Аннотации:
© BEIESP. The term “deterritorialization” has become widely used in various fields of social theory to describe a wide variety of social processes. For example, they started to use the concept of “deterritorialization” to describe, first of all, cultural processes, while the gap between social and geographical is emphasized. However, as many researchers rightly point out, where deterritorialization takes place, the reterritorialization will also appear necessarily. And here the thing is, first of all, about the correlation of global and local, universal and particular. But in the modern world this ratio is characterized by apparent asymmetry. Hence the researchers' particular attention to such concepts as homogenization, macdolandization, Americanization, glocalization, etc. Of course, there is a clear idea that it is Western culture that is becoming a kind of model that has a decisive influence on other, non-Western cultures. A characteristic feature of modern social studies is that their focus shifts from rationality to the emphasis of differences, hence the keen interest in history, the search for roots that are lost, also as the result of deterritorialization. The relativization of knowledge in general and historical knowledge in particular has led to the fact that the latter, and in particular, historiography begin to be regarded as a synonym for mythology, and traditions and the past of a particular nation-as artificially created constructs.
