Priorities of cultural policy in the context of national security

This article discusses the cultural policy as an important factor of national security. National security in the framework of this work is understood not only as the territorial integrity of the state borders, but also as a condition of protection of the individual, society and the state from external and internal threats which associated with the non-military factor. Analyzes the evolution of the concept of «cultural policy», as applied to the modern conditions of Kazakhstan. Reviewed approaches and principles on which the implementation of cultural policy by the example of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

During the last two decades, in which issues of national security was developed, there have been some shifts in the understanding of the basics of this phenomenon. Instead of the military component of national security non-military components moved to the forefront.

Despite the resistance of supporters of the traditional military-force approach today in the scientific community increasingly supporters gets the concept of cultural and humanitarian bases of national security. In this regard, states should pay attention to the cultural and humanitarian factors in ensuring national security. Therefore, correctly defined priorities in cultural policy will create a favorable atmosphere for national security.

In order to study this question it is important to clarify the concept of «cultural policy». One of the first definitions of this term was given at the round table of UNESCO in 1967 in Monaco. In the report «Cultural Policy — Preliminary considerations» under the policy in the sphere of culture was decided to understand the «complex of operational principles, administrative and financial activities and procedures which formed the basis of state action in the field of culture» In this context, the implementation of policy in the sphere of culture is «the full amount of conscious and deliberate action (or lack of action) in society which aimed at achieving specific cultural objectives through the optimal use of all physical and spiritual resources of the society at a given time» [1].

The definition proposed by the famous French researchers in the field of cultural policy Genevieve Augustine and Gerard Gentil, emphasizes the definition of «cultural policy» in terms of not only their goals, but also the conditions of institutions and resources: «Politics is a system of interrelated goals, practical tasks and the means chosen by the expert and aimed at a particular group in society. Cultural policy can be carried out within the framework of associations, parties, educational movements, organizations, businesses and city government. But regardless of subject of policy, it assumes the existence of long-term goals, medium-term and measurable objectives and means (human resources, finance and legal framework) united into an extremely complex system» [1].

Emphasizing the complexity of cultural policy as a control object, its complexity and not reducible to its constituent elements, the French researchers give the correct formulation of the strategic objectives of cultural development, but left outside the brackets the problem of tactical and operational management of cultural institutions from the state institutions.

According to the concept of cultural policy in the Republic of Kazakhstan: Cultural policy — this is the main ideological platform of each successful state, which forms the main value systems of society and the individual creative source [1]. An important factor in the strategy of becoming a sovereign state, to ensure its national security is the preservation and development of national culture society. As noted in the program of cultural development of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2006–2008 «culture as a whole system of spiritual values, affecting all spheres of public life, in conditions of life of the secular democratic state takes on the task of preserving moral compass of the people» [2].

Nowadays development of culture and cultural potential is one of most important priorities of many peoples and nations of the world. One of the most important success criteria is the level of development of culture, the presence of a well functioning infrastructure of cultural institutions and mechanisms to ensure the preservation and enrichment of the national and world cultural heritage, creation, translation, and the consumption of high-quality cultural values, cultural exchanges and productive spiritual and creative selfrealization of the individual.

National security will not be nearly complete without the inclusion of a reasonable system of activities for the conservation, reproduction and improvement of the national culture. Protection of national culture by and large — one of the most important functions of the army, police, judicial systems, legal provisions, consistently active domestic and foreign policy. The foundations of such security are economic independence, preserve the country and its people unique culture, consciousness of self-worth and the last based on this self-esteem. The country can lose much in the material sense, but it can reborn still retains its spiritual, cultural and intellectual potential.

