Social progress - ascent to more complex forms of social life; a change in social relations leading to increased social freedom and social justice.
The idea that changes in the world are occurring in a certain direction arose in ancient times and was initially purely evaluative. In the development of pre-capitalist formations, the diversity and severity of political events were combined with an extremely slow change in the socio-economic foundations of social life. For most ancient authors, history is a simple sequence of events behind which there is something unchangeable; in general, it is depicted either as a regressive process descending from the ancient “golden age” (Hesiod, Seneca), or as a cyclical cycle repeating the same stages (Plato, Aristotle, Polybius). Christian historiosophy views history as a process moving in a certain direction, as a movement towards a certain pre-established goal that lies outside the framework of actual history. The idea of historical progress was not born from Christian eschatology, but from its denial.
The social philosophy of the rising bourgeoisie, reflecting the real acceleration of social development, was filled with optimism, the confidence that the “kingdom of reason” lies not in the past, but in the future. First of all, progress was noticed in the field of scientific knowledge: F. Bacon and R. Descartes already taught that there is no need to look back to the ancients, that scientific knowledge of the world is moving forward. Then the idea of progress extends to the sphere of social relations (Turgot, Condorcet).
Enlightenment theories of progress substantiated the breakdown of feudal
relations, on their basis numerous systems of utopian socialism were formed. But historicism was alien to the rationalistic theories of progress. The progress of society in the theories of the Enlightenment was teleological in nature; they elevated the transitory ideals and illusions of the bourgeoisie to the rank of the ultimate goal of history. At the same time, Vico and especially Rousseau already pointed out the contradictory nature of historical development. Romantic historiography of the early 19th century, in contrast to the rationalism of the Enlightenment, put forward the idea of slow organic evolution, not allowing outside interference, and the thesis of the individuality and incomparability of historical eras. However, this historicism was one-sidedly turned to the past and often acted as an apology for archaic relations. Hegel gave a deeper interpretation of progress, speaking out both against the Enlightenment’s neglect of the past and against the false historicism of the romantic “historical school.” However, understanding historical progress as the self-development of the world spirit, Hegel could not explain the transition from one stage of social development to another. His philosophy of history turns into a theodicy, the justification of God in history.
Dialectical materialism has developed a fundamentally different approach to this problem, put forward and justified an objective criterion of progress. Progress is not some independent essence or transcendental goal of historical development. The concept of progress makes sense only in relation to a specific historical process or phenomenon in a strictly defined frame of reference. The goals, aspirations and ideals in the light of which people evaluate historical development themselves change in the course of history, so such assessments often suffer from subjectivity and ahistoricity. The general trend of historical development is the transition from systems with a predominance of natural determination to systems with a predominance of socio-historical determination, which is based on the development of productive forces. A higher level of development of productive forces corresponds to more complex forms of production relations and social organization as a whole, and an increased role of the subjective factor. The degree of mastery by society of the spontaneous forces of nature, expressed in the growth of labor productivity, and the degree of liberation of people from the oppression of spontaneous social forces, socio-political inequality and spiritual underdevelopment - these are the most general criteria of historical progress. In the light of this criterion, socio-economic formations represent natural stages in the progressive development of humanity. But this process is contradictory, and its types and pace are different. Hence the growth of social pessimism, numerous philosophical and sociological theories of the twentieth century,
directly or indirectly denying progress and proposing to replace it
the concept of either the ideas of cyclical circulation (Spengler, Toynbee, Sorokin), or the “neutral” concept of “social change”. Wide
Various concepts of the “end of history” are also becoming widespread.
and pessimistic dystopias. In the same spirit they interpret
many global problems of our time - environmental, demographic, food, energy, raw materials, threat
nuclear war, maintaining mental and physiological health
population.
In conclusion, we note that the application of social criteria
progress in the study of the development of society should be comprehensive and not in relation to the economic, social, political or spiritual spheres of society, but as a whole, i.e. all spheres are considered as parts of a single whole, as subsystems of a single social system that has its own history.
