529
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
review article                   DOI 10.19233/ASHS.2017.37
received: 2017-04-19
CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL 
SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO
University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Russia
e-mail: irina-kuzmenko@yandex.ru
Nikolai Vladimirovich NARYKOV
University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Russia 
e-mail: nikkuban@mail.ru
Evgenii Olegovich KUBIAKIN
University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Russia 
e-mail: tspopz@yandex.ru
Iuliia Gennadievna PILIUGINA
University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Russia 
e-mail: scarlet_sky@mail.ru
Valerii Valerevich PLOTNIKOV
University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Russia 
e-mail: antidoxiya84@mail.ru
ABSTRACT
This article is dedicated to the issue of social solidarity at the present times. The authors analyze the main 
scientifi c works devoted to this issue in order to study the nature of this phenomenon. The work evaluates the main 
approaches to the notion of “ social solidarity”. In the article, the authors come to the conclusion that solidarity pro-
cesses have different scales of manifestation and include both constructive communication between individuals and 
effi cient functional interaction of separate social subsystems that aim at achieving common objectives. Depending 
on the scale of solidarity manifestation, its leading factors can be cultural processes and regulatory activities of the 
government. The nature of interaction between the leading factors of solidarity development indicates implementing 
the principles of functional complementarity of political and cultural processes. The combination of direct regulative 
activity and indirect infl uence on the social structure through culture and social consciousness is the most effi cient 
strategy of political regulation.
Keywords: solidarity, society, culture, political regulation, macro social processes, self-regulation
ASPETTI CULTURALI E POLITICI DELLO SVILUPPO DELLA SOLIDARIETÀ SOCIALE 
NELLA SOCIETÀ CONTEMPORANEA
SINTESI
L’articolo s’incentra sulla questione della solidarietà sociale nell’età presente. Gli autori esaminano le principali 
opere scientifi che dedicate a questo tema per capire la natura di questo fenomeno. Il lavoro valuta i principali 
approcci alla nozione di “solidarietà sociale”. Nell’articolo, gli autori giungono alla conclusione che i processi di 
solidarietà possiedono diversi gradi di manifestazione e comprendono sia una comunicazione costruttiva tra le 
singole persone sia un’effi ciente interazione funzionale tra i singoli sottosistemi sociali volti a raggiungere obiettivi 
comuni. A seconda del grado manifestato, i fattori principali della solidarietà possono essere i processi culturali e le 
530
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO et al.: CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY, 529–536
attività regolatrici del governo. La natura dell’interazione tra i fattori principali dello sviluppo della solidarietà indica 
l’implementazione dei principi di complementarietà funzionale di processi politici e culturali. La combinazione tra 
l’attività regolatrice diretta e l’infl usso indiretto sulla struttura sociale attraverso la cultura e la coscienza sociale 
risulta essere la più effi cace strategia di regolamentazione politica.
Parole chiave: solidarietà, società, cultura, regolamentazione politica, processi macro-sociali, 
autoregolamentazione
INTRODUCTION
Over the 20th century, the topic of solidarity and the 
way to address it signifi cantly changed in the research 
area; it is connected both with the development of social 
sciences and large-scale social changes that form new 
urgent requests to the sphere of humanitarian knowl-
edge. These two processes are deeply interrelated, so it 
is not quite correct to study them separately. At the same 
time, it would not be absolutely correct to state the total 
dependence of the modern level of theoretical fi ndings 
in the sphere of solidarity processes on the current state 
of social structure. Due to the fact that the topic of soli-
darity has not been among urgent issues of the sociologi-
cal discourse for a long time, nowadays addressing this 
issue is a kind of combination of the results of studies 
on particular aspects of solidarity and the application of 
its theoretical grounds for studying urgent tendencies of 
the social development. In this sense, despite the central 
importance of this category in the social discourse, a 
current theory of solidarity can be considered as a 
developing sphere of knowledge, and its application 
for urgent modern issues has just begun. In particular, 
it gives rise to promising directions of theoretical stud-
ies, though only at an initial stage, including the issue 
of solidarity levels in the society and of driving forces 
that determine social solidarity development at different 
levels of the social organization. The general review of 
the issue allows for accepting a hypothesis that the main 
factors determining the nature of solidarity processes in 
the society also include the state and orientation of the 
political power activity, as well as the nature of current 
cultural processes and the general content of culture. 
