Psychoeconomics: globalization, markets, crisis. Николай Игнатьевич Конюхов
become more intensive, more synchronized. Culture, traditions, and customs of a country that is more developed economically are passed first of all to the elite, the economically active population of other countries. Russia is a classic example. In the past we have adopted wigs, knickers, knowledge of the major European languages, dance, music, literature, the details of architecture, the technology for creating ships, etc. from countries with a more developed economy and a different culture. Even earlier, merchants adopted each other’s customs, trade regulations, and rules for interacting. And so on the surface the merchants from different countries were similar to each other. Pantaloons came to Russia from Europe in the tracks of merchants, teachers, scholars, diplomats… The world has always been this way. The culture of the leading economic country of the world has been gradually transmitted, through the people that provide the connection between the economies of different countries, to other citizens. Culture was transmitted, as were dynamic stereotypes. And these changed initially in the merchants, then among the elites, the economically active population involved in trade and the international division of labor, and then in the whole nation.
Therefore, in the conditions of globalization, of uniformity of economic laws, norms, rules of foreign trade (and this uniformity is oriented toward the laws and norms of the leading economic country of the world), in conditions of open markets, the unified psychotype of the elite, the economically active population, begins to form. And it now is formed around the world financial elite. And the more the economic success of the country is tied to the international division of labor and foreign trade, the more intensively this process flows.
Here they are now buying expensive cars, yachts, mansions not only in old-fashioned capitalist countries, but also in a country consistently moving along the socialist path – China. Of course, for now in China this is only allowed for certain individuals as opposed to the entire population. But these individuals are emulated not by thousands or even millions, but rather by a billion people.
But the question of which psychotype the elite is closer to remains fundamental: to the psychotype of the world elite or to the psychotype of one’s own nation? The people may simply renounce those that do not appreciate their culture. The people may make a stand against these events, if their interests are affected. Finally, a revolution against the dominance of their elites may begin…
And if copying the psychotype of the elite of the leading country (group of countries) doesn’t make sense or is uninformed, then it will also be so over time. For we know that eventually the elite of the third generation, the elite with hysteroid traits, comes into power. This has also happened in the leading country of the world. If we follow its culture, differentiation in the society will increase, the rich will get richer, while the poor will become poorer… Such social systems are swept away from the historical arena by an angered populace. It has always been this way.
So what will the elite of different countries do when they understand or simply sense the growing protest of people: be transformed more under the influence of its nation or under the influence of the elite of the leading country of the world? Or think with their heads?
High-profile decision making (and this is underscored by the data in the chart) leads to the formation of a unified psychotype in the elite of various countries, but with time also to a unified ideology of the elite. A unified ideology and even its rudiments reassure the elite, since it creates the sensation (but sometimes merely the illusion) that everything is going in the same direction. For people with an external reference this is one of the most important arguments that everything is going right. And this sensation is in line with the feeling that the right decision has been made (but sometimes it merely substitutes a feeling of confidence in tomorrow). Countries that for now are not affected by this process, such as Iran or North Korea, provoke an ambiguous attitude toward themselves by the “global community.” These are also defensive reactions. The elite of various countries close ranks by introducing uniform rules of the game. And whoever does not subscribe to the accepted values is more or less thrown out of this environment.
So, for the elites, the economically active population of the earth, a single psychotype, a single culture, singular values begin to form on the basis of unified psychoeconomic processes… The process of creating a unified elite of the world will be completed by the formation of a uniform ideology.
One effect that appears with astonishing regularity is that the leading economies of the world themselves begin to be occupied with promoting their culture to other countries once the postresonators, the elite of the second generation, that is, the social motivators, come into power. The resonators, the elite of the first generation, are all wrapped up in work, they have no time for external self-praising contacts, for distribution of their culture, the culture of labor, or of their experience among different peoples. But here the elite of the second, and particularly the third generation have a stake in this. The requirements of maniacal, hysteroid personalities correspond to this. Furthermore, this appears as a unique defensive reaction for the elites, who begin to understand that they are losing the global leadership.
Therefore the creation of different organizations that are occupied with promoting the culture of the leading country of the world among other nations, regularly begins with the coming to power of the second-generation elite, but attains the effect of producing negative emotions from such enlightenment in other nations when the post-postresonators, the elites of the third generation, come into power.
Before the time of globalization of the economy, the place of the leading world government was taken by another government. But what will happen in the globalization period with a government that did not bear the burden of world leader?
Here several tendencies or possibilities overlap.
The first tendency. In the leading country of the world, the elite of the second generation and then the third generation come to replace the first-generation elite. The loss of power by the resonators, the emotionalization of the economically active population, leads sooner or later to the loss of this country’s leading position in the world. The elite of the peripheral countries that surround this country-leader will begin to form around the culture of the elite of that country that grabs the leadership. In the final analysis, reason and the resonators may prevail.
The second tendency. In a period of globalization, at the point when the third-generation elite, the post-postresonators, come into power, the processes in the leading country of the world, from technological innovations to the culture at large, will shift to peripheral countries. Hence, there is increasing stratification of the population, an increased role and significance of the objects of material prestige, emotionalization of social processes, etc. That is, the culture of the leading country of the world begins to form not only among the elites, but for everyone, as this culture does not correspond to the interests of the rapid, progressive development that is stratifying the society. In the entire world population, especially that population with an external reference, traits of the post-postresonators will increase among the extroverts. Introverts, schizoids, countries with marked introverted cultures such as India, China, Japan, and Russia, will be inoculated against such culturological changes.
Therefore it is not impossible to divide the world’s countries into those that hold on to the culture and values of the US and those that are oriented to the values and culture of China and similar countries. That is, countries or nations choose in favor of an extroverted or an introverted culture.
In any case, a new system of contradictions becomes intensified: between the elite and the people of their country (when accepting the culture of the leading country, the US) or between different countries (when they accept the culture of a new, rapidly developing world economic center). Of course, these are processes that affect decades, the understanding of which causes protest and defensive reactions in people who think in smaller slices of time.
But if we think in decades, then the probable socio-political conclusions that derive from the acknowledging the tendencies described are unavoidable.
The quality of the population in the US and in the majority of European countries is becoming increasingly worse through successive peaks of solar activity. This thesis became more evident after the issuance of Thilo Sarrazin’s book Germany Is Doing Away With Itself.
If by the time of a definitive decline in the quality of the population