Control questions:
1. What is social progress?
2. Hegel’s interpretation of progress?
3. General trend of historical development?
4. General criteria of historical progress?
5. What nature should the application of criteria of social progress have?
There are a number of eternal questions that have long troubled minds. Who are we? Where did they come from? Where we are going? These are just some of the problems facing broad disciplines such as philosophy.
In this article we will try to understand what humanity is doing on Earth. Let's get acquainted with the opinions of researchers. Some of them view history as a systematic development, others - as a cyclical closed process.
Philosophy of history
This discipline takes as its basis the question of our role on the planet. Is there any meaning at all to all the events that happen? We are trying to document them and then link them into a single system.
However, who is actually the actor? Does a person create a process, or do events control people? Philosophy of history tries to solve these and many other problems.
During the research process, concepts of historical development were identified. We will discuss them in more detail below.
It is interesting that the term “philosophy of history” first appears in the works of Voltaire, but the German scientist Herder began to develop it.
The history of the world has always interested humanity. Even in the ancient period, people appeared who tried to record and comprehend the events taking place. An example would be the multi-volume work of Herodotus. However, then many things were still explained by “divine” help.
So, let's delve deeper into the features of human development. Moreover, there are only a couple of viable versions as such.
Two points of view
The first type of teachings refers to unitary-stage teachings. What is meant by these words? Proponents of this approach see the process as unified, linear and constantly progressing. That is, both individuals and the entire human society as a whole, which unites them, are distinguished.
Thus, according to this view, we all go through the same stages of development. And Arabs, and Chinese, and Europeans, and Bushmen. Only at the moment we are at different stages. But in the end everyone will come to the same state of developed society. This means that you either need to wait until the others move up the ladder of their evolution, or help them with this.
The tribe must be protected from encroachments on territory and values. Therefore, a warrior class was formed.
The largest faction were ordinary artisans, farmers, cattle breeders - the lower strata of the population.
However, during this period people also used slave labor. Such disenfranchised farm laborers included everyone who was included in their number for various reasons. It was possible to fall into debt slavery, for example. That is, not to give the money, but to work it off. Captives from other tribes were also sold to serve the rich.
Slaves were the main labor force of this period. Look at the pyramids in Egypt or the Great Wall of China - these monuments were erected precisely by the hands of slaves.
The era of feudalism
But humanity developed, and the triumph of science was replaced by the growth of military expansion. A layer of rulers and warriors of stronger tribes, fueled by priests, began to impose their worldview on neighboring peoples, at the same time seizing their lands and imposing tribute.
It became profitable to take ownership not of powerless slaves who could rebel, but of several villages with peasants. They worked in the fields to feed their families, and the local ruler provided them with protection. For this, they gave him part of the harvest and livestock raised.
Concepts of historical development briefly describe this period as a transition of society from manual production to mechanized production. The era of feudalism basically coincides with the Middle Ages and
During these centuries, people mastered both external space - discovering new lands, and internal space - exploring the properties of things and human capabilities. The discovery of America, India, the Great Silk Road and other events characterize the development of mankind at this stage.
The feudal lord who owned the land had governors who interacted with the peasants. This freed up his time and could spend it for his own pleasure, hunting or military robberies.
But progress did not stand still. Scientific thought moved forward, as did social relations.
Industrial society
The new stage of the concept of historical development is characterized by greater human freedom compared to the previous ones. Thoughts begin to arise about the equality of all people, about the right of everyone to a decent life, and not vegetation and hopeless work.
In addition, the first mechanisms appeared that made production easier and faster. Now what a craftsman used to take a week to do could be created in a couple of hours, without involving a specialist or paying him money.
The first factories and plants appeared in place of the guild workshops. Of course, they cannot be compared with modern ones, but for that period they were simply excellent.
Modern concepts of historical development correlate the liberation of humanity from forced labor with its psychological and intellectual growth. It is not for nothing that entire schools of philosophers, natural science researchers and other scientists arise at this time, whose ideas are still valued today.
