Contemporary Information Society as a System of Global Political, Economic and Social Development

The globalized information society, which by its nature is a hybrid socio-technological interface between the global information space and a person, relies on digital communications technologies and networked information platforms. The information society remains one of the few pillars of globalization. In its essence, it is unlikely to be dismantled even in the event of the implementation of critical scenarios of global transformations; it can become one of the integrating platforms of various management subsystems both at the interstate and state levels – although in its pure form, probably in the foreseeable future, the management of medium-term processes within purely state systems seems unlikely. The information society, remaining an instrument of globalization and ensuring the relative integrity of global processes, begins to play an increasingly important role in the process of delimitation of the “world of globalization” into macro-regions. Through the mechanisms of the information society and through the division of the excessively hybridized management system, the most noticeable elements of real, rather than declarative, geo-economic regionalization are likely to be implemented. In the context of the globalization crisis, the information society acts as the basis for a system of non-force strategic management of socio-political and economic processes. As the institutional vacuum grows, the importance of the information society will grow. In addition to the functions of managing medium-term development trends, the information society has already acquired the functions of strategic management of socio-cultural processes, as well as universal political narratives. At this stage of global transformations, we are witnessing an intensive process of substitution of classical interstate institutionality by information (called “online”, although this does not reflect all the features of the phenomenon) technologies, that changes the essence of institutionality in principle. In the future, supranational regulation can also be replaced by information society technologies and corresponding digitalized algorithms. A fundamentally different space of global, and therefore transregional governance is emerging, which puts on the agenda a number of specific tasks for Russia.

1. Carey, J.W. (1998). The Internet and the End of the National Communication System: Uncertain Predictions of an Uncertain Future. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 1(75), 28–34. DOI: 10.1177/107769909807500106

2. Gates, R.M. (2023). The Dysfunctional Superpower. Can a Divided America Deter China and Russia? Foreign Affairs, November/December. URL: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/robert-gates-america-china-russia-dysfunctional-superpower

3. Nye, J.Jr. (2018). How Sharp Power Threatens Soft Power. The Right and Wrong Ways to Respond to Authoritarian Influence. Foreign Affairs, January, 24. URL: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2018-01-24/how-sharp-power-threatens-soft-power

4. Wihbey, J.P. (2019). The Social Fact: News and Knowledge in a Networked World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 328 p.

5. Dmitriev, O.A. & Evstafiev, D.G. (2024). Ot postpravdy k postreal’nosti. Krizis globalizatsii, konkurentsiia tsennostei i stolknovenie tsivilizatsii [From Post-Truth to Post-Reality. The Crisis of Globalization, Competition of Values, and the Clash of Civilizations]. Russia in Global Politics, 128, 110–121.

6. Dzolo, D. (2010). Demokratiia i slozhnost’: realisticheskii podkhod [Democracy and Complexity: A Realistic Approach]. Moscow: Izdatel’skii dom Gos. universiteta – Vysshaia shkola ekonomiki. 320 p.

7. Eremeenko, M.S. (2023). Atomizatsiia informatsionnogo soznaniia v sovremennom obshchestve [Atomization of information consciousness in modern society]. Kul’tura i obrazovanie: nauchno-informatsionnyi zhurnal vuzov kul’tury i iskusstv, 1(48), 47–53. DOI: 10.2441/2310-1679-2023-148-47-5

8. Fukuyama, F. (2017). Ugasanie gosudarstvennogo poriadka [The Fading of State Order]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo AST. 704 p.

9. Giddens, E. (2005). Ustroenie obshchestva. Ocherki teorii strukturatsii [The Structure of Society: Essays on the Theory of Structuration]. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. 528 p.

10. Gorbaneva, O.I. & Ugol’nitskii G.A. (2024). Modeli upravleniia vo vlastnykh ierarkhiiakh [Models of Management in Power Hierarchies]. Problemy upravleniia, 1, 43–55.

11. Kuznechenko, I.M. (2024). Riski organizatsii i realizatsii protsessa priniatiia reshenii na osnovanii analitiki bol’shikh dannykh i iskusstvennogo intellekta [Risks of Organizing and Implementing the Decision-Making Process Based on Big Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence]. Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie. Elektronnyi vestnik, 104, 162–180. DOI: 10.24412/ym8t4a89

12. Loshkariov, I.D. (2021). Problema urovnei analiza v teorii mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenii: na puti k ontologicheskim obiazatel’stvam [The Problem of Levels of Analysis in the Theory of International Relations: Towards Ontological Commitments]. Comparative Politics Russia, 12, 5–18. DOI: 10.24412/2221-3279-2021-10036

13. Mayr, P. (2019). Upravliaia pustotoi. Razmyvanie zapadnoi demokratii [Managing the Void. The Erosion of Western Democracy]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaidara. 216 p.

14. Pilgun, E.V. (2022). Politicheskoe manipulirovanie cherez ideologizatsiiu krizisa [Political Manipulation through the Ideology of Crisis]. Governance and Politics, 1(2), 30–43. DOI: 10.24833/2782-7062-2022-1-2-30-43