LITERATURE REVIEW AND RESEARCH 
METHODOLOGY
The topic of solidarity has been studied for a long 
time. This category has been refl ected in the social, phil-
osophic, political, theological, juridical and sociological 
thought since the age of Enlightenment. The original in-
terpretation of solidarity belongs to theology and refl ects 
a general orientation of peoples’ actions that depend on 
their religious attitude towards God; this interpretation 
can be found in the works of J. de Maistre (1995), H. F. R. 
de Lamennais (2017) and other religious philosophers. At 
the level of social and philosophic thought, V. Soloviev 
(2007) should be marked out separately, as he thoroughly 
developed the topic of solidarity in the framework of his 
religious and philosophic doctrine. At the same time, the 
531
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO et al.: CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY, 529–536
tendency of crystallizing social implication of solidarity 
is gradually traced. In the Russian social thought, a seri-
ous step in the understanding of solidarity is connected 
with the transition to sociopolitical studies on solidar-
ity processes in the works of P. L. Lavrov (1965), M. A. 
Bakunin (1964), L. I. Mechnikov (2016), P. A. Kropotkin 
(1999). Their works cover an ethical aspect of solidarity, 
and it is referred not only to the issues of “solidarity for 
good” but also to the fact that solidarity in itself is closely 
related to the processes of evaluation and general value 
description of a certain social environment. The concept 
of solidarity was actively developed at the level of the 
French social thought in the works of A. Fouillee (2012), 
C. Renouvier (2015), and H. Marion (2000). From mid-
19th century, the solidarity theory has turned into one 
of the leading theoretical models, formed for explaining 
a wide range of social issues: solidarism refl ects at the 
level of economics, legal studies, political science, so-
ciology and social philosophy (Gofman, 2012a; 2012b). 
In addition to the abovementioned authors, the solidar-
ity theory was also theoretically developed by C. Gide 
(2010), M. Hauriou (1914), E. Durkheim (1996) and 
other researchers. Special attention should be paid to 
Durkheim (1996) who developed a detailed sociological 
theory of solidarity that was a kind of paradigm in sociol-
ogy for a long time. 
Despite high urgency of the solidarity issues, com-
plications in its theoretical refl ection, complexity of 
solidarism concept usage in the social knowledge and, 
as a consequence, polysemous character of the notion 
led to signifi cant diversion of the sociological tradi-
tion from the issue of solidarity. While other fi elds of 
knowledge preserve the interest to the idea of solidarity, 
the discipline that correlates with the solidarity scope 
most of all demonstrates the shift to particular research 
of specifi c aspects of solidarity processes. In that pe-
riod, the solidarity issues were latently developed, as 
there was a signifi cant number of works dedicated to 
solidarity-related issues, though the issue of solidarity 
in itself was not addressed. This interrelation is mostly 
traced in addressing the structural functionalism theory, 
in particular in the works of T. Parsons (1998). 
F. Hayek’s (1992) works that revealed a set of theo-
retical and methodological problems related to applying 
Durkheim’s interpretation of solidarity are of signifi cant 
importance at the sociological thought level. In particu-
lar, it was Hayek who was the fi rst to bring up a question 
about levels of social organization which the solidarism 
theory can be applied for. 
At the present time, one can fi nd an in-depth research 
of A. Gofman (2012a; 2012b), as well as theoretical 
fi ndings of M. K. Zverev (2009) among latest social 
researches in the sphere of social solidarity. The present 
issue is brought up and addressed on the basis of the 
results of their works. 