What is the meaning of «culture» within the context of national security? It is known that in the scientific and educational literature there is a huge number of definitions of culture that reflect the contradictory nature of the philosophical, methodological or conceptual approaches, assessments of the phenomenon. Each of the definitions is committed to overall, universal fixing of the most important features and aspects of culture. But in reality, any definition emphasizes and highlights only some face side of this phenomenon. This is explained by the fact that, firstly, culture or its elements are incredibly complex phenomenon located also in constant development and change; secondly, the culture in the broadest sense identical concepts of society; third, person who studies culture belongs to a culture that is inside, his assessment, methods of perception and language of his environment depend on the value-normative content of this culture. Therefore evaluation of one's culture, cultural position can not be completely impartial, deprived of subjectivity [3]. Culture in the broadest sense there is an environment of social existence of man, his «second nature» which he creates, produces, distributes and transmits to descendants as existing, sustainable value (material, spiritual, social), symbols, norms, traditions, and ceremonies. Therefore evaluation of one's culture and cultural position can not be completely impartial, deprived of subjectivity [3]. Culture in the broadest sense there is an environment of social existence of human, his «second nature» which he creates, produces, distributes and transmits to descendants as existing, sustainable value (material, spiritual, social), symbols, norms, traditions, and ceremonies. The content of culture and especially forms of its manifestation is always national and therefore unique. So the concept of «national security» is functionally follows from the nature of national culture.

The biggest and the most attractive feature of national culture — is its amazing variety, originality and uniqueness. Developing features of their culture nation avoids imitation and humiliated copy, creates its own forms of cultural life. If the culture has no particular only it inherent flavor, it is like a faceless man. Like any manifestation of individuality, originality of national culture is enriched at the same time with the general flowering of the nation, confidence in its future place in the world civilization.

Each national culture has its benefits: spiritual attainment and opening their dramas and tragedies, their vision of the world. Its development is not done in a sterile flask, but in conditions of social contradictions, the struggle of progressive traditions against the backward and conservative phenomena. Today every nation connects their future with the national culture, which is a guarantor for life and integration into the global culture. This idea has its own immanent logic: that it supports the spiritual and intellectual potential of the nation, serves impulse of human creativity, strengthens the spiritual health of the people, and creates a national moral ideal.

Each national culture belongs to all mankind, and is obliged to express them to the world. Each of our national culture has yet to have its say in the global culture of modern times. Because there is no a unified national-cultural model. Baltic States characterized by its own cultural model, the Central Asian republics — the other, and so on. But each of these cultures goes on their original and unique way to universal values.

Within of national cultures allocates subcultures. These cultures of individual demographic or social strata and groups which embody differences of their way of life, thought and behavior from the national cultural norms (youth subculture, subculture of the underworld, subculture of religious denominations). Special role in the cultural development of a society have religious subculture which formed on the basis of belonging to a particular religion. Each world religions create its own kind of subculture. The same way specific subculture can be formed within the branches of world religions, such as Christianity exist within the Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox culture. Professional subculture — is based on values norms of behavior which shared by one professional group. Vocational education and training has a great influence on the formation of this form of subculture. It is closely connected with the content of the work and the role played in society by its representatives.

Sometimes subcultures retreat from the national goes so far that its followers becomes in opposition to society and come into conflict with its existing traditions and rules of life. And this in turn can lead to a number of conflicts on the territory of the country, which can also harm the national security of the country.

It is worth noting that in legislation of the National Security of many countries «cultural factor» occupies an important place. So in the Law «On National Security of Kazakhstan» in Article 6 among the main threats to national security listed the loss of cultural and spiritual heritage of the people of the Republic of Kazakhstan [4]. Because if the country does not have its cultural and spiritual heritage, so it does not have the values that unite people and thereby open the way to various external threats such as extremism, terrorism, the emergence of different sects and communities, which entail different consequences threaten national security. At this stage, Kazakhstan has faced a number of problems such as extremism and the activities of various sects in the country. This led to an outflow of a certain number of citizens of Kazakhstan to the Arab countries, where they voluntarily live under the guidance of these sects. Also with similar problems now facing many European countries. Long time there is debate on the subject of the collapse of the policy of «multiculturalism», which is adhered by France, Germany, Norway and others. The influx of migrants to Western Europe led to a inflow their traditions and customs which are not in all cases take root. And in consequence of arises various problems that directly affect national security.

