| Annotation |
The article examines the relationship between the State and civil society. It is mentioned that T. Hobbs and his followers believed that in the natural, pre-state people experienced the “natural desire of evil to each other”, so the emergence of the state was a forced measure and implemented in the form of a social contract. According to the author of the article, this theory of Hobbs implicitly refers to contradictions between the interests of man and society, which in the time of Hobbs was identified with the state. The basis for the analysis of the relationship between the New Age civil society and the State throughout its existence is the dispute between T. Paine, who considered the State to be a necessary evil, and G. Hegel, who defended the need for full control of civil society by the State. The article describes three forms of relations between the state – subject and civil society – object: the state can act in relation to civil society as absolute dictator (“Leviaphan” in T. Hobbs theory), strict controller (in G. V. F. Hegel theory) or “caring but strict father” (in the practice of the socialist state and partly in modern Russia). The democratic form should be subject-subject relations in the form of dialogue or social partnership. According to the author of the article, the obstacle to equal partnership is the contradiction between the interests of the State, which should be defended by officials and their personal interests, which they cannot ignore in their State activities
|
| References |
1. Akhiezer A. S. Tsivilizatsii. Vyp. 7: Dialog kultur i tsivilizatsiy (Civilizations. Vol. 7: Dialogue of cultures and civilizations), Moscow: Nauka, 2006, pp. 38–64.
2. Bektanova A. K. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofskie nauki (Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State University. Philosophical sciences), 2017, no. 4, pp. 83–88.
3. Vodenko K. V., Chernykh S. S. Gumanitariy Yuga Rossii (Humanitarian of the South of Russia), 2016, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 161–169.
4. Hegel G. Filosofiya prava (Philosophy of law). Moscow: Thought, 1990. 526 p.
5. Hobbes T. Izbrannye proizvedeniya: v 2 t. T. 2 (Selected works: in 2 volumes. Vol. 2). Moscow: Mysl, 1964, 744 p.
6. Zaitsev A. V. Gosudarstvo i grazhdanskoe obshchestvo: defitsit dialoga (State and civil society: dialogue deficit). URL: http://www.human.snauka.ru/2013/08/3703 (Date of access: 25.10.2019). Text: electronic.
7. Zinoviev A. A. Na puti k sverhobshchestvu (On the way to super-community). Moscow: Astrel, 2000. 563 p.
8. Kanunnikov A. A. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya (World Economy and International Relations), 2017, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 33–40.
9. Ogneva V. V, Pastukhov A. V. Nauchnye vedomosti Belgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya “Istoriya. Politologiya” (Scientific reports of the Belgorod State University. Series “History. Political science”), 2014, no. 8, pp. 150–155.
10. Payne T. Zdravy smysl (Common sense). URL: https://www.rulit.me/books/zdravyj-smysl-read-198697-1.html (Date of access: 25.10.2019). Text: electronic.
11. Ryabev V. V. V mire nauchnyh otkrytiy (In the world of scientific discoveries), 2014, no. 1–2, pp. 936–948.
12. Subbotin V. O. Vestnik Kostromskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta (Bulletin of the Kostroma State University), 2012, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 88–91.
13. Sungurov A. Yu. Modeli vzaimodeystviya organov gosudarstvennoy vlasti i struktur grazhdanskogo obshchestva: rossiyskiy opyt (Models of interaction between government bodies and civil society structures: Russian experience). URL: https://www.civisbook.ru/files/File/Sungurov_modeli.pdf (Date of access: 11.10.2019). Text: electronic.
14. Timasheva A. O. Vestnik Povolzhskogo instituta upravleniya (Bulletin of the Volga Institute of Management), 2014, no. 4, pp. 122–128.
15. Chicherin B. N. (The course of state science). URL: http://www.constitution.garant.ru/science-work/pre-revolutionar/3948892 (Date of access: 12.11.2018). Text: electronic.
16. Code of good practice for civil participation in the decision-making process. Adopted by the conference of ingos at its meeting on 1st october 2009 (Code of good practice for civil participation in the decision-making process. Adopted by the conference of ingos at its meeting on 1st october 2009). URL: http://www.eesc.europa.eu/resources/docs/code-of-good-pratice-for-civil-participation-inthedecision-making-process-en.pdf (Date of access: 12.10.2019). Text: electronic.
17. Details of treaty No. 124. European convention on the recognition of the legal personality of international non-governmental organisations (Details of treaty No. 124. European convention on the recognition of the legal personality of international non-governmental organisations). URL: http://www.rm.coe.int/168007a67c (Date of access: 12.10.2019). Text: electronic.
18. Ghaus-Pasha A. Role of civil society organizations in participatory and accountable governance (Role of civil society organizations in participatory and accountable governance). URL : http://www.unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan019594.pdf (Date of access: 12.08.2019). Text: electronic.
19. Keane J. Civil society, definitions and approaches (Civil society, definitions and approaches). URL: https://www.johnkeane.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/jk_civil_sciety_definitions_encyclopedia.pdf (Date of access: 06.10.2019). Text: electronic.
20. Sampson R., Macindoe H., Mcadam D., Weffer-Еlizondo S. American journal of sociology (American journal of sociology), 2005, vol. 111, no. 3, pp. 673–714. |