In order to cover the specifi ed issues, it is necessary 
to apply a wide range of methodological approaches like 
the comparative analysis method, abstracting, synthesis, 
structural and functional approach and phenomenologi-
cal approach.
By applying all of them, it is possible to shed the 
light on specifi c features of solidarity at different levels 
of the social structure organization. The systematic ap-
proach should be specifi cally mentioned as it allows for 
developing a complex theoretical model on the basis of 
the obtained theoretical results.
THE PHENOMENON OF SOCIAL SOLIDARITY 
AND ITS IMPACT ON THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT
Solidarity is an integrative principle that determines 
the interaction between individual social actors and co-
orientation of their interests. In terms of its manifestation 
scale, solidarity covers both the interaction at the level 
of individual communication of the society members 
and the sphere of institutional structures activity (from 
small social groups up to large structural social ele-
ments). In this regard, taking into account the division of 
the social structure organizational levels into the micro-
level (local interaction between individual members of 
the society) and macro-level (interaction between the 
society structural components), it is possible to mark 
out four potential forms of solidarity manifestation. It is 
related to the fact that as a form of attitude, solidarity 
has vector orientation and can be determined by apply-
ing an object criterion. At the same time, a solidarity 
subject is of no small importance. As a result, it becomes 
obvious that solidarity manifests itself at the micro-level 
(interaction of individual members of the society and 
their consolidation), macro-level (formation of effi cient 
functional relations between different social groups and 
institutions) and within the framework of inter-level 
interaction. The latter is expressed in cases when an 
individual member of the society joins in the interests 
of a specifi c social structure, as well as in the opposite 
cases when social structures have constructive orienta-
tion on pursuing interests of individual members of the 
society. The example for such a type of solidarity is the 
state policy on social protection that is quite targeting in 
certain cases. 
Different factors of solidarity formation, existence 
and development prevail at different levels of the 
social structure organization. It is related to the fact 
that a solidarity subject changes depending on the 
social processes level; the subject directly infl uences 
a set of main factors of solidarity development and, in 
particular, forms of its manifestation. In case of solidar-
ity processes at the micro-level, the solidarity subject 
is an individual. Herein, as a type of attitude, solidarity 
is a form of individual’s social orientation that is fi xed 
in his/her worldview. This is due to the fact that at the 
individual level, both the evaluation of social reality 
and the understanding of one’s own place in it are ac-
tualized through the construction of individual social 
532
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO et al.: CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY, 529–536
worldview. On the contrary, functionality of the social 
structure elements and coincidence of their interests 
is a crucial factor for the formation of solidarity ten-
dencies at the macro-level (Zverev, 2009). Therefore, 
the micro-level solidarity is determined by individual 
orientation of the society members, while the macro-
level solidarity primarily depends on external factors of 
existing social structures, i.e. their functional clearness, 
requests to external elements of the society structural 
organization, as well as a range of restrictions imposed 
by the government on different functional spheres 
of the society. It can be proved by the fact that if 
individual orientation of the society members is vari-
able, the orientation of functional structures activity is 
mainly determined by their institutional type. In light 
of this, not so much the initial orientation of the social 
structure as the factors of pursuing its interests become 
urgent. 
Different social institutions are deeply interrelated 
as they depend on the effi ciency of related functional 
spheres (Parsons, 1998). The general level of the social 
structure effi ciency and, in particular, the existence 
of functional balance is actualized through natural 
mechanisms of social self-regulation, as well as in the 
framework of direct regulatory activities of the authori-
ties. The analysis of modern tendencies of the global 
transformation indicates that now natural development 
of certain institutional spheres leads to their isolation, 
resulting in functional imbalance in the society. It is 
partly related to the fact that the sphere of interests of 
the institutional structures is primarily connected with 
direct pursuing of their own interests in improving the 
effi ciency in an occupied functional niche. Herein, 
the interaction between social structures that differ in 
their functional orientation is regulated in the course 
of political activities. It indicates that the formation 
of constructive orientation of social structures to their 
interaction (in other words, to the formation of solidarity 
between them) is carried out within the framework of 
the government activities.