Who hasn't heard of Kant, Freud or Nietzsche? After the Great French Revolution, humanity began to talk not only about the equality of people, but also about the role of everyone in the history of the world. It turns out that all previous achievements were obtained through human efforts, and not with the help of various deities.
Post-industrial stage
Today we live in a period of greatest achievements, if we look at the historical stages of development of society. Man learned to clone cells, set foot on the surface of the Moon, and explored almost every corner of the Earth.
Our time provides an inexhaustible fountain of opportunities, and it is not for nothing that the second name of the period is information. Nowadays, so much new information appears in a day that previously was not available in a year. We can no longer keep up with this flow.
Also, if you look at production, almost everyone makes mechanisms. Humanity is more occupied in the service and entertainment sectors.
Thus, based on the linear concept of historical development, people move from understanding the environment to becoming familiar with their inner world. It is believed that the next stage will be based on the creation of a society that was previously described only in utopias.
So, we have examined modern concepts of historical development. We also understood more deeply. Now you know the main hypotheses about the evolution of society from the primitive communal system to the present day.
Socio-historical development - an extremely complex, multilateral process that takes place over a fairly long historical period and involves economic, political-legal, spiritual-moral, intellectual and many other components that form a certain integrity.
Its difficulty lies, firstly, in isolating the actual social aspect corresponding to the subject of sociology as a science, and, secondly, in determining the very content of social development in the course of the historical process. Typically, sociologists focus on the socio-historical development of a particular social entity. Such a social subject can be an individual, a specific society (for example, Russian) or a group of societies (European, Latin American societies), a social group, a nation, a social institution (education system, family), a social organization or any combination thereof (political parties, national economic enterprises, commercial and industrial companies). Finally, such a subject may be certain trends relating to all of humanity as a social subject.
In sociology, the greatest interest is in the socio-historical development of various societies as fairly integral social units. It is clear that it consists of the socio-historical development of individual social groups, classes, other communities, organizations, institutions, cultural patterns, etc. At the same time, at each stage of socio-historical development, society represents a certain integrity for description and analysis which usually uses various concepts that can be combined into two main groups - “type of society” and “civilization”. These concepts characterize special qualitative states of society at certain stages of its socio-historical development.
- it is a system of certain structural units - social communities, groups, institutions, etc., interconnected and interacting with each other on the basis of some common social ideals, values, and norms.
There are different classifications of types of societies. The most elementary classification is the division of societies into simple And complex, proposed back in the 19th century. G. Spencer. In his view, societies move over time from a state of vague homogeneity to a state of definite heterogeneity with increasing differentiation and integration of personality, culture and social connections. Let us say right away that such a division is quite arbitrary, since the “simplest” society is a very complex organism, a very complex system. Nevertheless, it is obvious that societies belonging to the primitive communal system are much more simply organized than, for example, modern developed society.
One of the most common divisions of society today, formulated at one time K. A. Saint-Simon, O. Comte, E. Durkheim and many other sociologists, - division into traditional And industrial society. The concept of “traditional society” is usually used to designate pre-capitalist stages of development, when society does not yet have a developed industrial complex, is based mainly on an agricultural economy, is socially sedentary, and traditional forms of life activity and patterns of behavior are passed on from generation to generation almost unchanged. Industrial society is the result of widespread industrialization, which gives rise to urbanization, occupational specialization, mass literacy, and a general increase in the educational level of the population. This society relies primarily on the industrial economy, a developed system of production and social-class division of labor, and market relations; it is dynamic, characterized by constant scientific, technical and technological inventions and innovations, and a high level of social mobility. We will continue the topic of the characteristics of industrial society in the next paragraph.
German sociologist F. Tennis introduced another important distinction into science - between community (Gemeinschaft) And society (Gese Use haft). The community is characterized by the predominance of informal, personal connections between individuals and small groups, neighbors, relatives, friends, the dominance of informal institutions - social norms, value orientations, patterns of behavior, which are also emotionally charged. Society is based to a decisive extent on relationships and connections of a different kind. Their principle is rational exchange, the awareness of the utility and value that one person has, can or will have for another and which that other person discovers, realizes and perceives. In such a society, formal connections and relationships established by law predominate, although connections and relationships typical of the community are partially preserved. Social development is presented by Tönnies as a process of increasing rationality, institutionalized, and the direction of development is from community to society.
