Expansion of subcultural movements as a result of social disunity among the young population

Modern post-Soviet transitional society is undergoing a complex and contradictory process of socio-political, socio-economic, and cultural transformations, accompanied by a clash of established norms and values, regulating people’s behavior, with the new, conflicting standards, which are being implemented in the society through mass media.

Rapid devaluation and destruction of traditional norms and values led to a change in behavioural strategies of different social groups in post-Soviet society, first of all, it concerns the youth. Cultural anomy, typical of modern society, is accompanied by the lack of integration in stable social institutions of a significant number of young people, which affects their own personal stability and success, as well as the functioning of social system as a whole.

Due to the relevance of the problem, ISEDT RAS scientific staff (Russia) in collaboration with Cherkassy State Business College (Ukraine) conducted a study aimed at analyzing the moral and psychological condition of the youth as a factor contributing to the alienation of its representatives from the main social institutions and the spread of such social phenomenon as subcultural movement. It should be noted that the study wasn’t aimed at characterizing the political orientation of the young generation.

Choosing Russia and Ukraine for studying the psychological climate in the youth environment is not random. Of all the post-Soviet countries, these states have common features and problems, connected with the crisis of spiritual and moral values after the USSR collapse. The common difficulties for Ukraine and Russia lie in the fact that the society exists separately from the authorities, the society possesses paternalism1 as its characteristic feature.

According to the sociological centers (Yuri Levada in Russia and Razumkov in Ukraine), “Ukrainians and Russians are equally not confident about the future of their countries... the public mood is so similar that it’s time to talk about common challenges2.”

Similar features can be found in the spiritual and moral state of the population in both countries3:

• 1.    Firstly, 85% of Russians are not aware of their country’s development trends and whether its future is positive. Ukrainians have similar views, and the number of those who believe that the country is sliding towards dictatorship, has grown twice for 2010.

• 2.    The second peculiarity consists in a rapid estrangement of citizens from the state. Only 57% of Ukrainians and 58% of Russians consider themselves part of the state. They prefer more and more often to identify themselves according to the social roles (husband, father, son), nationality or profession.

• 3.    The third common feature is the citizens’ distrust of the state’s ability and willingness to protect them. 58% of Russians don’t feel secure. In Ukraine 50.6% of citizens do not trust the police.

• 4.    The fourth similar feature is the population’s discontent over a high level of social inequality: 40% of Ukrainians and 42% of Russians believe that their living standards have decreased.

Therefore, Russia, and Ukraine show similar negative trends, with all the signs of social anomy and consisting in the crisis of the main social institutions, the estrangement of society from the state, the growth of social tension. In these conditions, the young are among the most vulnerable population layers; representatives of the youth, due to their age and lack of life experience, don’t possess a sustainable concept of world view and an established structure of spiritual and moral values.

Sociological surveys data prove that today’s young people are in a state of social anomy, and so they are an “easy prey” for any forces, ready to offer them life goals and confidence in the future.

Assessment of people aged under 30 of the level of social cohesion on different levels of society organization (in% of the number of respondents)

□ More consent, unity            □ More dissent, disunity            □ Difficult to answer

So, according to the research carried out in the Vologda Oblast in 2011, approximately one person in three (31%) aged under 30 displays symptoms of anxiety, depression, or neurosis; 32% are not satisfied with their lives; 33% experience the feeling of loneliness; every fourth gives a negative evaluation of their dayto-day emotional state (21%) and notes the lack of confidence in their future (25%). Most young people do not trust institutions such as the court (29%), trade unions (34%), Prosecutor’s office (30%), the police (40%), mass media (33%)4.

Young people point out a feeling of social cohesion only at the level of immediate environment, which also shows the prevalence of individualism in the worldview attitudes and opinions of young people on the structure of

Russian society (figure) ⁵. More than half (58%) of people aged under 30 characterize the social relations in the country as a “disagreement” and “estrangement”.

The situation is not less tense in Ukraine: 72% of school graduates admit that they drink alcohol; 60% say that they are proud of their motherland, but only 3% are ready to sacrifice something or make concessions in its favour; 36% of Ukrainian university graduates are sure that to succeed in life you need sometimes to be capable of evading the law; 44% of respondents believe that in order to achieve a high position in society, one needs influential relatives first of all (for comparison: the high intelligence and capabilities to achieve this goal were pointed out only by 35% of respondents); 30% of the students are worried about their future, 35% have the feeling of confusion in this connection6.

Thus, as the researchers note, the majority of adolescents are pragmatic and demonstrate the consumer’s approach to their homeland, considering that it is the state that should take care of its citizens7.

Social anomy of the young generation in the former USSR countries is manifested most openly in their views on the political situation. At the same time, the heightened emotionalism, lack of political, professional and life experience, psychological instability of the youth can be used by representatives of political elites in the various scenarios of race for power.

