful in using Smartphone’s and iPads. Spiritual bonds between humans
are growing weak, emotions and experiences of digitalist generations are moving from the real life to the
It is worth remembering that the system of digitalism has no place for sex, nation, skin color or otherwise.
Note that digitalists are minded to set all these aside and create their own world without countries, borders,
nations, languages, etc. Their realm is limited to bits and bytes, network; and their skin color, race and sex by
some strange freak.
It is worth pointing out that from now on the entity is set to be divided into old and new worlds. At some
point in time when the basic system of digitalism sets up, currencies and methods of their earning (Bitcoin,
Etheriom, etc.) are approved, apps are developed to make life easiest (calling forward traffic, food delivery,
information retrieval, etc.), dronetization and robotics of working process will be over; powerful routine
network be triggered and social platforms will take control over political, economic and spiritual life of
masses. It is at this instant that the split between digitalists and the rest of the world will be carried through.
Mason Paul. The New Spirit of Post-Capitalism. Joint publication by
Social Europe andlPG-
http s: //www. s oci al europ e. eu/
Mason Paul. The end of capitalism has begun. The Guardian. Fri, 17 Jul, 2015.
Booth Adam. The Sharing Economy, the Future of Jobs, and “PostCapitalism”. In Defence of
Marxism. 02 October 2015.
Shermuxamedova, N. "Philosophy and methodology of science." Tashkent: Publishing House of the
National University of Uzbekistan (2005): 21-27.
Namazova, Yulduz Muzapparovna. "MINISTRY OF PUBLIC EDUCATION AND
CONFESSIONAL (RELIGIOUS) SCHOOLS IN TURKESTAN." Scientific and Technical Journal of
Namangan Institute of Engineering and Technology 1.7 (2019): 135-139.
Нишанова, О. (2023). Влияние процессов глобализации на этническую культуру, in Library,
7(1), 164-167. извлечено от https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/archive/article/view/21867