Policy as activity on management of a society (the functional approach)

At the functional approach the essence of a policy is seen in division of duties and powers at their indispensable coordination. Participants of political life carry out the roles strictly caused by rules which division is necessary for maintenance of efficiency of a policy and preservation of integrity of a society.

The functional approach focuses the basic attention to technologies of political interactions, that is on the one who makes political decisions as they are carried out, what ways of reaction of managing directors on changing living conditions of a society. Ancient Greek философ Платон (427-347 BC) considered that the management skill demands connection from people of "courageous customs» and "prudence". These qualities (wisdom and prudence), on Platon, philosophers who should correct the state possess. Other groups of the population - soldiers, handicraftsmen and farmers - should obey philosophers and be engaged everyone in the craft.

The philosopher already then has truly noticed that direct creators of a policy are political elite and leaders without which the policy cannot exist. Creators of a policy they are because possess the special knowledge necessary for acceptance of political decisions and a management by a society. There, where incompetence of elite and leaders is found out, are shown эгоистичность their interests, a separation from requirements of weights, the policy loses the интегративную function, ability to co-ordinate and regulate public processes. As an example it is enough to address to processes in the former states: Yugoslavia and the USSR. With disintegration of political elite which provided integration of the state formations, with destruction of the objective bases of their integrity they have broken up; and in the Yugoslavian Federation disintegration was accompanied by civil war between its some subjects.

However elite and leaders - sometimes only actors on a scene, behind them someone costs, someone skilfully supervises over their actions. The functional approach does not open social sense of a policy, the nature of those interests which it realises. It does not help searches of the answer to a question: why it is in power frequent an eye -

Through a number of definitions, each of which reflects its intrinsic signs. First, the policy is sphere of imperious relations, that is relations concerning the power, its organisation, distribution between various groups of interests, definitions of a line of activity of the state and its institutes. Secondly, the policy is a way of the organisation of the public life, based on integration of diverse interests, their coordination on the basis of the general interest uniting all members of a society. Realisation and domination of the general interest in a counterbalance to private requirements of individuals, groups are realised by the state. Thirdly, the policy represents activity of elite and leaders on a management and management of social development processes at all levels by means of government institutes.

Policy as special type of the social relation "friend-enemy" (K.Shmitt)

Special version конфликтологического understanding of a policy is political Charles Shmitt's theory (1888-1985). He suggests to develop such criterion political which would have practical and informative value and allowed to reveal specificity of a policy. As criterion for definition of the nature of polic K.Shmitt "friend-enemy" offered a dichotomy. The concept "enemy" should be interpreted in its literal sense: it is the one who is hostile to you.

In the fundamental work «Concept of a policy» (1931) it confirmed: «Specific definition political under which political actions and motivations fall, consists in accurate differentiation of the friend and the enemy... Thus the political enemy not necessarily should be bad from the point of view of morals or ugly from the point of view of an aesthetics. It it will be not obligatory to play a role of the competitor economy level, and as required with it it can appear favourable to deal. It is simple someone other, a stranger, and its nature is defined already by that all existence it proves other, another's, such that finally with it there can be conflicts which it will appear it is impossible to resolve with the help before the established general norms, at intermediary of any third party which is considered not interested and without the biassed... At level of the concrete validity of the concept of the enemy assumes struggle possibility...»

Later, in 1963 K.Shmitt has specified that its concept of the enemy did not mean that this enemy should be destroyed and that he meant «defence, test of forces and an establishment of the general border».

Contrary to Gobbs, K.Shmitt value of a policy sees not that it can lead to a pacification and well-being, and is faster that oblivion of distinction the friend-enemy can lead to decline.

Essence of polic K.Shmitt saw in war, including in war between the people. The war right the state which represents itself as the political integrity concentrating the huge power, and the decision-making centre possesses. According to K.Shmittu, «both possibilities are embodied in the state: possibility to demand from the citizens of readiness to go to death and other possibility - to demand from them readiness to kill the human beings who are in hostile camp».

Later power interpretation of a policy was widely adopted in a political science. The American scientist Dzh. Дэнис in policy sphere includes all situations in which to achievement of the planned purposes various subjects (groups threaten, to a generality, individuals) and danger of threat is so great that it cannot be prevented privately and intervention of bodies of the public power is required.