Fundamentals of optimization of development of the ideology of state-building in Ukraine

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

6

Zaporizhzhya National University

UDC 321.01:101(477)

Fundamentals of optimization of development of the ideology of state-building in Ukraine

O.V. Krasnokutskyi Candidate of Philosophical Sciences (PhD)

Assistant Professor, Doctoral student of Department of

Social Philosophy and Management

Zaporizhia, Ukraine



Introduction

Definition of the problem and its relationship with important scientific and practical tasks. Identification, comprehensive understanding of the main determinants of state building of optimization of ideological phenomenon in contemporary Ukrainian society, and, above all, the primary basic determinants are integral pieces of the social and philosophical study of the problem of formation of the ideology of state-building, effective solution of which will help optimize the processes of state-building and building of a qualitatively new Ukrainian state.

Analysis of the recent researches and publications, which discuss this issue and on which the author bases his study. In recent years the problem of state-ideology directly or indirectly rises to the level of monographic literature (W. Andruschenko, V. Volovyk, L. Hubersky, Mihalchenko M. etc.), the dissertation works (I. Myklaschuk, M. Pleshko etc.), publications in periodicals, professional journals (S. Vovkanych, M. Yenin, A. Khoroshilov etc.). However, only some authors of the works in the sphere of ideology, try to determine key factors and optimize the development of the social and spiritual phenomenon [4, p. 26-30]. Therefore, taking into account the necessities of the present, organization and debug of the current state of affairs of the country and the relevant ideological measurements, there is an urgent need to study the primary, basic determinants and the bases with the help of which the systematic improvement of the defined ideology of progress in Ukraine becomes possible. In our social and philosophical quests we primarily rely on the theoretical models of V. Volovyk and continue to conceptualize the ideology as an original kind of theoretically based practical consciousness.

The purpose of the article is to research the primary unit of the system of the determinants of the optimization of the ideology of state in the Ukrainian society.



The main material

The first (primary) unit of the determinants of the optimization of the ideology of state in modern Ukrainian society can be called "theoretical" [6, p. 12] as it contains specific determinants related to the development of the expanded theory that is needed to improve the current statebuilding ideology. "However, it is clear today that achievement of the desired change in the ideology of state-building requires a reliable theory" [4, p. 28].

This unit is a system that unites under its "umbrella" those factors that are directly related to the development of all the theoretical aspects of state-building, the whole gamma and completeness of the necessary theory as the highest form of scientific knowledge. It is integrating both the theory of the society, and the theory of the state, and of course, the theory of the state building.

Taking into account that the latter is conceptualized as a process of our activities of the creation of a new state, and the state itself - as a political form of society, it is correctly to speak of the need for the creation of a single original format metatheory - the theory of society and the state and the state-building, which would occupy the central place in the conceptual dimensions of the designated unit. It is clear that the latter, together with the corresponding metatheory should be considered as primary, basic, fundamental construct of an appropriate system being its foundation, as it is maximally synchronized with high nature of the researched ideology as a special kind of theory-based practical consciousness, corresponding to its spiritual frequencies naturally combining with the structural lines of state-building of the ideological world.

Embracing a conceptual view of the relevant block design it should be noted that during the last two decades some solid steps towards developing of theoretical foundation outlines of state-building, creating outlines of the theory of society, state and state-building were made. It is appropriate to recall the theoretical exploration achievements of M. Amosov, W. Andrushchenko, V. Bekh, V. Voronkova, L. Hubersky, W. Kremen, V. Kudin, V. Lytvyn, V. Medvedchuk, M. Myhalchenko, A. Skrypniuk, D. Tabachnik, V. Tkachenko, A. Tolstoukhov, V. Tsvetkov, Yu. Shemshuchenko and, of course, of many other representatives of the national philosophical and scientific thought and other social scientists and statesmen. society state geopolitical ukrainian

It should also be noted, in particular, theoretical results of the respected author team, in the broad-based community of which there are V. Geyts, A. Danilenko, M. Zhulynskiy, Yu. Levenets, E. Libanova, A. Onishchenko, M. Popovic and dozens of other researchers that were presented to the NAS of Ukraine in the relevant national reports on the key problems of socio-economic, socio-political and cultural progress of modern Ukraine [7; 10].

