Introduction: The Silent Revolution of Values
This article analyzes how the rise of existential security influences the evolution of value systems and the foundations of politics. Drawing on the theory of Ronald Inglehart, the author argues that the shift from survival values toward self-expression is redefining the axes of global conflict. You will explore the mechanisms of the "silent revolution," which, rather than shouting, operates through generational replacement, making culture a first-order causal condition for state stability. You will learn why traditional class divisions are fading in favor of disputes over lifestyle and autonomy.
Inglehart’s Methodology and the Mechanisms of Value Evolution
The theory of change rests on two pillars: the scarcity hypothesis and the socialization hypothesis. The first suggests that we most value what we lacked in our youth. The second indicates that our basic values crystallize during adolescence and remain stable for decades. Empirical confirmation of these assumptions is found in the World Values Survey, which maps global attitudes along two axes: from survival to self-expression and from tradition to secular-rationality.
Existential security releases psychic energy, shifting it from the struggle for survival toward the needs of self-actualization and meaning. Axiology serves an adaptive function here—values are decision-making maps that reduce information noise and provide the individual with a sense of agency. In an era of saturated security, there is a growing demand for "soft norms" that allow for maximum intensity of self-expression.
The Geography of Values and the Decline of Traditional Politics
The shift in values is eroding the traditional left-right axis based on the redistribution of goods. New conflicts center on individual autonomy, minority rights, and ecology. Electorates are becoming fluid conglomerates of lifestyles. On a global scale, this process follows different trajectories: Western Europe serves as a laboratory for post-materialism, while in the US, polarization between tradition and secularism is intensifying. East Asia combines modernity with a communal ethos, while in China, younger generations paradoxically exhibit strong materialism, satiating a hunger for wealth.
These changes are restructuring international alliances. Generations raised in peace are less likely to accept the logic of force, which in Europe results in a decline in national pride in favor of European identification. System stability depends on the civic culture syndrome: high interpersonal trust and life satisfaction, which build a legitimacy reserve for the state even in times of crisis.
Governance and Law in the Era of the New Hierarchy of Needs
A mature state must meet the challenge of a culture of stability—a mechanism for handling conflicting demands for security and expression. The logical catch is that societies are rarely homogeneous; scarcity and saturation coexist within different groups. Recommendations for political systems include building channels for participation (citizens' panels) and treating trust as a strategic resource by protecting independent institutions.
The law should adapt to the needs of self-expression, acting as a "collision architecture" that weighs competing interests rather than imposing absolute dogmas. Although critics accuse the theory of Eurocentrism, data shows that the cultural map is not a ranking but a coordinate system. Even if crises temporarily modulate moods, the socialization core formed in youth remains resilient to shocks, forcing institutions to evolve toward transparency and agency.
Summary: Culture as the Foundation of Stability
In a world where traditional axes of dispute are losing relevance, the future of democracy depends on the ability to create systems that balance the need for security with the desire for authenticity. Culture is not an ornament of politics, but its foundation. True progress is not measured solely by GDP indicators, but by the capacity to build social cohesion in the face of inevitable generational shifts. Can we build bridges across the worldview divide, understanding that stability is a habitus of dynamic equilibrium, not stagnation?
📄 Full analysis available in PDF