At the level of interaction between individual mem-
bers of the society, one can observe radically different 
principles of solidarity that are based on actualizing 
initial social guidelines of the society members. Here, 
the most important factor is the main features of indi-
viduals’ social worldview that is determined by history 
(a set of factors that are actualized during individual’s 
social development) and by context (that indicates 
the dependence of certain relations, evaluation and 
decisions of individuals on general features of the cur-
rent information space). The tendencies of individual 
attitude development that have been formed through-
out history are determined by effi ciency of solidarity 
processes, personal experience of the society members 
and the culture content. Another crucial element of 
the current context of social guidelines formation is 
a current state of culture, its content and dynamics. 
Therefore, the leading factor of forming solidarity at the 
individual level (that is directly related to the specifi c 
features of individual’s worldview) is the nature, state 
and content of culture. 
The studied aspects of social solidarity – political 
activities and the state of culture – are closely interre-
lated. Despite the fact that culture determines individual 
social guidelines of the society members, its infl uence 
is widespread and determines prospects, opportunities 
and orientation of political regulation. At the same time, 
governmental activities signifi cantly infl uence both the 
level of culture in the society and current content of 
the information space. Therefore, the social integration 
level depends not only on direct infl uence of cultural 
and political processes on certain aspects of social life 
but also on the degree of their coherence. 
KEY APPROACHES TO UNDERSTANDING THE 
PHENOMENON OF SOCIAL SOLIDARITY: HOW IS IT 
BEING FORMED?
One of the main issues related to the study on social 
solidarity features is defi ning social solidarity and, in 
particular, the sphere of its application as an organizing 
principle. In the original interpretation of E. Durkheim, 
solidarity is the feeling that unites individual participants 
of the social interaction; herein, a solidarity object can 
be both a person or a small social group and large social 
structures with which the society members associate 
their social life. F. Hayek strongly criticized Durkheim’s 
theory for both insuffi cient development of Durkheim’s 
idea of division into organic and mechanical solidarity 
and his thesis about possible solidarity attitude towards 
large social structures. The importance of this thesis is 
fundamental as it refl ects the possibility of goal-oriented 
activities that are carried out by the social interaction 
subject and aims to optimize the solidarity object (Hayek, 
1992). According to Hayek, solidarity is possible at the 
level of small social groups as a feeling of inclusion, 
while the interaction between individual members of 
the society and developed social structures (including 
the interaction with the authorities) is determined not 
so much by the society members’ guidelines towards 
the self-identifi cation object as by a set of external rules 
and social sanctions. As a result, the existence of such 
forms of solidarity as patriotism and cosmopolitanism is 
brought into question as their object exceeds the frames 
of small social groups with direct interaction (Gofman, 
2012a; 2012b). It is obvious that this approach is one-
sided to some extent because, in fact, it refuses a set of 
essential and currently existing social processes. At the 
same time, in his review, F. Hayek sets up an important 
problem – the issue of levels of applying solidarity as a 
social principle.