Socio-cultural crisis currently experiencing the world community in connection with the entry into the period of globalization strongly required overcoming its significant intensification of the national cultural resource. In the process of modern development of culture is more noticeable the regulating role of factor of social life in many ways providing due to mobility of «central core culture» — national and cultural values sustainable and safe development of the In addition to the fundamental source of the spiritual health of nation and social stability culture is system formation factor international and national security because of its pervasive ability to positively impact on social relations through the consciousness and behavior. Contradictory phenomena in contemporary reality makes necessary to develop a holistic concept of cultural policy in order to strengthen the role of culture in the context of national security. Priorities of this policy are to strengthen the role of the family, preserving and strengthening of national traditions.

In this regard, it is important to note the importance of well-formed cultural policy. Despite the entrenched stereotype in society that culture for the most part — is the branch of leisure and entertainment, we must first consider culture as a powerful tool for the formation of the national ideology, spiritual development and positioning of the country in world space.

The modern approach to understanding the culture dictates the necessity to form new social and cultural environment in which a change in society's attitude towards creativity as key success factors of personality, business and the state as a whole. In such conditions, there is a radical transformation of the traditional cultural environment: to the forefront creativity and competitiveness.

Currently there are a large number of typologies of policy models in the field of culture, due to the different approaches to the definition of its objectives, mechanisms of implementation and results. So Abraham Moles distinguish four different groups of cultural policy, proposing as a basis for classification social static and social dynamic characteristics.

Social static model describes sustainable objectives of cultural policy and its institutions. Mole identified three subgroups of this policy:

• «The populist» or «demagogic», which aims to satisfaction cultural needs as much as possible number of people;
• «The paternalist» or «dogmatic», according to the right and the main distribution channels of cultural property belong to «the Governing Body», disposing to an accurate scale of values of existing and emerging cultural goods. Policy in the sphere of culture, in this case serves the purpose of a particular political party, religious movement or the state as a whole;
• «The eclectic», which mission is to equip each person individual culture, which is the undistorted reflection, «good» sample of more general humanitarian and humanistic In this case, society must ensure that each of the elements of culture corresponded to cultural values and distributed proportionally, according to the frequency or «weight» of this element in the general culture, accepted in society at the moment.

There are different ways and approaches in the field of cultural policy, and every developed country is guided by its own unique strategy, conditioned by the existing historical and cultural experience, the objective political and economic benefits.

Management models:

1. Charismatic policy — government efforts are aimed at building a strong value system, support for image projects, creative organizations, groups and individuals that have national and international importance.
2. Policy of accessibility — the main efforts of the state aimed at the promotion of elite culture and the arts, the formation of taste and high aesthetic values in the general
3. Policy of cultural expression — blurred classical cultural hierarchy and aesthetic categories, the leading role played by any attempt of cultural identity and expression (ethnic, social, professional, and others) [1].

In general, the basis of any model of management in the sphere of culture defines the principle of high participation of the state in the creation of a powerful ideological platform. And as you know the powerful ideological platform is the key to a single nation that can withstand any external threat.

Is accepted to allocate the following tools of state regulation in the sphere of culture:

• Legal For several years, the representatives of the sphere of culture of Norway require the introduction of «Fundamentals of Legislation on Culture» as a means of protecting the regional and municipal sectors of culture. The central authority is quite skeptical about this idea. As the argument is this: in Sweden, where there is no national law on libraries, the situation in the library sector is significantly better than in Norway, where there is such a law.
• Organizational The state can influence the regional and municipal authorities by recommending or ordering to create an appropriate organizational structure for the management culture.
• Financial methods.
• Expert methods. Exactly they are getting in recent years widespread. Particularly popular expert evaluation and system of detailed reports about the activities municipalities, regions and individual cultural This is largely due to the increased use of the system support of cultural projects. A similar trend is gradually becoming international. So the Ministry of Culture of France established a special body for the assessment cultural policies and monitoring the situation in the cultural life.
• The Increase of professionalization can also serve as an instrument of national policy for specific territories.