The first report "Social and Economic Situation in Ukraine: Consequences for People and the State", on the one hand makes the complex analysis of the conditions and determinants of economic, social, political, legal and humanitarian development of Ukraine in the light of the threats and risks associated with including crisis processes in the modern world, and on the other hand it proposes vision of the strategy, ways and mechanisms to overcome the systematic crisis and lead the country to the dynamic growth targets.

Its ideological successor is- the second national report "New Course: Reforms in Ukraine, 2010-2015" the aim of which was to outline the conceptual vision of a radically new course of implementation in Ukraine of urgent modernized transformations, concrete tasks and mechanisms for their implementation formed by the domestic academic science. This report is actually a strategic and at the same time practical document aimed at the future.

However, it would be a significant exaggeration to believe that today we have before us a detailed map of the theory of state-building as the highest form of scientific knowledge, logically structured systems enabling coherent synthetic representation of patterns and significant relationships of the specifically defined area of reality, let alone a single metatheory - the theory of society, state and nation-building. In support of this we give a number of critical points.

First of all, we should note an obvious fact that today, as well as over the years of its independence, we actually do not have a single institution, either at national level or beyond it, under the patronage and in the name of which the systematic laborious development of all aspects of the theoretical foundations of state-building would be conducted and a large-scale creation theory of society, state and state-building would be made and that this theory would set the tone, and at the same time promote a general line of this development and this creation.

And this is the first. Obviously, this institution by the natural logic of things would have to be, above all, the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine as the highest state scientific institution of the country, which, indeed, by virtue of its status may play the first violin in the generation and realization of the indicated line and run full theoretical investigations of the state building content and direction.

However this unfortunately did not happen, because of different reasons and circumstances about which we sometimes could only guess being sincerely surprised with helplessness and irresponsibility of national scientific public, whose members were often themselves at the helm of the state ruling. Those rare occasions when the NAS initiates the state-building search, like the above named collective works - national reports are a pleasant exception that proves the general rule and the moment mentioned by us.

We have to admit that most modern Ukrainian researchers when starting to work, individually or collectively, on one or other theoretical issues of creation and transformation of the state body, or boldly encroaching on the "holy of holies" - grasp the nature of the theoretical dimension of society, state and statebuilding, often act on their own initiative, relying mainly on themselves, their own strength and understanding.

At the same time it is impossible not to notice the eye cutting conceptual fuzziness, vagueness of the theoretical foundation of state-building, as well as the set of theories of society, the state and the state-building, the lack, at least, of a common format unifying different theoretical and research positions. This creates significant obstacles on the way to the establishment and strengthening of the metatheory necessary to the state-ideology. And this is the second thing.

This situation is a logical continuation of the first moment which we had mentioned. In addition, we must take into account weakness of interdisciplinary foundation of various research projects, studies, affecting directly or indirectly the state issues, the insufficient level of philosophical, scientific culture of individual authors, who work with a certain range of questions going into theoretical depth of a social body, state-building and diverse perspectives of its development and reconstruction and the limitations of their professional competence, which prevent them from understanding of the nature of certain issues.

This is a classical situation when legal scholars who are knowledgeable in the field of the theory of the state, when developing state issues, do not pay attention to the theoretical work of national philosophical thought and created with its help theoretical models of a modern society, socium and social world run away from philosophical texts almost like a "devil from holy water".

In contrast, philosophers of Wisdom produce some interesting, original concepts that describe the social world, creating innovative theoretical developments, new models of social organization that can be sometimes understood, in fact, due to various reasons, only by a limited number of persons including, above all, the creators of the data concepts.

They often prefer to talk generally about the state and the statebuilding in their texts thus mentally spinning the most important forms, aspects, facets of life of the social organism. As for the representatives of politological science and political scientists, we sometimes get the impression that they are to some extent abstracted from mental schemes either of the scholars or philosophers, being held captive by their own theoretical structures.

As a result, the urgent matter, that should unite both scientists and philosophers into a solid first, is permanently in the birth tortures. I mean, of course - the birth of the metatheory, which is extremely necessary to optimize the ideology of state-building in modern Ukrainian society during its transformation.

