Search

The article contains the experience of socio-philosophical analysis of the prison subculture phenomenon. The relevance of this study is due to the transformation of the basic culture of society traditional values under the influence of the criminal subculture, the development of its new socio-cultural spaces, observed in recent decades. The aim of the work is to analyze the evolution of the prison subculture from the perspective of its interaction with the culture of society in the context of the dialectical triad «thesis-antithesis-synthesis». The definition and the main characteristic features of the prison subculture are given. The main stages of its evolution are considered in the context of interaction with the basic culture of Russian society. It is shown that the main factors influencing the metamorphosis of the prison subculture are: the high number of convicts, the presence of passionarity in the Soviet penitentiary system, the detachment system of containing convicts, the unsuccessful results of the experiment carried out in the 60s of the twentieth century to reform the penal system, negative consequences economic and social reforms of the 90s. It is noted that as a result of long-term cultural genesis, the prison subculture has the following characteristics : 1) a rigid hierarchy of the social structure of the prison community with the existence of strata of «outcasts» 2) the presence of a developed system of prison mythology, customs, symbols and taboos 3) the presence of a «control center» as the group «Thieves in law», as well as channels of information transmission 4) high adaptability of the penitentiary subculture to external conditions 5) the presence of a catchy and attractive «thieves ‘ro¬mance» and «thieves’ ideology» 6) the ability of the prison subculture to reproduce itself 7) a high degree of cohesion of prison carriers subcultures 8) the spread of the norms of the prison subculture to the majority of the population of correctional institutions. In the development of the prison subculture, the authors have identified two cycles («big» and «small»). The «big cycle» describes the global relationship between the prison subculture and the basic culture of Russian society, «small» – the interaction of collectives of convicts and staff of correctional institutions influenced by the prison subculture. In both cycles, three stages of development are distinguished, characteristic of the dialec¬tical triad. The practical significance of the work lies in comprehending the ongoing changes with the subsequent adoption of managerial decisions aimed at leveling the spread of the norms of the prison subculture in society.