Despite the crucial importance of all these instruments of state regulation of cultural policy, the most significant for the culture stay current funding model of its state [1].

National security has become a major goal of cultural policy that can effectively deal with internal and external threats of the stability of society. Internal threats are associated with an increase in problem situations that give rise to the phenomenon of xenophobia, religious and ethnic intolerance, extremism, deviant behavior, marginalization and criminalization of society, the weakening of the family institution.

External threats are associated with the advent cultural uniformity in the context of globalization, the possible loss of national identity. Protection against external threats of society can be achieved through cultural and educational measures, with the systemic nature — educational, moral, tolerant, legal and others. For this it is important to identify the main approaches and principles that should guide the cultural policy of the country.

The initial condition of policy development in the cultural sphere — is to reach an agreement between the formal, creative, social forces in relation to the priority objectives of cultural development.

Summarizing foreign analysts attempts to define cultural policy can be distinguished the target, institutional and resource approaches. Often they are combined, and then uses an integrated management approach.

An example of target approach can be definition of famous Serbian researcher, Rector of the Academy of Arts in Belgrade Milena Dragicevic-Sheshich: «The term» policy «means a conscious activity aimed at achieving the objectives demanded by society. Each side of social life has its purpose; therefore we're talking about the goals in the field of economics, health and education. When dealing with the implementation of the objectives demanded by society in the field of culture, there appears the notion of cultural policy. Knowing that there is no human society without culture could be reached to the conclusion that there is no society without a cultural policy. This conclusion, however, is not true, because the mere existence of a culture does not mean that the direction of its development is defined by a number of goals and objectives that must be implemented by appropriate measures, mechanisms and actions, and in this lies the notion of «cultural policy». Thus, cultural policy is conscious regulation in the field of culture in making the necessary decisions on all matters relating to the cultural development of society as a whole» [1].

Assign a tactical function and purpose of cultural policy allows the definition of Mario D'Angelo and Paul Vesperini that distinguish its five main characteristics:

1. The objectives of the central government should be combined with those of regional and local governments, as well as the interests of the major players in the cultural sphere;
2. Objectives of the state should relate to a real choice of subjects involved in the processes of cultural policy;
3. Implementation of cultural policy action always involves logistical and creative ensure the functioning of culture;
4. Cultural policy involves the allocation of resources, both financial and administrative, structural, human and creative;
5. Cultural policy necessarily involves planning, which is the process of preparation of the state to participate in cultural activities, as well as in planning the allocation of resources [1].

Of course, this understanding of the nature of cultural policy does not go beyond the concept of «formal rationality» and «bureaucracy» of Max Weber, which formed the basis of most European models of governance in the twentieth century. Defining the institution of «state» as the main subject of cultural policies, institutions and creators of culture researchers secondary role «control object».

Three types of actions necessary for conscious cultural policy, allocate famous cultural development consultants from California Don Adams and Arlene Goldbard:

1. Definition of cultural values, goals and priorities;
2. Programme of initiatives and costs corresponding to these goals, and that perceived actual as the formation of cultural policy;
3. Monitoring of policy — the process allowing to estimate cultural impact of each social action in the light of established standards, which are the means of achieving the established cultural policy [1].

While agreeing that the state should take part in the formation of such a policy, researchers have identified six major directions, which actually should be directed vector of of cultural policy:

• Preservation of heritage (museum collections, historic buildings, art, music literature, as well as the skills of crafts and folklore);
• Dissemination of cultural product. The funds used to finance productions, tours, tickets subsidies, broadcast, publishing, distribution network or special promotions to enhance the audience;
• Creativity (which includes both a job creator, and any auxiliary personnel involved in cultural production);
• Research (which suggests checking compliance of cultural policy goals and objectives);
• Staff training (which includes training of creative professionals, administrators and employees related areas);
• Education [1].