The data of sociological research, carried out in the Vologda Oblast, proves the apolitical nature of the views of the people aged under 30, which is connected with the lack of trust in the basic institutions of civil society and understanding their own inability to influence the political situation in the country or region. In 2011 36% of people aged under 30 estimated the political situation in the country as being “tense”, “critical”, “explosive”, while only 12% believed that they could somehow in-fluence this state of affairs.

Almost every second (46%) youth representative characterizes his/her participation in public and political life as “passive”. While describing the motives of this passivity, they give such answers as “lack of benefit” (37%), “risk of being involved in dirty business” (11%), “lack of information about the methods of participation in public organizations and forms of local self-government” (15%)8.

According to young people’s opinion, “the indifference towards common causes, individualism”, and “disbelief in the possibility to influence the authorities’ decision” are the most common reasons that impede social activity and prevent people from displaying their civil position (25 and 22%, respectively9).

The scientists at the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy made similar conclusions on the basis of a comparative analysis of the psychological climate and social well-being conducted among the youth of three postSoviet states – Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan. The study shows that the population of Russia and Ukraine experiences its isolation from the state, which is evidenced by the low level of trust to basic social and political institutions on the part of the society10.

Young people living in the surveyed countries have more trust in their families and friends than in state and public institutions. As the researchers note, “it is quite an expected result; however, such a depth of differences in trust is caused, along with other factors, by a low developmental level of institutions, which the society could rely on”11.

According to the data for 2010, the level of trust among Russian and Ukrainian population concerning the main political institutions, as well as law and order enforcement institutions was significantly lower than in many European countries (table 1) ¹². In these circumstances, the traditional system of informal relations remains the only reliable structure, in the framework of which the formation of subcultural associations takes place.

In the absence of firm and strong relationship between the society, the state and its institutions, the youth starts to long for the associations that reflect various ideologies, different from traditional cultural notions. One of the negative effects of those conditions, when the traditional culture fails to meet the spiritual demands of

Table 1. Level of population trust in the institutes of politics, order and law enforcement (2010, in % to the number of respondents)

Institutions	Russia*	Ukraine*	For comparison**
			Denmark	Finland	Norway
Political parties	7 (24)	14 (16)	54	45	47
Parliament	22 (17)	27 (16)	67	64	53
Legal system	26 (20)	27 (18)	83	78	61
Police	45 (16)	41 (19)	89	92	72

* Figure in brackets shows the state’s rank (total number of the states chosen – 25 European states).

** Data on the states with the greatest level of trust are represented.

society, is the emergence and expansion of subcultural movements, which mean the system of values, attitudes, patterns of behaviour and life styles, that is typical of a smaller social community, spatially and socially isolated, to a greater or lesser extent13.

Similar to the way the pseudo-religious movements begin its rapid development when the influence of traditional religion is weakened, subcultures fill a niche that is not occupied by other social institutions. Society, family, state – crisis of these subjects of socialization urges the population (and first of all the youth, as the most active category “seeking” its place in society) to turn to alternative sources of values, norms of behavior and attitudes.

Youth subcultures are a phenomenon of the Western type urban culture, reflecting a variety of processes occurring in the religious, ideological, political and economic spheres, in the sphere of fashion, etc.14 Therefore, the level of expansion and nature of young people’s subcultural preferences can be regarded as an indicator of social health and psychological climate in the society as a whole.

In 2010, ISEDT RAS scientists carried out a research, aimed at assessing subcultural preferences of young people in Vologda15.

The survey results showed that mostly young people say they belong to a subculture of punks (21%), emos (15%), goths (14%) and alternatives (13%; table 2 ). However, upon closer examination, it becomes clear that the most common subcultures in the city are skinheads (60%), goths (47%), role players (43%) and emos (41%), as the participants of these subcultures share not only their external attributes or music, but also their ideology, lifestyle and behavior patterns.

The results of the Yaroslavl region youth information centre survey16 can be used to confirm the data on the city of Vologda. The authors note, “Among the well-known subcultures ranking first, the Yaroslavl Oblast youth name the same ones, as in the 2009 – 2010 surveys: the first place belongs to “emo” (64% of all respondents); the second place – “goths (41%), the third place was divided between “punks” (36%) and “skinheads” (35%)”17.

Table 2. Characteristics of most widespread subcultures in Vologda (in % to the number of respondents)

Most widespread subcultures	In % to the number of respondents who belong to subcultures or have friends belonging to subcultures	Share of respondents fully accepting subcultural rules among those who belong to subcultures or have friends belonging to subcultures
Skinheads	2.3	60.0
Goths	13.6	46.7
Role players	3.2	42.9
Emos	14.5	40.6
Punks	20.9	26.1
Alternatives	12.7	25.0
Rappers	8.2	16.7
Anime	3.6	12.5
* Ranked according to the level of representation of people, fully accepting subcultural rules. Source: a survey of subcultural attitudes of Vologda city youth (ISEDT RAS).