The Importance of Worldview Paradigms in Formation of the Conceptual Foundation Social Forecast

Introduction. Forecasting in social philosophy is aimed at anticipating and forming a conceptual image of the future society. The methodological basis for constructing a development scheme for achieving the desired state of the social system is ideological and cultural-historical paradigms. A philosophical analysis of the historical process, despite all its diversity, allows us to identify fundamental determinants that are used for geopolitical shifts in the world. The unification of the nature of the interaction algorithms does not mean the exclusion of national interests and the levelling of the civilizational characteristics of the actors. The main goal is formulated in the context of the need to reach a compromise acceptable to all parties in the face of competition in the geopolitical space. In a situation of confrontation, attitudes aimed at one-sided gain will inevitably adjust the parameters of social forecast on the part of the actors who are regarded as the object of such influence.

Methodology and sources. As a methodological basis for work, the authors use the philosophical methodology of comparative analysis on the material of worldview and political narratives in geopolitical scenarios, which are basic for the conceptual substantiation of ways to achieve specific political goals. The article analyzes the paradigm of civilisational globalisation and expert-prognostic recommendations substantiating influence mechanisms for the implementation of tasks aimed at isolation of social systems whose values, from the point of view of the Western political elite, are incompatible with liberalism.

Results and discussion. The article examines the features of social forecasting, which are determined by the availability of an objective resource base for the implementation of the intended goals and the mechanism for making political decisions. Due to the large number of variables in society that affect the dynamics of its development, the presence of a subjective factor makes it possible to realize the variability of its development. Competition of the geopolitical interests of the main actors in the historical process increases the range of uncertainty in the ways and mechanisms for achieving the set goals. The subjects of political control determine the specifics of the formation of an adequate response in response to the doctrine of unipolar strategic domination. The mobilization of economic and political resources allows maintaining civilizations identity in opposition to expansionary geopolitical strategies.

Conclusion. In the real world, liberal values do not have the status of general universality. Theoretical and methodological principles in the formation of social prognosis become the most important link in modern conditions. In the sphere of geopolitics, Russia should position itself as a humanitarian-oriented political force, ensuring the preservation of traditions and the identity of all peoples. This would help to create a platform for uniting social movements advocating similar world view positions in the political struggle.

1. Wainer, D. (2020), “Kissinger Warns U.S. and China Must Set Limits to Avoid a Blowup”, Bloomberg, 7 Oct., available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-07/kissinger-warns-u-s-and-china-must-set-limits-to-avoid-a-blowup (accessed 20.10.2020).

2. Brzezinski, Z. (1998), The Grand Chessboard. American primacy and its geostrategic imperatives, Transl. by Ural'skaya, O.Yu., Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, Moscow, RUS.

3. “The Interview: Henry Kissinger” (2015), The National Interest, 19 August, available at: http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature/the-interview-henry-kissinger-13615 (accessed 10.10.2020).

4. Brzezinski, Z. (2016), “Toward a Global Realignment”, The American Interest, vol. 11, no. 6, available at: https://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/04/17/toward-a-global-realignment/ (accessed 09.10.2020).

5. “The National Security Strategy of the United States of America” (2017), The White House, available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905-2.pdf (accessed 16.10.2020).

6. Poindexter, J., McFarlane, R. and Levine, R. (2020), “A New U.S. National Security Strategy: A World Transformed”, The National Interest, 20 July, available at: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/new-us-national-security-strategy-world-transformed-165173?page=0%2C2 (accessed 14.09.2020).

7. Pompeo, M.R. (2020), “Communist China and the Free World’s Future”, U.S. Department of State, 23 July, available at: https://www.state.gov/communist-china-and-the-free-worlds-future/ (accessed 14.09.2020).

8. Layne, C. (2020), “Coming Storms. The Return of Great-Power War”, Foreign Affairs, available at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-10-13/coming-storms (accessed 01.11.2020).

9. Beebe, G. (2020), “Balancing Great Power Politics in 2021 and Beyond”, The National Interest, 17 Oct., available at: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/balancing-great-power-politics-2021-and-beyond-170814?page=0%2C1 (accessed 20.10.2020).