Let us note one more division of types of society. Famous modern philosopher and sociologist K. Popper divides societies into closed And open. The first are authoritarian, sedentary social organisms that do not allow political and social opposition to the authorities; they lack freedom of speech and freedom of information. An open society is a democratic society, dynamically developing, open to innovation, freedom of speech and criticism, easily adapting to external changing circumstances. Open societies, according to Popper, are a more developed, more democratic type of social structure than closed societies.
I. Wallerstein- one of the leading modern Western sociologists - considers it necessary to highlight the so-called "historical systems". Each of them is based on a certain type of division of labor, develops various institutions (economic, political, sociocultural), which ultimately determine the implementation of the basic principles of the system, as well as the socialization of individuals and groups. One can find different kinds of historical systems, Wallerstein argues. One of them is the capitalist world economy (the so-called modernity), which has existed for about 500-600 years. The other is the Roman Empire. Maya structures in Central America represent the third. There are countless small historical systems. Real social change, from Wallerstein's point of view, occurs when a transition occurs from one historical system to another. The disappearance of a system is determined not by the action of internal contradictions, but by the ineffectiveness of the way it functions, which opens the way to more advanced methods. Nowadays there are a number of processes that “undermine the basic structures of the capitalist world economy and thereby bring a crisis situation closer,” “a period of the end of the historical system is observed,” the main feature of which “is not the accumulation of capital, but the priority of endless accumulation of capital.” What happens next? We are “at a point of systemic bifurcation” and even “seemingly insignificant actions of groups of people here and there can change the vectors and institutional forms of the system in various ways.”
The identification of different types of societies allows us to consider socio-historical development from different positions, from different points of view and in different aspects as a multifaceted process with many signs and indicators.
If we summarize these and other judgments of sociologists, as well as historians, economists, and philosophers, then in a brief schematic form we can distinguish the following main socio-historical types of societies:
- hunter-gatherer communities, existing through hunting and collecting “gifts of nature”;
- agricultural societies cultivating land and artificially growing plants;
- pastoral societies based on breeding domestic animals;
- traditional societies, based mainly on agricultural production and handicrafts. Cities, private property, classes, state power, writing, trade arise in them;
- industrial societies, whose economy is based primarily on industrial machine production;
- post-industrial societies, replacing industrial ones. In them, as many authors believe, the economic basis is not so much the production of physical goods, but rather the production of knowledge, information, and the service sector.
This typology as a whole is quite widely accepted by representatives of the social and human sciences in different countries. It is often used to construct more detailed and specialized concepts of socio-historical development.
Using the concept "civilization" in sociology, cultural studies and social philosophy, various types of social and cultural structure of societies are also distinguished. But if the concept of “type of society” emphasizes, first of all, the nature of social structures, social relations and connections, then the concept of “civilization” emphasizes the socio-cultural, spiritual, religious characteristics of different societies. Close to this concept is the term "cultural-historical type" which was substantiated by the Russian philosopher and sociologist of the 19th century. I. Ya. Danilevsky. He was one of the first social thinkers to try to move away from the image of socio-historical development as a flat linear process and believed that peoples form specific cultural and historical types that differ significantly from each other. He considered the main criteria for identifying types "affinity of languages", political independence, territorial, psycho-ethnographic, religious unity, forms of economic activity and some other features. He included among such types: Egyptian, Chinese, Assyro-Babylonian, Indian, Iranian, Jewish, Greek, Roman, Arabian, German-Roman (European). Each type goes through the stages of its life cycle - origin, development, flourishing, decline (destruction), after which a new cultural-historical type moves to the forefront of world-historical development. From Danilevsky’s point of view, the formation of the Slavic type, the Slavic civilization, for which he predicted a great future, has been taking place for several centuries. Despite a number of theoretical naiveties and political conservatism, Danilevsky’s concept gave a non-linear image of socio-historical development, suggesting the presence of historical zigzags, retreats and even significant destruction of accumulated cultural values.
