Social policy of the state as complex systems management tool

The purpose of this article is to show the state as an instrument of control of complex systems in the sphere of social policy. The named scope includes many complex systems, the management of which requires an integrated, systemic approach and does not always imply the achievement of unambiguous results. With a great degree of certainty one can say that in social policy to achieve unambiguous results, planned in advance, is not always successful. This is explained, in our opinion, by the peculiarities of social policy, in particular, the inclusion of an endless variety of social ties between the subjects of social activities in it. An infinite variety of social ties to some extent is regulated by such a powerful instrument of social policy, as a state. What is the role of the state in social policy depends largely on the effectiveness of social control. In turn, the role of the state in many respects depends on the implementation of the social policy of the state interests. If one tries to find something in common in different versions of the definition of "public interest", the following can be noted. All these options provide different methods (sometimes contradictory) of the decision of one and the same question about the collision between state and corporate interests. The term "corporation" in this case is used in the broadest sense as an association of people of interest: economic, bureaucratic, social, national, political, etc. It should be borne in mind that all of these options reflect the real processes taking place in practically all countries of the world. This undeniable fact must be taken into account in the formulation of the national interests. In this context the problem of formulating state interests is in an inconsistent, simultaneous and constant interaction and confrontation of the government and corporate interests. It is this interaction and confrontation that constitute the problem, it is its content, the essence of it. It would be a mistake to assume that this problem can only be solved in favor of the state or corporations. The solution of the problem should be sought in the optimal mix of corporate and government (in the broad sense) interests. It is obvious and has long proved that without the state as the main management body of the company it is impossible to achieve a consensus in the society as a number of corporations that have different interests. Hence inevitably follows that the optimality criterion are the signs of the state as such, the signs of the state, which "should be". Unlike corporations, which can appear and disappear, the state as such (regardless of the form of government and political system)"must be there". The state as such has a number of well-known immutable attributes, which can be reduced to three main: 1) territory; 2) population; 3) resources of all kinds (economic, political, intellectual, natural, etc.).

Keywords

Authors

References