The indicated moment can be added to one more very important statement from the point of view of intensification of metatheoretical search of a necessary metatheory-namely the uncertainty of a conceptual model of the society, including the modern Ukrainian one. And this is the third thing. In the bosom of home social and philosophical thought the first more or less common outlines of this model are being tested now and the author's position on the issue is being agreed.

Thus, V. Andruschenko speaks of an organized society as a model of transition from totalitarianism to democracy capable of solving the problem of organization and social self-organization in the period of radical transformation in Ukraine at the turn of the century [1]. Based on a thorough comprehending of the concept of "social body", B. Bekh produces interesting thoughts on self-regulation of the social organism of the country [2; 8].

While agreeing in general with his colleagues, V. Voronkova speaks of "self-governing society" as a new social phenomenon, as well as of the formation and development of innovative paradigms of modern Ukrainian society, on the one hand, and the formation of the noospheric concept of modern society in the context of globalization, on the other hand [5].

Next. Fourth, the vast majority of local researchers who approach to the theoretical development of the process of creating a qualitatively new state structure and certain aspects of it, or try to build a theoretical scheme of society, state and state-building, with admirable tenacity and for a long time don't pay their attention to considering such extremely important issues as laws and regularities which subordinate to themselves the development of extremely complex phenomena of social reality: society, state, state-building as a process of its creation and subsequent transformation and improvement. Without their solutions there is nothing to hope for the emergence of an extensive full-valued theory of state formation and, consequently, a single metatheory that interests us.

Fifth, there is a lack of a single, clearly defined and theoretically grounded Ukrainian national idea, approved by most citizens and understandable to them, which would be a kind of a pivot around which a solid foundation of the theory of society, state and state-building will eventually be formed up. It should be noted, that since the time of the declaration of independence the interest to the national idea among the community and leading scientific and philosophical circles has been considerably high.

This is testified by numerous publications and a whole galaxy of authors among whom we can mention such representatives as I. Diyak, V. Kremen, M. Kubayevskiy, M. Lepskiy, D. Lukyanenko, D. Pavlychko, M. Popovich, B. Sushinskuy, A. Phartushniy, A. Chernenko and so on. No doubt, they multiplied the national treasury of state-ideological activity which had been developed on the territory of independent Ukraine. However, it is well-known that the issue of the Ukrainian national idea still remains open and ambiguous for discussion.

As it is noted in the national report of the NAS of Ukraine, "the increased attention of researchers, politicians and ordinary citizens to the national idea in Ukraine has been due to an abrupt change of the political and legal status when it became a sovereign and independent state. Since then, the state has been made for a short time to look for new ways of political, economic and cultural development and define itself in European and global spaces and for the citizens of Ukraine - to define not only their citizenship but also political, economic and cultural value orientations. One part of the population broke the barrier of identification as citizens of Ukraine, while the other part failed to do it and emigrated and the rest of them went to the conscious inner emigration having got passports of citizens of Ukraine but identified themselves as citizens of the USSR or other countries. One reason for this identification division is the lack of spiritual unity of the society, integrating ideas, projects and perspectives" [10, p. 437].

It seems possible to agree in general with the thesis that the Ukrainian national idea in general appears as a form of reflection of social reality, as the result of understanding by the social and scientific thought of the main object of knowledge - social development.

This, indeed, is not only an item or a form of the knowledge and a component of social consciousness, but in some way, of course, the "bridge" to the transition from the thought to the action, from consciousness to the activity. It is a form of theoretical understanding of reality, which includes two aspects: on the one hand, a theory of the ideal object of national power, and on the other hand, the plan to implement this object into practice. The national idea outlines practical ways of the embodiment of the ideal object not only into political, but also economic, spiritual and cultural and historical reality [10, p. 439].

It is obvious that we are (and for some time!) on the threshold of developing, generating of a single, clearly defined, reasonable and understandable for most citizens theoretically grounded Ukrainian national idea. It seems that one of the guides here is creation of a new Ukrainian state as a truly sovereign and independent country, on the one hand, and democratic, social and legal one on the other hand. "The task of a further development of the national idea, strengthening its regulatory influence in the whole is on the agenda of social development.