The idea of the cyclical development of civilizations was later continued in the works of the German philosopher O. Spengler and especially the English historian A. Toynba. Every civilization, but Toynbee (and he counted 21 civilizations in the history of mankind, including 13 main ones), goes through a closed life cycle - from origin to decay and death. Currently, in his opinion, five main civilizations can be distinguished: Chinese, Indian, Islamic, Western and Russian. He paid special attention to the causes of the collapse of civilizations. In particular, he believed that the “creative elite”, the bearer of the vital force of a given culture, at some point turns out to be unable to solve newly emerging socio-economic and historical problems, turns into a minority, alienated from the population and dominating it by the right of strong power , not authority. These processes ultimately destroy civilization.
In recent years, in Russian sociology (and in the social and human sciences in general), the concept of civilization has become increasingly widespread when characterizing socio-historical development. This is primarily due to the fact that the Marxist concept of socio-economic formation, which dominated in Soviet social science, was rejected in absolute terms by the overwhelming majority of social scientists as overly politicized and simplifying the process of socio-historical development. Currently in the domestic scientific literature concept of civilization usually used in three meanings:
- a fairly high stage of the sociocultural level of a particular society, following barbarism;
- sociocultural type (Japanese, Chinese, European, Russian and other civilizations);
- the highest modern level of socio-economic, technological, cultural and political development (contradictions of modern civilization).
Evolutionary types of societies
To better understand the society that surrounds us and in which we live, let us trace the development of societies from the very beginning of their existence.
Simplest societies were called hunter-gatherer societies. Here men hunted animals and women collected edible plants. Apart from this, there was only this basic division of the group by gender. Although male hunters enjoyed authority in these groups, female gatherers brought more food to the group, perhaps 4/5 of all food obtained. The main unit of the organization was the clan and family. The basis for most relationships was family ties by blood or marriage. Since the family in these societies was the only clearly defined social institution, it performed functions that in modern societies are distributed among many specialized institutions. The family distributed food to its members, taught children (especially the skills of obtaining food), cared for the sick, etc.
Hunter-gatherer societies were small and usually consisted of 25-40 people. They led a nomadic life, moving from place to place as food supplies dwindled. These groups were, as a rule, peaceful and shared food among themselves, which was a necessary condition for survival. However, due to the high risk of destruction of food supplies and, accordingly, hunger, disease, drought, and epidemics, the mortality rate for these people was very high. Almost half of them died in childhood.
Hunter-gatherer societies are the most egalitarian of all societies. Since food obtained by hunting and gathering spoils quickly, people cannot stock up, so no one can become richer than another. There are no rulers, and many decisions are made jointly. Because hunters and gatherers have few needs and do not have material savings, they have much more time for leisure than other groups.
All people were once hunters and gatherers, and until a few centuries ago, societies were quite primitive. Currently, there are only a few of them left: the Pygmies in Central Africa, the San tribe in the Namibian desert and the Australian Aborigines. Sociologists G. and J. Lenski noted that modern societies are taking away more and more land that provides food for such groups. They believe that the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies will soon disappear.
Around 10-12 thousand years ago, hunter-gatherer societies began to develop in two directions. Very slowly, over thousands of years, some groups domesticated and bred the specific species of animals they hunted—mainly goats, sheep, cattle, and camels. Other groups began to engage in crop production. Livestock-raising societies developed in arid areas where it was impractical to grow crops. Groups that chose this path became nomadic as they followed animals to new pastures. Horticultural societies grew plants using hand tools. Feeling no need to leave areas where they had enough food, these groups began to establish permanent settlements. Vegetable gardening appears to have first emerged in the fertile regions of the Middle East. Primitive agricultural equipment - hoes and sticks for making holes in the ground for seeds - gradually began to appear in Europe and China. These processing methods were probably invented independently by the tribes of Central and South America, but they could have spread from a single source due to the interpenetration of cultures through contacts unknown to us.