Despite the fact that a social structure that cannot 
be comprehended by an individual member of the so-
ciety (i.e. when it is referred to the understanding of be-
533
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO et al.: CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY, 529–536
longing to the country’s multi-million population) may 
be a solidarity object, still there is an open question 
how social structures relate to each other. Here, it is 
necessary to pay attention to the fact that in the course 
of their development, social structures gain a set of 
specifi c features that are typical for a subject of social 
relation:  their level serves a basis for the formation of 
development intentions, a set of urgent needs, a sphere 
of direct functional interaction and also self-awareness 
that was formed collectively. The latter is proved by the 
fact that the understanding of social structures by those 
who are in charge of control activities is a required ele-
ment of self-regulation of these structures. As a result, 
it can be stated that certain social groups and institutes 
interact with each other, form complex systems of rela-
tions from direct confl icts to large-scale cooperation, 
obtain interaction patterns and, in particular, correlate 
their existence with other elements of the social struc-
ture. It allows to say that solidarity processes can be 
formed at the macro-level as well. Herein, emerging 
solidarity can be focused both on other macro-objects 
of social organization and on individual members of 
the society. It explains (to some extent) diffi culties in 
developing a theoretical defi nition of solidarity as it is 
referred to a social mechanism with several radically 
different forms of manifestation. This specifi city of soli-
darity must be taken into account when raising and 
addressing specifi c issues, otherwise the theoretical 
aspect of social solidarity may be reduced to one of its 
forms of manifestation. 
Traditionally, one of the tasks for the social knowl-
edge is developing methodology to infl uence the social 
structure, thus making its optimization possible. Since 
solidarity is one of the most important integrative 
principles of the society that act at all levels of its or-
ganization, it is obvious that answering the question of 
solidarity factors is of practical importance. And here we 
realize that different sets of social factors can be relevant 
depending on the scales of solidarity manifestation. 
Moreover, it is of no small importance that the detailing 
of types of solidarity and respective aspects of the social 
being makes it possible to analyze the situation more 
thoroughly and infl uence it more effi ciently. 
One of the specifi c features of solidarity that marks 
it out from other integrative functions of the society 
is inner intentions for developing a solidarity object. 
According to E. Durkheim, solidarity can be based on 
both similarity and understanding of functional inter-
ests that are connected with the presence of another 
participant of social relations and his/her state. In fact, 
organic solidarity is based not simply on a functional 
interest in a specifi c result from another participant of 
the interaction but on the understanding of the relations 
system that is of a higher order than a solidarity subject. 
And if the interpersonal communication level admits 
elements of mechanical solidarity that is based on the 
understanding of similarity, for the macro-social inter-
action level it is essential to have functional effi ciency 
and the possibility to improve its own performance in 
the system of interaction with other elements of the 
social structure. In this sense, one of the main factors 
that determine the possibility of forming solidarity at 
the macro-level is a principal possibility of harmonizing 
interests of macro-social structures (Stepin, 2010). Here, 
an important principle is discovered: the interaction of 
social structures with different functional orientation 
can be held under the principle of effi cient cooperation, 
or it can be characterized by the presence of confl ict 
tendencies related to converging interests or insuffi cient 
effi ciency of social subsystems. The latter implies that 
a higher-order system (e.g. in case of social institutes it 
could be the society as a whole) functions incorrectly. At 
the social level, the supreme regulative mechanism for 
optimizing interaction between social subsystems and 
creating conditions for their constructive cooperation is 
the government. 
At the individual level, the actors’ original objectives 
remain unclear. In this sense, the regulation process 
implies, on the one hand, formation of limits to defi ne 
acceptable forms of social activity and, on the other 
hand, setting general intentions for the society members’ 
activities. It is a key difference between the sphere of in-
dividual social relations and the macro-level where the 
main set of development intentions is pre-determined. 
In this sense, it can be stated that the individual social 
interaction level actualize a considerably wider range 
of social factors (Parsons and Bales, 1956). At the same 
time, there are good grounds for believing that the cul-
ture as a leading factor of developing social guidelines 
is of paramount importance in forming solidarity in 
individual members of the society. 
The analysis allows for marking out several factors of 
forming solidarity at the individual level:
• similarity by certain social features (mechanical 
solidarity);
• involvement into functional group activities (a 
type of organic solidarity);
• positive communication experience;
• existence of initial constructive guidelines of 
interaction.
However, each factor (including the attitude towards 
experience of communication with a participant of 
social relations) can be positively evaluated only if 
there are constructive guidelines of social worldview. 
