Взаємодія державної влади та громадянського суспільства в Україні в умовах системних викликів сучасності (кратологічно-управлінський і антропологічний дискурси)

Анотація

We consider the issues of interaction between government and civil society in modern Ukraine in terms of system calls through the prism kratological and management analysis and anthropological discourses. These discourses are concentrated in the kratological domain of research, because the issues of power in the domestic space forever are key in the theoretical and practical plane. Nowadays, the kratological discourse is complemented by the problem of studying the network of civil society and the E-state, which causes a qualitatively different view of political power - as a disperse phenomenon, a set of political alternatives known and equal to all rules.

The author draws attention to the importance of lighting latent internal mechanisms for the implementation of political and / or power state for a deeper understanding of trends, implications and possible prospects of implementation of the strategy of systemic transformation of the Ukrainian state and society. At the same time, special attention is paid to the formation of a de facto semi-political confrontation between political and social actors of two types - representatives of the establishment and "opinion leaders" of the traditional and networked civil society. If the former are mainly representatives of the domestic political class of the post-Soviet period, then the latter are activists, intellectuals, artists, public, and eventually also potential statesmen (say, the young generation of people's deputies of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine of the VIII convocation), who came to the political and social advance during or after the revolutionary events of autumn 2013 - the winter of 2014. It is proved that in the conditions of those splits that occur now in Ukraine, the key social and political actors of socio-political shifts should be updated representatives of the ruling class, on the one hand, and «opinion leaders» from among the traditional and the network of civil society, on the other hand.

Substantiates the view that the expression of an effective and truly democratic interaction of the state and civil society should be to ensure transparent competitive environment and creating a realm where it becomes possible political dialogue between the government and citizens, which the state is ready to negotiate with its citizens about the important issues of social development. After all, the main problems of the national state building in Ukraine in the last two and a half decades are related precisely to the fact that the domestic ruling class has not managed to conduct a permanent public dialogue with citizens, and those attempts to formulate and put forward relevant projects of social agreements that were carried out by social actors from the civil society, did not find an adequate response from the political actors on the part of the state. Thus, it can be argued that while the attempts to "conventionalisation" Ukrainian political life are a model of "one-gates", when only one side of a potential public-public dialogue and the conclusion of a social contract on its basis is interested in such a process.

Moreover, the representatives of the establishment of various ideological and ideological and geopolitical directions, from the conventionally "pro- Moscow" to the conditionally "pro-American" and "pro-European" ones, have shown their disinterest. The basis of such a political dialogue should be symbolic of the conclusion convene social contract between senior representatives of the state and civil society on the basis of a political and social compromise. The importance of achieving a political and social compromise is due not only to the fact that without its achievement it is impossible to speak about the further political and socio-economic progress of our state in the conditions of a long Russian-Ukrainian military conflict and the unsolved numerous splits (intergenerational, value, structural-institutional, geopolitical And others) within the domestic society, but also because in recent decades, under the influence of the deployment and deepening of the processes of informatization and globalization in a substantial way the understanding of political and / or state power has changed - its essence, purpose, features of interaction with society and citizens.

A true "conventionalisation" of domestic political life is possible only on condition of recognition of the equality of both subjects in the conclusion of such a symbolic pact - and the leading figures of the political class and civil society actors, with their circle to be expanded as much as possible, including through the involvement of representatives of the network civil society, various communities of so-called "grassroots" public initiatives.