Text of policy in the background of civilizational contexts and subtexts as a missing element of educational discourse

Urgency of the research. Politics as a set of practices and discourses regarding the optimal ordering of public life acquires signs of a certain text with all its features and regularities: with its authorial and subject style, with a combination of both conventionally acceptable and ambiguous accents, conclusions and proposals. However, today we have to state an unfortunate given: the aspect of civilization contexts and subtexts of politics, if it is presented, is only stated and postulated, although in fact it requires lengthy discursive alternatives and coverage of essentially different conceptual approaches, because only in this way we can hope for the argumentative expressiveness of significant paradigmatic differences and their consolidation by means of education at the level of consciousness in the educational sphere in general, and in domestic education in particular.

Target setting. The of research task lies in providing the civilizational context and subtext of policy by instruments of full educational discourse, that will not use "finished truths in the last instance", and will try to learn the difficult relief of this subject field in the way of full discourse, critical analysis and systematic reflection.

Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. The list of conceptual approaches to understanding the subject of research can be structured into four thematic branches, namely: the first research priority concerns the features and regularities of the civilizational approach to the operation of political reality, processes in the political sphere (A. Abulmagd, L. Arispe, H. Ashravi, M. Barg, F. Brodel, V. Galin, B. Erasov, I. Ionov, I. Kefeli, and others); the second research area deals with the phenomenon of political reality in the context of cultural and civilizational continuity, as well as with the essential differences between politics and other social practices (S. Oznobishchev, P. Riker, M. Sarki-siants, V. Sorokina, Ch. Mouffe, Ph. Schmitter, and others); the third thematic branch operates with the intellectual component of politics and the political vocation of the intellectual (A. Dyakov, P. Sloterdike, G. Smith and others); the fourth block of the source base deals with the theoretical and methodological positioning of politics with text that has its genre features, morphology, stylistics, texts and subtexts (I. Kasavin, E. Fidrich, I. Shchirova, E. Goncharova).

The research objective. To analyze the casual links of inadequate mastering of cultural and civilization achievements by the political sphere, to comprehend the ways and means of overcoming this theoretical and praxeological problem.

The statement of basic materials. Politics feels the steady influence of the civilization factor first of all and mainly because for various reasons the way of its existence prevents the careful selection of optimal articulation, argumentation and rhetorical approaches; instead of this, the civilization factor works not so much within the limits of specific and historical priorities, as in a much longer retrospective and perspective.

Unlike politics, for civilization modernity is a minor episode, which becomes meaningful only in the context of some historical continuity and prospects for the future. At the expense of the closest possible association links with the civilization factor, politics tries to legitimize and raise its institutional status and ensure a respectable image. It tries to prove that it also works on the principles of historical continuity, and her argumentatively vulnerable memoranda are not without prospects for the future.

Conclusions. In general, it must be noted that the educational sphere reflects political reality quite formally and passively at the level of stating rather than discursive practices. An indirect consequence of this disadvantage is the undeniable fact that the politicization of the intellectual sphere is much more intense than the intellectualization of the political sphere. In general, the research problems are diverse and multidimensional, and they define only the contours of the problem and need that are enormous in scope as well as social and political consequences.

Keywords: politics as text, evolutionary factors of political practices, civilizational conditionality, cultural and civilizational stereotype, geopolitical analogies, causal links.

 

References:

  1. Abulmagd, AK, Arispe, L & Ashravi, H 2002. ‘Preodolevaya barery: dialog mezhdu civilizaciyami (Overcoming barriers: dialogue among civilizations)’, per. s angl. TP Vecherina, red. per. SP Kapica, Moskva: Logos, 191 s.
  2. Aronson, O 2017. ‘Rasseyannyj fashizm (Absent-minded fascism)’. Dostupno: <http://left.by/archives/13400>. [15 Cherven 2020].
  3. Barg, MA 1991. ‘Civilizaionnyj podhod k istorii (Civilizational approach to history)’, Svobodnaya misl, № 3, s. 27–35.
  4. Brodel, F 2008. ‘Grammatika civilizacij (The grammar of civilizations)’, Moskva: Izdatelstvo “Ves Mir”, 552 s.
  5. Vidstoyuyuchi realizm: Centr nacionalnih interesiv zayaviv pro nebezpeku hrestovoyi zovnishnoyi politiki (Upholding realism: The Center for National Interests has stated the dangers of cross-foreign policy). Dostupno: <https://zik.ua/news/2019/05/05/vidstoyuyuchy_realizm_tsentr_natsionalnyh_interesiv_ssha_zayavyv_pro_nebezpeku_1565511>. [15 Cherven 2020].
  6. Galin, V 2013. ‘Poslednyaya civilizaciya. Politekonomiya XXI veka (The last civilization. The political economy of the XXI century)’, Moskva: Algoritm, 2013, 416 s.
  7. Konflikt ili dialog civilizacij? (Globalization. Conflict or dialogue of civilizations?) 2002. Institut mikroekonomiki, Moskva: Izd. dom “Novyj vek”, 364 s.
  8. Dergachev, VA 2004. ‘Civilizacionnaya geopolitika (Geofilosofiya) (Civilizational geopolitics (Geophilosophy))’, Kiev: VIRA-R, 667 s.
  9. Diligenskij, GG 1991. ‘“Konec istorii” ili smena civilizacij (The “end of history” or change of civilizations)’, Voprosy filosofii, № 3, s. 29–42.
  10. Dyakov, AV 2019. ‘Politicheskaya funkciya intellektuala: istoriya i sovremennost (The political function of intellectuals: history and the present)’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, № 1, s. 21–32.
  11. Erasov, BS 2002. ‘Civilizacii: Universalii i samobytnost (Civilization: Universal and the identity)’, otv. red. NN Zarubina, Moskva: Nauka, 524 s.
  12. Ionov, IN & Hachaturyan, VM 2002. ‘Teoriya civilizacij ot antichnosti do konca XIX veka (The theory of civilizations from antiquity to the late nineteenth century)’, SPb.: Aletejya, 384 s.
  13. Ichokin, AA 1995. ‘Relyativistskaya teoriya socialnoj cennosti i “svobodnaya ot cennosti” teoriya socialnoj organizacii (Relativistic theory of social values and “value-free” theory of social organization)’, Sociologicheskij zhurnal, № 3, s. 86–109.
  14. Kasavin, IT 2008. ‘Tekst. Kontekst. Diskurs: Vvedenie v socialnuyu epistemologiyu yazika (Text. Context. Discourse: Introduction to social epistemology of language)’, Moskva: Kanon+, ROOI “Reabilitaciya”,. 544 s.
  15. Kefeli, IF 1995. ‘Kultura i Civilizaciya (Culture and Civilization)’, Socialno-politicheskij zhurnal, № 4, s. 122–127.
  16. Kosmina, VG 2011. ‘Problemi metodologiyi civilizacijnogo analizu istorichnogo processu (Problems metodolog civilizing analso stolichnogo process)’. Monografiya, Zaporizhzhya: Zaporizkij nacionalnij universitet, 310 s.
  17. Kryober, A & Klakhon, K 1964. ‘Kultura: obraz koncepcij i opredelenij (Culture: the way of concepts and definitions)’, Moskva: Nauka, 208 s.
  18. Levyash, IYa 2012. ‘Globalnyj mir i geopolitika: kulturno-civilizacionnoe izmerenie (Global peace and geopolitics: the cultural-civilizational dimension)’. V 2 kn. Kn. 1, Minsk : navuka,  485 s.
  19. Lorenc, K 1998. ‘Vosem smertnyh grehov civilizovannogo chelovechestva (Eight deadly sins of civilized humanity)’, Oborotnaya storona zerkala, per. s nem. AI Fedorova & GF Shvejnika, pod red. AV Gladkogo, posleslovie AI Fedorova, Moskva: Respublika, 393 s.