The attention to this problem is actualized by the goals of political and economic reforms, search of prospects of Ukraine, geopolitical and geo-economic objectives of the country's determination, search of strategic and tactical partners in the world, concern for the living standards of the population and for its survival, human rights and freedoms" [10, p. 441].

Sixth, there is a lack on the domestic field of modern theoretical developments appealing to the masses of people of social and political idea as the state-political system to which the citizens of the country would strive in their thinking and practical deeds. "But it is early to speak of the existence of the expanded state-theory, It is early, because there is no attractive social and political ideal - the political system of government to which our fellow citizens will seek in their thoughts feelings and deeds" [9, p. 317-318].

As it turns out, these developments are absent today, unfortunately, either with theorists or practitioners of politics. thus, some representatives of the political science (A. Wysotskiy), exploring in their modern development the basic problems of legitimization and modernization of political power in modern Ukraine, indicate on the territory of the latter extreme weakness and the lack of social solidarity and the attractive model of a common future [3].

As a rule, we will not meet such a social and political ideal today either on the pages of serious monographs, scientific and popular literature, newspapers, magazines, or on the pages of various national reports of respected scientific institutions. "Now the search of the ideal by theorists of the parties and movements that grow like mushrooms after a heavy rain, either is concentrated on a quest to restore, revive the past, removed from the modern time by more or less thicker or thinner walled years, or even is taken out beyond the actual process of historical development of Ukraine. The ideal, so to say, is searched around somewhere on the side. We can confidently assert that the first and second of these paths have no prospects" [9, p. 318].

We are solidary in mind, that "only the scientific research, based on the objective analysis of the historical development of Ukrainian society can be perspective. Besides, this research must take into consideration the past experience and the present state of things and it must be aimed at the achievement of a better future. In other words, the attractive social and political ideal of Ukraine should be found on the ways of its social progress. By this we mean a comprehensive and harmonious development of the society, its economy and culture, improvement of welfare of people and prosperity of their spiritual life; the increase of the level of freedom of every citizen in the development of their social importance, that is valuable abilities necessary to the society" [4, p. 29].

Seventh, the necessity of a clear definition, conceptual processing of the ways and means of achieving of the social and political ideal attractive to the people logically comes up from the above mentioned moment. "The next condition that you must stick to if you want to speak about the presence of the state-building theory is to define clearly the ways and means of achieving of the goal and the ideal" [9, p. 318]. And as you know, the definition of real ways, creation of effective mechanisms for the achievement of certain pre-election promises, public policy programs, etc. is usually the biggest problem in the country.

Thus every time during the presidential elections the potential candidates for the highest position of the state government give out to the right and, of course, to the left quite generous promises, package them into glamorously presented shapes, bright covers with eloquently highlighted slogans appealing to common people and don't really care (to tell the truth) about the issues of further realization of their commitments which they distribute around with royal generosity.

It is remarkable, by the way, that most of the recipients of these obligations do not prefer to think seriously about how and at the expense of whom the future leader of the state is going to implement his numerous promises, programs, slogans and goals. And it can't but hurt "let's recollect the last presidential elections (elections of 2010 - O.K). All the candidates for the highest public position in Ukraine were rich in their promises as it is typical in such cases. But none of them offered an alternative source of financing with the help of which their programs can be really fulfilled. And this circumstance played its role in the choice which most of our countrymen made when they came to the polls" [9, p. 318].



Conclusions of the given study and prospects of further researches in this area

A positive solution of all above mentioned "Gordian knots", all of the seven problematic issues will make it possible to revive the theoretical foundation of national state-building and optimize the emergence of metatheory which is necessary for the improvement of the exiting state-building ideology. And then, really, we can hope, not in words but in deeds, for the emergence of innovative, high-quality and science based product, including a map of the theory of statebuilding. The properly formatted, crystallized Ukrainian national idea as well as the social and political ideal attractive for the people and conceptually developed ways and means of its achievement can find their places in this product. Many other novelties and innovations so necessary in the field of creation of a qualitatively new Ukrainian state can also be a part of this product.

