It is available to study social realty objectively only by searching and detecting of permanent changing in it. The purpose of finding of substantial “order” in society gives rise to distance with social reality, takes away the searcher from veritable of state of affairs. Scientific studying of social reality run through rivalry, competition, exertion and antagonism assumes to emphasize the phenomenon which is the subject of scientific discussions and it demands rapt attention. This is the phenomenon of social and ethnic conflict.
What is the nature of social conflict? What is the ethnic conflict? What is the role of conflict in society? Isn’t it the cause of the social contradictions? Should the society solve this social conflict or get used to living in the conditions of it? Does the social conflict promote the development of society or does it hinder it?
These and many other questions demand deep comprehension and defining of social conflict, the reasons of its origin, means of its solution and, in the upshot, revealing of the role and significance of social conflict in society.
Commonly, the conflict is a resisting and struggle. The ethnic conflict is the variety and particular form of the social conflict. Social conflict is the result of such social system, in which the aims and intentions of its element become incompatible. According to this statement, the clash in society is inevitable phenomenon which it’s necessary to make adequate relations with.
The problem of the nature of conflict has interested the thinkers from the high antiquity. When the elucidation of the nature of conflict it has formed at least two points of view in the history: Aristotle’s and Hobbes’s. According to Aristotle’s point of view the reason of the conflict is social system and the character of distribution of goods. In Hobbes’ opinion the conflict is due to the natural equality of people. The equality of people in their pretensions gives a rise to the clash, because the objects of claims cannot belong to everyone at the same time.
The problems of social and ethnic conflicts in the structure of the modern theoretical knowledge take a peculiar place. This situation was contributed by the ideas expressed by Max Weber, Emil Durkheim, Talco Parsons, Neil Smelser, Ralf Darendorf and others.
The peculiar interest and requirements in studying of social and ethnic conflicts is connected with that situation in the 1990s after the disintegration of Soviet Union when new social and political formations embarked on difficult reforms where most often used the concepts of market and democracy. Exactly for market and democracy the conflict protrudes as a general concept. “New interests of individuals, groups, organizations, social institutes and social strata are formed by means of conflict” [1].
The studying of social conflict is not in vain. Abroad has accumulated vast experience in this matter. In advanced researches of scholars abroad the problem of social conflicts has elaborated in the context of the theory of human demands. If in the past such leading figures of the science of conflict as Darendorf, Cozer, Deautch and others asserted that in the foundation of all conflicts was the question of power and authority, conflicts exist in connection with distribution of resources and in consequence of differences in purposes, the cause of conflict among the groups of people can be claims of dominating of those values, in the newest literature the problem of nature of the social conflict and its solution mostly examined through the prism of the satisfaction of human requirements.
At any level of social life natural and universal requirements of a person and social and national groups is a solid root cause of all conflict and controversial situations which begin from problems of mode of life and ending with international difficulties. Furthermore, the requirement of security, confession, identity, social belonging, prosperity, freedom are inherent to every individual, social groups, ethnic formations, societies and countries.
The vast majority of researchers consider that not only requirements can be the source of conflicts. The cause, according the researches, is in the deficiency and in scantiness of adequate means or methods of satisfaction of existing demands.
For having a solution of social and ethnic conflicts a big importance has a following circumstance: in connection with the decision of the needs of structuring of problems it’s arisen many questions, among them important the issue of hierarchy of needs. Ordering the structure of needs most researchers distinguish fundamental (central, essential) and second (derivative, peripheral) components.
The importance of indicated distribution of needs to the degree of significance is in the process of solving the conflict it’s clearing up the issue of degree of satisfaction of needs in the dependence of its place in hierarchical staircase and also according to the depth of solution of disputable problem.
In terms of classification of needs, A. Maslow emphasized that the highest and social requirements are closely connected with the physiological needs. As noted N. Kuznetsov, “ based on the ideas of the human person and the integrity of its development, Maslow builds the hierarchy of needs, convincingly showing the value of satisfaction of the physiological needs: it gets rid the organism of it predominance and gives the opportunity of the development and displaying of other, more social requirements” [2].
In ethnic relations the fundamental questions are the needs in ethnic identity, safety, freedom and well-fare, and derivative components are the needs in acknowledgement, esteem, social membership and self-actualization.
The ethnic identification is a peculiar social and psychological mean of ethnos protection from alien cultural influence and preservation of it as an independent ethno-cultural unit.
Psychological factors take an important place in interethnic relations. To a marked degree psychological (ethno-psychological) stereotypes are irrational and unverified, they can be neither proved nor disproved, and any reasonable arguments and attempts of the reassurance usually are powerless. For that reason, in the conditions of domination of consciousness stereotypes peaceful and mutually acceptable solution of problems extremely difficult. Nevertheless, management of such situations is possible. For this, it is necessary to know psychology of intergroup relations.
The ethnic (ethno-psychological) stereotype advocates as a kind of system-status indicator of the state of interethnic relations. It is such a form, which psychologically reflects and regulates interethnic relations. The ethnic stereotype explaining an ordinary level of ethnic relations, is extremely emotionally saturated and doesn’t submit to arbitrary change and also has powerful psychic energy. As a concrete manifestation of the ethnic stereotype it is can be given examples of well-known Osh events, Fergana tragedy. Here the ethnic stereotype assumed the role of the unifier of the community rallying and directing it against the other community. Because of its spontaneity, ungovernability ethnic stereotypes, as evidenced by the well-known tragic events in our country, are extremely dangerous and lead to the negative consequences in interethnic relations. In this respect it is detected the correlation of ethnic stereotype with national self-awareness and it can lead to the interethnic imbalance.
Ethnic stereotype is a specific concept, referring to the more general generic concept of an ethnic image, which is called to fix characteristic features of an ethnic psychology. As an every image, ethnic image is objective according to its source- the object of reflection, and it is subjective according the way of existence. The bearer of an ethnic image is ethnic community.
The main component of the national self-awareness is national or ethnic self-identification, which is self-selection on the basis of comparison. This peculiarity was noticed by famous anthropologist Dj. de Vos, according whom ethnic community is realizing itself the group of people, which adheres to common traditions, which aren’t associated with other groups relating with.
In present conditions of raising of the national self-awareness, national revival in Uzbekistan it is risen significance distinguishing function of ethnic-psychological factors, which influence on interethnic relations and the necessity of close inspection and influence on social development and become more actual.
References:
- Здравомыслов А. Г. Социология конфликта. -М.: Аспект-Пресс, 1996.
- Кузнецов Н. С. Человек: потребности и ценности. — Свердловск: Изд-во Урал.Ун-та, 1992.