In other words, current existence of favourable exter-
nal conditions for forming constructive correlation 
between the society members is not suffi cient for its 
emergence. Social experience that is gained by a person 
is interpreted in his/her worldview system, is evalu-
ated at different stages and correlated with the general 
system of priorities. Here, the importance of culture as 
a key factor for determining the nature of the society 
534
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO et al.: CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY, 529–536
members’ worldview is also actualized. It is referred 
both to long-term interaction that aims at forming and 
cultivating constructive guidelines and to urgent infor-
mation messages. Another important fact is that there 
are disintegrative social principles that are actualized at 
the cultural level equally with constructive guidelines of 
the worldview. The understanding of how any cultural 
element infl uences integrative features of the society is 
one of the main aspects of developing timely and ef-
fi cient measures for optimizing the situation.
CONCLUSIONS
Political activities and cultural infl uence mecha-
nisms are the most important social mechanisms that 
determine the society integrity through the formation of 
grounds for constructive interaction between the social 
activity subjects.  The level of individual interaction 
between the society members is a prevailing sphere 
of cultural infl uence on the social environment. One 
of the main objects of political activities is the social 
macrostructure. At the same time, the study identifi ed 
that specifi c features of the macro-level social structures 
indirectly infl uence particular social and communica-
tion processes and determine general features of positive 
or negative experience gained by the society members. 
Though culture infl uences individual guidelines of the 
society members, its infl uence is often large-scale due to 
the culture representativeness. Due to this reason, apart 
from direct infl uence of the abovementioned factors of 
solidarity development, it is also necessary to take into 
account effects of their indirect and joint impact.
535
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO et al.: CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY, 529–536
KULTURNI IN POLITIČNI ASPEKTI RAZVOJA DRUŽBENE SOLIDARNOSTI 
V MODERNI DRUŽBI
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO
Univerza ruskega Ministrstva za notranje zadeve, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Rusija
e-mail: irina-kuzmenko@yandex.ru
Nikolai Vladimirovich NARYKOV
Univerza ruskega Ministrstva za notranje zadeve, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Rusija
e-mail: nikkuban@mail.ru
Evgenii Olegovich KUBIAKIN
Univerza ruskega Ministrstva za notranje zadeve, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Rusija 
e-mail: tspopz@yandex.ru
Iuliia Gennadievna PILIUGINA
Univerza ruskega Ministrstva za notranje zadeve, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Rusija 
e-mail: scarlet_sky@mail.ru
Valerii Valerevich PLOTNIKOV
Univerza ruskega Ministrstva za notranje zadeve, 350000, Krasnodar, 128 Yaroslavskaya Street, Rusija 
e-mail: antidoxiya84@mail.ru
POVZETEK
Članek prinaša teoretični pregled korelacije med različnimi tipi družbene solidarnosti v sodobnih razmerah. 
Ozadje nastanka tega prispevka je povratek koncepta solidarnosti, ki je zelo obetavno sredstvo za identifi kacijo ten-
denc družbenih procesov proti teoretskim osnovam sodobnega družbenega znanja. Raziskava prinaša kompleksen 
prikaz vodilnih družbenih tendenc z vidika različnih integracijskih načel. Identifi kacija narave solidarnosti v družbi 
zahteva širok nabor metodoloških pristopov, saj je predmet obravnave zelo kompleksen in večdimenzionalen. V 
skladu s cilji raziskave je obravnava teoretskih in metodoloških smernic strukturnega funkcionalizma in socialne 
fenomenologije temeljnega pomena. Zaradi potrebe po pokrivanju sistematične interakcije specifi k družbenih struk-
turnih elementov so bili nekateri aspekti preučeni z uporabo metode sinergijske teorije. Prav tako so bile uporabljene 
metode analize, sinteze, abstrakcije in historičnega pristopa. V družbi imajo procesi solidarnosti različne oblike 
manifestacije ter vključujejo konstruktivno komunikacijo med posamezniki ter učinkovito funkcionalno interakcijo 
med različnimi družbenimi podsistemi, ki so usmerjeni k doseganju skupnih ciljev. Odvisno od obsega manifestacije 
solidarnosti, so lahko njeni vodilni dejavniki kulturni procesi in regulativne dejavnosti vlade. Narava interakcije 
med vodilnimi dejavniki razvoja solidarnosti kaže na izvajanje načel funkcionalne komplementarnosti političnih in 
kulturnih procesov. Z obzirom na to, da ti procesi ne samo izvajajo podobne funkcije, temveč so tudi odvisni drug od 
drugih, je učinkovitost politične regulacije neposredno odvisna od usklajenosti s sočasnimi tendencami v kulturnem 
razvoju. Kombinacija neposrednih regulativnih aktivnosti in posrednega vpliva na družbeno strukturo preko kulture 
in družbene zavesti je najbolj učinkovita strategija politične regulacije.