Prospects for further research in this direction include a conceptual analysis of one more unit-the "cultural" unit of the system of determinants of optimization of the development of the ideology of state in the modern Ukrainian society.



References

1. Andrushchenko, V.P. (2006), Orhanizovane suspilstvo. Problema orhanizatsii ta suspilnoi samoorhanizatsii v period radykalnykh transformatsii v Ukraini na rubezhi stolit: dosvid sotsialnofilosofskoho analizu [Organized society. The problem of organization and social self-organization in a period of radical transformations in Ukraine at the turn of the century: experience of socio-philosophical analysis], Atlant YuEmSi Publ., Kyiv, Ukraine.

2. Bekh, V.P. (1998), Sotsialnyy organizm: filosofsko-metodologicheskiy analiz [Social organism: philosophical and methodological analysis], Tandem-UPubl., Zaporozhye, Ukraine.

3. Висоцький О. ЮРу.^.^і, O.Yu. (2012), Politychna vlada v Ukraini: problemy lehitymatsii ta modernizatsii [Political power in Ukraine: problems of legitimation and modernization], Innovatsiia Publ., Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine.

4. Volovyk, V. (2001), «Main factors of the formation of the ideology of state-building», Viche, no. 12 (117), pp. 22-31.

5. Voronkova, V.H. (2012), Filosofiia rozvytku suchasnoho suspilstva: teoretyko- metodolohichnyi kontekst [The philosophy of development of modern society: theoretical and methodological context], ZDIA Publ., Zaporizhia, Ukraine.

6. Krasnokutskyi, O.V. (2013), «The system of main determinants of optimization of development ideology of state-building in Ukrainian society during its transformation», Aktualni problemy sotsialno-humanitarnykh nauk, Dnipropetrovsk, part ІІ, pp. 12-15.

7. Averianov, V.B., Azhniuk, B.M., Bohdan, T.P. et al. (2010), Novyi kurs: reformy v Ukraini, 2010-2015: natsionalna dopovid [New course: reforms in Ukraine, 2010-2015: national report], NVTs NBUVPubl., Kyiv, Ukraine.

8. Andrushchenko, T.I., Bekh, V.P., Bekh, Yu.V. et al. (2010), Samorehuliatsiia sotsialnoho orhanizmu krainy [Self-regulation of the social organism of country], NPU imeni M.P. Drahomanova Publ., Kyiv, Ukraine.

9. Volovyk, V.I., Lepskyi, M.A., Butchenko, T.I. and Krasnokutskyi, O.V. (2011), Sotsialna filosofiia [Socialphilosophy], Prosvita Publ., Zaporizhia, Ukraine.

10. Amosha, O.I., Andros, Ye.I., Bazhal, Yu.M. et al. (2009), Sotsialno-ekonomichnyi stan Ukrainy: naslidky dlia narodu ta derzhavy: natsionalna dopovid [The socio-economic condition Ukraine: consequences for people and the state: national report], NVTs NBUV Publ., Kyiv, Ukraine.



Список використаної літератури

1. Андрущенко В. П. Організоване суспільство. Проблема організації та суспільної самоорганізації в період радикальних трансформацій в Україні на рубежі століть: досвід соціально-філософського аналізу /В. П. Андрущенко. - К. : Атлант ЮЕмСі, 2006. - 502 с.

2. Бех В. П. Социальный организм: философско-методологический анализ : [монография] /В. П. Бех. - Запорожье : Тандем-У, 1998. - 186 с.

3. Політична влада в Україні: проблеми легітимації та модернізації: [монографія] / О. Ю. Висоцький. - Дніпропетровськ : Інновація, 2012. - 130 с.

4. Воловик В. Основні фактори становлення ідеології державотворення / В. Воловик //Віче. - 2001. - № 12 (117). - С. 22-31.

5. Воронкова В. Г. Філософія розвитку сучасного суспільства: теоретико- методологічний контекст : монографія / В. Г. Воронкова. - Запоріжжя : ЗДІА, 2012. - 262 с.