  20. Macko, O 2019. ‘Zakat Evropy? Chto ostalos ot Notr-Dam de Pari (Sunset Europe? What is left of Notre-Dame de Paris)’, Delovaya stolica, 16 aprelya 2019.
  21. Mihajlovskij, A 2008. ‘Ponyatie politicheskogo v epohu “postpolitiki” (The concept of the political in the era of “Ostpolitik”)’, Mezhdunarodnaya zhizn, № 7, s. 3–16.
  22. Muff, Sh 2004. ‘Karl Shmitt i paradoks liberalnoj demokratii (Carl Schmitt and the paradox of liberal democracy)’, Logos, № 6 (45), s. 140–153.
  23. Oznobishev, SK 2019. ‘Tridcat tri rakursa politicheskoj realnosti (Thirty-three visions of political reality)’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, № 3, s. 186–191.
  24. Rikyor, P 1995. ‘Germenevtika. Etika. Politika (Hermeneutics. Ethics. Policy)’, Moskva: Academia, 160 s.
  25. Rifkin, Dzh 2017. ‘O novoj ekonomike, kotoraya pozvolit chelovechestvu vyzhit (About the new economy, which will allow humanity to survive)’. Dostupno: <http://left.by/archives/11249>. [15 Cherven 2020].
  26. Sarkisyanc, M 2003. ‘Anglijskie korni nemeckogo fashizma. Ot britanskoj k avstrobavarskoj “rase gospod” (English roots of German fascism. From British to australiaray “master-race”)’, s nem. M. Nekrasova, SPb: Akademicheskij proekt, 400 s.
  27. Sloterdajk, P 2009. ‘Kritika cinicheskogo razuma (Critique of cynical reason)’, Ekaterinburg: U-Faktoriya; Moskva: AST, 800 s.
  28. Sorokina, VS 2019. ‘Inscenirovanie politicheskoj realnosti (The staging of political reality)’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, № 6, s. 145–158.
  29. Tojnbi, ADzh 2003. ‘Civilizaciya pered sudom istorii (Civilization before the court of history)’, Moskva: Ajris-press,. 592 s.
  30. Tomislav Sunich: yevropejski novi pravi (Tomislav Sunic: European new rights), Dostupno: <http://blog.plomin.club/tomislav-sunic-european-new-right/>. [15 Cherven 2020].
  31. Fidrya, ES 2019. ‘Faktory i logiki rekonstruirovaniya smysla politicheskogo teksta v usloviyah kognitivnoj i interpretativnoj neopredelennosti (Factors and the logic of the reconstruction of the meaning of a political text in terms of cognitive and interpretative uncertainty)’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, № 4, s. 40–56.
  32. Shejkin, S 2012. ‘Poskrebi ruskogo – najdesh… polyaka (Scratch the Russian - you will find ... a Pole)’. Dostupno: // <http://www.rusfact.ru/node/2878>. [15 Cherven 2020].
  33. Shmitt, K 1992. ‘Ponyatie politicheskogo (The concept of the political)’, Voprosy sociologii, 1, № 1, s. 35–67.
  34. Shirova, IA & Goncharova, EA 2007. ‘Mnogomernost teksta: ponimanie i interpretaciya (The multidimensionality of the text: the comprehension and interpretation)’, : OOO “Knizhnyj Dom”,. 472 s.
  35. Elias, N 2001. ‘O processe civilizacii: Sociogeneticheskie i psihogeneticheskie issledovaniya (The process of civilization: socio-genetical and behavioral genetic research)’, T. 1,2, Moskva; SPb.: Universitetskaya kniga, 331 s. (T. 1), 381 s. (T. 2).
  36. Ailes, R 1995. ‘You are the message: Getting What You Want by Being Who You Are’, New Yor etc. 256 р.
  37. Fonseka,L. de. ‘On The Truth Of Decorative Art; A Dialogue Between an Oriental and an Occidental’, London: Greening, 233р.
  38. Mouffe, Ch ‘Agonistics: Thinking The World Politically’, London New York: Verso, 228р.
  39. Schmitter, Ph 2009. ‘The Nature and Future of Comparative Politics’, European Political Science Review, Vol. 1. № 1. 33–52.
  40. Smith, G 2014. ‘Intellectuals and (Counter-) Politics. Essays in Historical Realism’, New York; Oxford: Berghahn, 254 p.