Two types of subject are the subject of the social collective

Turning into a comfortable step the Americans did so did the Soviet Union do so as far as possible and we are now in our modern Russia. But this is certainly an attitude with only one amendment; other countries are objects of our activity in fact for themselves in the same subjective only in their own way but they do not like when in their affairs they put all kinds of extraneous subjects they are developing they are resisting, at least they start a social element that leads to such a result atom as we are the subjects in what results did not expect reluctance and did not want to, but still, that's the way it is. We with our pragmatism towards other civilizations do the same as the passengers of the crowded bus, we push our nails and get an answer from them exactly just as we designate on the ground our right to exist as what they are and begin to participate in the dialogue, that is, our pragmatism achieves only one. We enter into dialogue with them in dialogue. I understand the character of the character, but one way or another, from conflict to dialogue, then to complementarity, then and then something else begins to happen. Well, that's another conversation. Well, it turns out that the complementary structure here is very purely political. By the way, the Lord of Political Science, the conclusion is that globalization is firstly objective the process really has nowhere to go even if only because the population of the Earth if before civilization could exist freely from each other is quite spacious that they themselves are simply from - the number of its population due to migration flows and life in passing Utah break each other's civilization is a process that does not depend on us Although it occurs within the framework of culture But this globalization can really have only