Ključne besede: solidarnost, družba, kultura, politična regulacija, makro družbeni procesi, samoregulacija
536
ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 27 · 2017 · 3
Irina Sergeevna KUZMENKO et al.: CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS OF DEVELOPING SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN MODERN SOCIETY, 529–536
SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bakunin, M. A. (1964): Collected works and letters. 
1828 – 1876. Moscow, Publishing house of the All-
Union Society of Political Cavalry and Exile Settlers. 
De Maistre, J. (1995): Considerations on France 
(Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought). 
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Durkheim, E. (1996): The Division of Labour in 
Society. Moscow, Unitydana.
Fouillee, A. (2012): Education from a National Stand-
Point (Classic Reprint). Washington, Forgotten Books.
Gide, C. (2010): Works of Charles Gide. Volume 11: 
Solidarity Brochure. Paris, Editions L’Harmattan.
Gofman, A. B. (2012a): Solidarity or Rules, Dur-
kheim or Hayek? On Two Forms of Social Integration. 
Sociological Yearbook: collected research papers. Mos-
cow, INION RAS, 97 – 167.
Gofman, A. B. (2012b): Social Solidarity: Awakening 
Social Idea. Sociology and Society: Global Challenges 
and Regional Development: Proceedings of the 4th All-
Russian Sociological Congress. Moscow, 32–39.
Hauriou, M. (1914): Specifi cs of administrative law 
and public law. Retrieved from: https://archive.org/de-
tails/prcisdedroitadm00unkngoog (Accessed on March 
2017).
Hayek, F. A. (1992): The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of 
Socialism. Moscow, Novosti Publisher. 
Kropotkin, P. (1999): Anarchy, its philosophy, its 
ideal. Moscow, Eksmo Press.
Lamennais, F. (2017): Unpublished works by F. 
Lamennais. Amazon Digital Services LLC. 
Lavrov, P. L. (1965): Philosophy and Sociology. Vol-
ume 2. Moscow, Mysl’.
Marion, H. (2000): Lessons in applied psychology. 
Parism, Adamant Media Corporation.
Mechnikov, L. I. (2016): Notes of Garibaldian. Saint 
Petersburg, Aleteya.
Parsons, T. (1998): The System of Modern Societies. 
Moscow, Aspect Press.
Parsons, T. & R. F. Bales (1956): Family Socialization 
and Interaction Process. London, Psychology Press.
Renouvier, C. B. (2015): Science and morality. Paris, 
Ligaran.
Soloviev, V. (2007): Spiritual foundations of life. Re-
trieved from: http://www.vehi.net/soloviev/duhovosnov/
index.html (Accessed on February 2017).
Stepin, V. S. (2010): New Philosophical Encyclope-
dia. Volume 3. Moscow, Mysl’.
Zverev, M. K. (2009): Peculiarities of Social Solidar-
ity in the Modern Russian Society. Ph.D. thesis in Phi-
losophy. Irkutsk.