6. Краснокутський О. В. Система основних детермінант оптимізації розвитку

ідеології державотворення в українському суспільстві на етапі його трансформації / О. В. Краснокутський // Актуальні проблеми соціально-гуманітарних наук: матеріали ІІ Всеукр. наук. конф., 29-30 лист. 2013 р., Дніпропетровськ. Ч. ІІ / наук. ред. О. Ю.

Висоцький. - Дніпропетровськ : Роял Принт, 2013. - С. 12-15.

7. Новий курс: реформи в Україні, 2010-2015: національна доповідь / [Авер 'янов В. Б., Ажнюк Б. М., Богдан Т. П. та ін.] ; за заг. ред. В. М. Гейця [та ін.] ; НАН України. - К.: НВЦНБУВ, 2010. - 232 с.

8. Саморегуляція соціального організму країни : монографія /[Андрущенко Т. І., Бех

В. П., Бех Ю. В. та ін.] ; за наук. ред. В. П. Беха. - К. : Вид-во НПУ імені М. П. Драгоманова, 2010. - 652 с.

9. Соціальна філософія : монографія / [Воловик В. І., Лепський М. А., Бутченко Т. І., Краснокутський О. В.]. - Запоріжжя : Просвіта, 2011. - 376 с.

10. Соціально-економічний стан України: наслідки для народу та держави: національна доповідь /[Амоша О. І., Андрос Є. І., Бажал Ю. М. та ін.] ; за заг. ред. В. М. Гейця [та ін.] ; НАН України. - К. : НВЦ НБУВ, 2009. - 687 с.



Annotation

Fundamentals of optimization of development of the ideology of state-building in Ukraine. O. V. Krasnokutskyi Candidate of Philosophical Sciences (PhD), Assistant Professor, Doctoral student of Department of Social Philosophy and Management) Zaporizhzhya National University, Zaporizhia, Ukraine krasnokutskij@rambler.ru

The first «theoretical» unit of the main determinants of the optimization of the ideology of state in modern Ukrainian society is analyzed, its top construct - the creation of an appropriate metatheory as a unified theory of society, state and state-building is found out. Weakness of elaboration of such a metatheory in general and a map of the theory of state-building in particular is stated. The author defined a number of problematic issues whose solution will enable to revive the theoretical foundation of national state building and optimize the birth of metatheory necessary to improve the current state-building ideology.

Keywords: society, state, state-building, theory, ideology, theory of state-building, statebuilding ideology.



Анотація

Проаналізовано перший, «теоретичний» блок системи основних детермінант оптимізації розвитку ідеології державотворення в сучасному українському суспільстві, виявлено його провідний конструкт - творення відповідної метатеорії як єдиної теорії суспільства, держави й державотворення. Констатовано слабкість проробки такої метатеорії в цілому й розгорнутої карти теорії державотворення зокрема. Виокремлено ряд проблемних моментів, розв'язання яких дозволить реанімувати теоретичний фундамент вітчизняного державного будівництва, оптимізувати народження метатеорії, необхідної для вдосконалення наявної державотворчої ідеології.

Ключові слова: суспільство, держава, державотворення, теорія, ідеологія, теорія державотворення, ідеологія державотворення.



Аннотация

Основы оптимизации развития идеологии государственного строительства в Украине. А. В. Краснокутский (кандидат философских наук, доцент, докторант кафедры социальной философии и управления) Запорожский национальный университет, Запорожье, Украина krasnokutskij@rambler.ru

Проанализирован первый, «теоретический» блок системы основных детерминант оптимизации развития идеологии государственного строительства в современном украинском обществе, выявлен его ведущий конструкт - создание соответствующей метатеории как единой теории общества, государства и государственного строительства.

Констатирована слабость проработки такой метатеории в целом и развёрнутой карты теории государственного строительства в частности. Выделен ряд проблемных моментов, разрешение которых позволит реанимировать теоретический фундамент отечественного государственного строительства, оптимизировать рождение метатеории, необходимой для усовершенствования существующей государственно-созидающей идеологии.

Ключевые слова: общество, государство, государственное строительство, теория, идеология, теория государственного строительства, идеология государственного строительства.

Размещено на Allbest.ru