Социуи, пси-фактор
Цитата из работы по современным концепциям войны, которую может и буду использовать в будущей работе. Надо двигаться вперед, хотя бы по паре страниц в день...
Привожу как факт, свидетельство того, что происходящее это уже война, - на пси-изнурение. И Президент РА уже не прав, уже проиграл, вне зависимости от планов и намерений. Ни он, ни его команда просто не понимают с чем имеют дело, с какой мощью сталкиваются.
И ничего с этим сделать нельзя, - нет времени. Надо принять к сведению и двигаться дальше. Давать перевод не буду, он проблематичный - кто заинтересуется разгрызет сам.
The social influence is particularly complex because it encompasses a seemingly infinite number of interdependent variables that are themselves continually evolving, e.g. religious, educational, political, and economic factors. These social influences are an essential process ... because they circumscribe and define the limits to a human institution’s or organization’s ability to adapt to a stimulus or situation without undergoing a transformation that might radically change the relationships among its subsystems. (Ref.)
The social influences are, therefore, at once the measure of the degree to which the system must change in order to adapt and the process by which that change is carried out or in which it fails to do so. This is where the distinction between the diplomatic and political arenas of action becomes essential. It stands to reason that the ability to respond to a stimulus or challenge depends not only on what impact any response will have on friends, foes, and neutrals, but also on what that response might do to our own group, organization, community, or society. A Pyrrhic victory is by definition self-defeating. …
While this is true in even a single action-reaction cycle, it is of paramount importance in a war of psychological attrition, the whole point of which is to challenge the ability of the opponent to sustain an institutional consensus through the course of what may be a lengthy succession of action-reaction cycles. (выделено мной)
In a nation-state system, this function would fall to the political leadership. One example is the role of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the period between Hitler’s 1939 attack on Poland and Japan’s 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt knew that any direct American participation in the war would depend on changing a deep isolationist streak in the American societal self-image and that any change in that mental image and societal boundary would require substantial preparation. His introduction of “lend-lease” to aid a flagging Britain after the fall of France therefore resorted to metaphors that used a different aspect of the self-image “neighborliness” to explain the aid in terms of a lending a garden hose to a neighbor whose house was on fire. Similarly, the Atlantic Charter sought to portray any impending conflict in terms of traditional societal goals of freedom and democracy. (Ref,)
Привожу как факт, свидетельство того, что происходящее это уже война, - на пси-изнурение. И Президент РА уже не прав, уже проиграл, вне зависимости от планов и намерений. Ни он, ни его команда просто не понимают с чем имеют дело, с какой мощью сталкиваются.
И ничего с этим сделать нельзя, - нет времени. Надо принять к сведению и двигаться дальше. Давать перевод не буду, он проблематичный - кто заинтересуется разгрызет сам.
The social influence is particularly complex because it encompasses a seemingly infinite number of interdependent variables that are themselves continually evolving, e.g. religious, educational, political, and economic factors. These social influences are an essential process ... because they circumscribe and define the limits to a human institution’s or organization’s ability to adapt to a stimulus or situation without undergoing a transformation that might radically change the relationships among its subsystems. (Ref.)
The social influences are, therefore, at once the measure of the degree to which the system must change in order to adapt and the process by which that change is carried out or in which it fails to do so. This is where the distinction between the diplomatic and political arenas of action becomes essential. It stands to reason that the ability to respond to a stimulus or challenge depends not only on what impact any response will have on friends, foes, and neutrals, but also on what that response might do to our own group, organization, community, or society. A Pyrrhic victory is by definition self-defeating. …
While this is true in even a single action-reaction cycle, it is of paramount importance in a war of psychological attrition, the whole point of which is to challenge the ability of the opponent to sustain an institutional consensus through the course of what may be a lengthy succession of action-reaction cycles. (выделено мной)
In a nation-state system, this function would fall to the political leadership. One example is the role of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the period between Hitler’s 1939 attack on Poland and Japan’s 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt knew that any direct American participation in the war would depend on changing a deep isolationist streak in the American societal self-image and that any change in that mental image and societal boundary would require substantial preparation. His introduction of “lend-lease” to aid a flagging Britain after the fall of France therefore resorted to metaphors that used a different aspect of the self-image “neighborliness” to explain the aid in terms of a lending a garden hose to a neighbor whose house was on fire. Similarly, the Atlantic Charter sought to portray any impending conflict in terms of traditional societal goals of freedom and democracy. (Ref,)