COMMUNICATION POLICY OF THE STATE IN THE HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL DIMENSION
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2415-881x.2020.85.210-225
Abstract
The relevance of the article is due to the need to understand the evolution of understanding the essence of the communicative policy of the state as a key tool for its interaction with society. The communicative policy of the state plays a key role in the development of general strategies for social development, influences the formation of public opinion, the nature of regulation of political processes, and the specifics of building communication between the state and society. The study of the transformation of communication policy concepts is also determined by the need to significantly improve the methodological aspects of building models of relations between the state and society in order to achieve the goals and implement the functions of state policy, taking into account the goals and interests of society.
The study of the communicative policy of the state has a long history, starting from antiquity and ending with the present. The main focus of consideration of this issue is to determine the relationship between the state and society, as well as communication tools for establishing links between them. The solution of theoretical and applied issues of communication between the state and society concerns changes in the sphere of building state institutions and civil society.
The communicative policy of the state can be described as a complex system of communication between the state and society, the purpose of which is to achieve a balance between the state-political and socio-humanitarian interests of the parties. The main trend in understanding the essence of the state’s communicative policy is the transition from a controlling model of relations between the state and society to a consensus one, understanding communication tools as basic conditions for combining state-political and socially-oriented goals of state policy. An effective model of the state’s communicative policy is thus possible only in conditions of transparent and democratic relations between the state and civil society.
Keywords
Full Text:
>PDF (Українська)
References
Avgustin Blazhennyiy (2000). O grade Bozhiem; per. s lat. Mn: Harvest; M.: AST [in Russian].
Aristotel. Politika (1983). Aristotel. Sochineniya. V 4 t. M., 1983. T. 4.[in Russian].
Veber M. (1990). Osnovnyie sotsiologicheskie ponyatiya; per. s nem.; sost., obsch. red. i posleslov. Yu. N.Davyidova; predisl. P.P.Gaydenko.Veber M. Izbrannyie proizvedeniya. M.: Progress. 602–643. [inRussian].
Veber M. (1990). Politika kak prizvatie i professiya. Veber M. Izbrannyie proizvedeniya. M.: Progress, 1990. 644–706. [in Russian].
Veber M. (1990). Protestanskaya etika i duh kapitalizma; per. s nem.; sost., obsch. red. i posleslov. Yu. N.Davyidova; predisl. P.P.Gaydenko.Veber M. Izbrannyie proizvedeniya. M.: Progress, 1990. 44–344. [inRussian].
Viner N. (1983). Kibernetika, ili upravlenie i svyaz v zhivotnom i mashine; per. s angl.; redaktsiya i predislovie G.N.Povarova. 2-e iz-danie. M.: Nauka; Glavnaya redaktsiya izdaniy dlya zarubezhnyih stran, 1983. [in Russian].
Vnuk-Lipinskiy E. (2012). Sotsiologiya publichnoy zhizni. M.: Myisl, 2012. [in Russian].
Habermas Yu. (1999). Dii, movlennevi akty, movlennievi inter aktsii ta zhyttievyi svit; per. z nim. A.M.Iermolenko. YermolenkoA.M. Komunikatyvna praktychna filosofiia. K.: Libra, 287–324. [inUkrainian].
Gobbs T. (1991). Leviafan, ili Materiya, forma i vlast gosudarstva tserkovnogo i grazhdanskogo; per. s angl. Gobbs T. Sochineniya: V 2t.M.: Myisl..2. 3–590. [in Russian].
Kant I. (1994). Osnovopolozheniya metafiziki nravov; per. s nem. Kant I. Sobranie sochineniy v 8 tt. M.: Choro. T.4. 153–246. [in Russian].
Kessidi F. X. (2001). Sokrat. SPb.: Aleteyya. [in Russian].
Koen Dzh., Arato E. (2003). Grazhdanskoe obschestvo i politicheskaya teoriya. M.: Ves Mir [in Russian].
Lebon G. (2000). Psihologiya mass. Mn.: Harvest, M.: ACT [inRussian].
Lokk Dzh. (1988). Dva traktaty pro pravlinnia. Dzh. Lokk. Tvory: v 3 t. M.: Dumka, T. 3. [in Ukrainian].
Luman N. (2001). Vlast; per. s nem. A.Yu. Antonovskogo. M.: Praksis. [in Russian].
Luman N. (2005). Media kommunikatsii; per. s nem. — M: Izdatelstvo «Logos». [in Russian].
Makiavelli N. (2001). Gosudar: Sochineniya. Per. s it. M.: ZAO Izd-vo EKSMO-Press; Harkov: Izd-vo «Folio». [in Russian].
Marks K. (1974). Ekonomichesko-filosofskie rukopisi 1844 goda. Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya. T. 42. M.: Politizdat. 41–174. [inRussian].
Marks K., Engels F. (1959). Kritike politicheskoy ekonomii. Marks K., Engels F. Sobr. soch., izd. 2, t. 13. M.: Politizdat. [in Russian].
Monteske Sh. — L. (1999). O duhe zakonov; per. s fr. M.: Myisl. [inRussian].
Parsons T. (2002). O strukture sotsialnogo deystviya; per. s angl. M.: Akademicheskiy Proekt. [in Russian].
Platon. (1999).Gosudarstvo; per. s drevnegrech. Platon. Fileb. Gosudarstvo. Timey. Kritiy. M.: Myisl. 79–420. [in Russian].
Russo Zh.-Zh. (1998). Rassuzhdenie o proishozhdenii i osnovaniyah neravenstva mezhdu lyudmi; per. s fr. D.Hayutina i V.S.Alekseeva-Popova. / Russo Zh.-Zh. Ob obschestvennom dogovore ili Printsipyi politicheskogo Prava. Traktatyi. M.: «KANON-press», «Kuchkovo pole». 51–150. [in Russian].
Tard G. (2011). Zakonyi podrazhaniya. M.: Akademicheskiy prospekt. [in Russian].
Foma Akvinskiy. (1999). Summa teologii: [Fragmentyi]; per. s lat. Antologiya mirovoy pravovoy myisli: V 5 t. Natsionalnyiy obschestvenno-nauchnyiy fond; Ruk. nauchnogo proekta G.Yu. Semigin. T. II: Evropa: V–XVII vv. M.: Myisl, S. 581–596. [in Russian].
Fukidid. (1993). Istoriya. M.: Nauka. [in Russian].
Habermas Yu. (2012). K razumu publichnoy sferyi. Habermas Yu. Ah, Evropa. Nebolshie politicheskie sochineniya. M. 105–110. [inRussian].
Habermas Yu. (2000). Moralnoe soznanie i kommunikativnoe deystvie; per. s nem. pod. red. D. V. Sklyadneva. SPb.: Nauka. [inRussian].
Tsitseron (1994). O gosudarstve; per. s lat. Tsitseron. Dialogi. M.: Nauchno-izdatelskiy tsentr «Ladomir»; Nauka. 8–88. [in Russian].
Alexander J.C. (2006). The Civil Sphere. New York.
Edelman, M. (1985). The Symbolic Uses of Politics. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The editorial board does not always share the position of the authors. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the material presented.
All rights reserved.
© Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2026