10. “The National Security Strategy of the United States of America” (2002), U.S. Department of State, available at: https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/63562.pdf (accessed 15.09.2020).

11. Kennedy, P. (2018), The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000, Transl. by Kalugin, E. and Leonovich, M., Gonzo, Ekaterinburg, RUS.

12. Abrams, S. Y., Sides, J., Tesler, M. and etc. (2019), “The Fight Over Identity Politics”, Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 2, available at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2019-02-01/stacey-abrams-response-to-francis-fukuyama-identity-politics-article (accessed 15.09.2020).

13. Turchin, P. and Korotayev, A. (2020), “The 2010 structural-demographic forecast for the 2010–2020 decade: A retrospective assessment”, PLOS ONE, no. 15 (8), available at: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237458 (accessed 12.09.2020).

14. Turchin, P. (2020), “I predicted 2020 would be a mess for the U.S. Could that help prevent a second civil war?”, The Globe and Mail, 3 July, available at: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-i-predicted-2020-would-be-a-mess-for-the-us-could-that-help-prevent/?utm_medium=Referrer:+Social+Network+/+Media&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links (accessed 28.08.2020).

15. “Sample Official Election Ballot State of Mississippi” (2020), 2020 General Election, available at: https://www.sos.ms.gov/content/documents/elections/FINAL%202020%20Sample%20GE%20Ballot%20with%20Flag.pdf (accessed 02.11.2020).

16. “Mississippi Ballot Measure 3, State Flag Referendum (2020)” (2020), Ballotpedia, available at: https://ballotpedia.org/Mississippi_Ballot_Measure_3,_State_Flag_Referendum_(2020) (accessed 06.11.2020).

17. Kirby, T. (2020), “Heroless America Is Losing Ideological Ground Quickly”, The Strategic Culture Foundation, 19 June, available at: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/06/19/heroless-america-is-losing-ideological-ground-quickly/ (accessed 26.08.2020).

18. Ekins, E. (2020), “Poll: 62 % of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share”, Cato Institute, 22 July, available at: https://www.cato.org/publications/survey-reports/poll-62-americans-say-they-have-political-views-theyre-afraid-share#introduction (accessed 02.09.2020).

19. Laughlin, N. and Shelburne, P. (2020), “Trust in Elections Erodes Further in Wake of Capitol Riot; Majority of Republicans Back Trump’s Concession”, Morning Consult, available at: https://morningconsult.com/form/tracking-voter-trust-in-elections/ (accessed 10.11.2020).

20. Dobbins, J., Cohen, R.S., Chandler, N. and etc. (2019), “Overextending and unbalancing Russia. Assessing the Impact of Cost-Imposing Options”, RAND Corporation, available at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB10014.html (accessed 10.08.2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RB10014.

21. Connable, B., Young, S., Pezard, S. and etc. (2020), “Russia’s Hostile Measures. Combating Russian Gray Zone Aggression Against NATO in the Contact, Blunt, and Surge Layers of Competition”, RAND Corporation, available at: https://www.randorg/pubs/research_reports/RR2539.html (accessed 15.08.2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RR2539.

22. Cohen, R.S., Chandler, N., Efron, Sh. and etc. (2020), “Peering into the Cristal Ball. Holistically Assessing the Future of Warfare”, RAND Corporation, available at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/ research_briefs/RB10073.html (accessed 18.07.2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RB10073.

23. “Munich Security Report 2020. Westlessness” (2020), Munich Security Conference, available at: https://securityconference.Org/assets/user_upload/MunichSecurityReport2020.pdf (accessed 25.07.2020).

24. Shultz, G.P. (2020), “On Trust”, Foreign Service Journal, November, available at: https://www.afsa.org/on-trust (accessed 20.11.2020).

25. Marchi, S. (2020), “Is the U.S. empire in jeopardy?”, Macleans, 15 April, available at: https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/is-the-u-s-empire-in-jeopardy/ (accessed 26.06.2020).