The domestication of animals and plants can be called the first social revolution. Although the process of domestication was extremely slow, it marked a fundamental break with the past and changed human history.
Animal husbandry and horticulture transformed human society. By enabling a fairly reliable supply of food, these types of economies contributed to the emergence of many interrelated innovations that changed almost every aspect of human life. As food supplies could support more people, the groups became larger. In addition, food became more than necessary for survival. Thanks to the surplus food, the groups came to a division of labor: not everyone needed to produce food, so some became priests, while others began making tools, weapons, etc. This in turn stimulated trade. When groups that lived largely in isolation began to trade with each other, people began to accumulate items that were valuable to them - tools, various foodstuffs, etc.
These changes created the conditions for social inequality, since some families (or clans) now had more surplus and wealth at their disposal than others. As groups acquired domestic animals, pastures, arable land, jewelry, and other goods, wars began to be waged over their possession. Wars in turn gave rise to slavery, since it was very profitable to force prisoners to do all the menial work. However, social stratification was limited because the surplus itself was small. As people passed on their property to their descendants, wealth became concentrated and power became increasingly centralized. The emergence of leaders led to changes in forms of government.
Second Social Revolution, much more sudden and significant than the first, occurred approximately 5-6 thousand years ago and was associated with the invention of the plow. This invention led to the emergence of a new type of society. The new society - agrarian - was based on extensive agriculture, in which the soil was cultivated with a horse-drawn plow. The use of animals to plow the soil was extremely effective: large areas could be cultivated by fewer people and more nutrients were returned to the soil when plowed. As a result, significant surpluses of agricultural products began to form, which freed up many people for non-productive activities. The changes at this stage of history were so profound that it is sometimes called the dawn of civilization.
The Industrial Revolution, like the Agrarian Revolution, was also driven by invention. It began in Britain, where the steam engine was first used in 1765. Even before this, some mechanisms (wind and water mills) used natural energy, but most of them needed human or animal power.
The new source of energy gave rise to an industrial society, which sociologist Herbert Bloomer defined as a society in which fuel-powered machines replace human or animal power.
Let's look at some of the social changes brought about by industrialization. This new method of production was much more efficient than all that had existed before. Not only did surplus production increase, but also its influence on groups of people, as well as social inequality, especially in the first stage of industrialization. Individuals who were the first to use advanced technology accumulated enormous wealth. Having taken a leading position in sales markets from the very beginning, they could control the means of production (manufactures, machines, tools) and dictate working conditions for other people. By this time, a surplus of labor had formed, as feudal agriculture was in decline and masses of villagers were driven away from the lands that their ancestors had cultivated for centuries. Once in the cities, these landless peasants were forced to work for meager wages.
However, workers gradually achieved better working conditions, as did other social strata. Eventually, owning a home, a car, and a wide range of consumer goods became commonplace. Social reformers could not foresee that in subsequent stages of development of industrial societies the worker would have a high standard of living. The progress associated with industrialization has, to some extent, erased signs of social inequality. Strengthening social equality began with the abolition of slavery; transition from a monarchy to a representative political system, which is characterized by the right to trial by jury and cross-examination of witnesses, suffrage, expansion of the rights of women and minorities, etc. The main trend in the development of modern advanced industrial societies is to shift the emphasis from the sphere of production to the sphere of service. Thus, in the United States, more than 50% of the working population works in service industries.
Problems of periodization. The period from the end of the 15th to the middle of the 17th century. according to one of the traditions that has developed in domestic science, it is called the late Middle Ages, according to another, also characteristic of foreign historiography, it is called the early modern time.
Both terms are intended to emphasize the transitional and extremely contradictory nature of this time, which belonged to two eras at once. It is characterized by profound socio-economic shifts, political and cultural changes, a significant acceleration of social development, along with numerous attempts to return to outdated relationships and traditions. During this period, feudalism, while remaining the dominant economic and political system, was significantly deformed. In its depths, the early capitalist structure was born and formed, but in different European countries this process was uneven. Along with changes in worldview associated with the spread of humanism, the rethinking of Catholic dogma during the Reformation, and the gradual secularization of social thought, there was an increase in popular religiosity. Outbursts of demonomania at the end of the 16th - first half of the 17th centuries, bloody religious wars revealed the close connection of this historical stage with the past.
The beginning of the early modern period is considered to be the turn of the 15th-16th centuries - the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries and the heyday of Renaissance culture, which marked a break with the Middle Ages in both the economic and spiritual spheres. The boundaries of the ecumene known to Europeans expanded sharply, the economy received a powerful impetus as a result of the development of open lands, a revolution took place in cosmological ideas and in the public consciousness, and a new, Renaissance type of culture took hold.
The choice of the upper chronological edge of late feudalism remains debatable. A number of historians, relying on economic criteria, are inclined to extend the “long Middle Ages” to the entire 18th century. Others, citing the first successes of the global capitalist system in individual countries, propose to take as a conditional boundary the major socio-political cataclysms associated with its growth - the liberation movement in the Netherlands in the second half of the 16th century. or the English Revolution of the mid-17th century. It is also widely believed that the Great French Revolution of the 18th century. - a more justified starting point for new times, since by this moment bourgeois relations had already triumphed in many European countries. However, most historians tend to consider the middle of the 17th century. (the era of the English Revolution and the end of the Thirty Years' War) as a watershed between the early modern era and the beginning of modern history itself. In this volume, the presentation of historical events is brought to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, which summed up the results of the first major pan-European conflict and for a long time determined the direction of the political development of Europe.
Main trends in economic development. The coexistence of the new and the traditional was clearly manifested in the sphere of economic life and economic processes of the early modern period. Material culture (tools, techniques and skills of people in agriculture and crafts, technology) generally retained a medieval character.
The 15th-16th centuries did not know truly revolutionary changes in technology or new sources of energy. This period marked the last stage of development of pre-industrial agrarian civilization in Europe, which ended with the advent of the industrial revolution in England in the 18th century.
On the other hand, many socio-economic phenomena contained new features: certain areas of the economy emerged, in which technical development proceeded at an accelerated pace; important shifts occurred thanks to new forms of organization of production and its financing. The progress of mining, metallurgy, a revolution in shipbuilding and military affairs, the rapid rise of book printing, the production of paper, glass, new types of fabrics, and the development of natural sciences prepared the first stage of the industrial revolution.
B XVI-XVII centuries Western Europe is covered with a fairly dense network of communications. The progress of trade and communications contributed to the development of internal and pan-European markets. Global changes followed the Great Geographical Discoveries. The emergence of settlements of European colonists and a network of trading posts in Asia, Africa, and America marked the beginning of the formation of the world market. At the same time, the formation of the colonial system took place, which played a huge role in the accumulation of capital and the development of capitalism in the Old World. The development of the New World had a profound and comprehensive impact on the socio-economic processes in Europe; it marked the beginning of a long struggle for spheres of influence in the world, markets and raw materials.
The most important factor in economic development in this era was the emergence of the early capitalist structure. By the end of the 16th century. he became a leader in the economy of England, and later the Netherlands, and played a prominent role in certain industries in France, Germany, and Sweden. At the same time, in Italy, where elements of early bourgeois relations arose in the 14th-15th centuries, by the beginning of the 17th century. their stagnation began due to unfavorable market conditions. In Spain and Portugal, the cause of the death of the sprouts of a new way of life was mainly the short-sighted economic policy of the state. In the German lands east of the Elbe, in the Baltic states, Central and South-Eastern Europe, early capitalism did not spread. On the contrary, the involvement of these grain-producing regions in international market relations led to the opposite phenomenon - a return to the domain economy and severe forms of personal dependence of peasants (the so-called second edition of serfdom).
Despite the uneven development of the early capitalist structure in different countries, it began to have a constant impact on all spheres of economic life in Europe, which already in the 16th-17th centuries. was an interconnected economic system with a common market for money and goods, as well as the established international division of labor. And yet, orderliness remained the most important characteristic of the economy.