Special attention in the concept of D.Adams and A.Goldbard paid to cultural policy instruments for which they relate:

• Distribution of grants and awards;
• Employment and job creation;
• Creation of cultural infrastructure – buildings, equipment, space for cultural activities;
• Formation of the legislative and regulatory framework for the activities of cultural and art institutions [1]. On the example of the concept of cultural policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan can be considered ap-

proaches that are necessary for the implementation of cultural policy in our country. The basis of the state policy in the sphere of culture based on the following approaches:

• Systematic and comprehensive development of all areas of culture in the relationship;
• Historical continuity and continuity of the progressive development of culture;
• Justification and priority;
• Inclusion and social orientation;
• Innovation and

Human capital, creative resource, systematic state support and business initiatives should be a solid foundation for intensive development of of competitive cultural environment, which in turn is the main indicator of the success of the state and society in the economic, social and cultural life [1].

Implementation of the Concept should be based on the following principles:

• The priority of the national cultural heritage that defines the identity and national identity of national culture in a globalized world;
• Recognition of culture as a factor of growth and a powerful resource for social development;
• Respect for cultural diversity of the country, support and development of the cultures and traditions of multiethnic Kazakhstan;
• Freedom of creative personality and cultural expressions;
• The unity of the cultural environment based on the new institutional associations, contemporary cultural clusters and advanced technologies [1]. Proceeding from the aforesaid it can be concluded that the social dimension of cultural policy is one of the most important principles and approaches to create the right cultural And as you know a stable social situation in the country is also an important factor in maintaining national security.

With a view to the proper formation of cultural policy, it is important to create a list of regulations that will govern the implementation of this policy. It seems that the improvement of the legal framework of modernization in the field of culture should go in two directions: by changing the existing conceptual documents on national security and through the development and adoption of concepts and laws of culture and cultural development of the country. Of course, the development of such documents precedes comprehensive interdisciplinary research. In conformity with social sciences all social phenomena can not get universal description, but should be seen in a certain specific historical and social context, which determines their content. If we consider the problem on the example of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the concept of cultural policy should be realized by the following documents:

• Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
• Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On culture»;
• Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On protection and use of historical and cultural heritage»;
• Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On tourist activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2020»;
• Message from the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev to the people of Kazakhstan «Strategy» Kazakhstan – 2050: «a new policy established state»;
• Message from the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev to the people of Kazakhstan «Kazakhstan's way – 2050: common goal, common interests and common future»;
• The national concept of social development of the Republic of Kazakhstan till 2030 and the National Plan of social modernization of Kazakhstan for the period until 2016;
• Concept of becoming one of the 30 most developed countries of the world and plan for its implementation;
• The concept of development of the tourism industry of the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2020;
• The concept of the state youth policy until 2020;
• The state program «Information Kazakhstan 2020»;
• Strategic plans of the central and local executive bodies [1].

Culture is the fundamental source of the spiritual health of the people and social stability. It has a pervasive capacity (cumulative effect) impact positively on social relations through people's minds. Because of this quality culture can act systemically important factor in international and national security, if it is focused in the holistic concept of cultural policy. Priorities of this policy are to strengthen the role of the family, the preservation and strengthening of national traditions, the increasing importance of language as the main ontological mode of national culture. In a symmetric configuration with them should be universal human values, starting with the equality rights of all people to live in dignity.

Solution of theoretical questions about the nature of culture and its human dimension is to determine the main targets of cultural development. Foremost among these is the basic type of person. His image is formed as an ensemble of intrinsic forces, the cultivation of which to the greatest extent meet the needs of society  as a whole, separate social groups and every individual. As pointed out by L.K. Kruglov, «from the point of view of national security is of prime importance, of course, the interest of society. However, this does not mean neglect of group and personal interests because maintenance of national safety is at the same time as the priority interests of any social group and each individual» [5]. In this context, national security is understood by us as a state of security of the individual, society and the state from external and internal threats and dangers in the present circumstances of marked, in particular, features such as the reduction of intellectual and cultural level of broad social layers, «blurring» of the spiritual foundations, individualism, selfcenteredness, the replacement of genuine cultural and spiritual values. Cultural policy as a condition of national security – is nothing more than an ideological weapon that can turn a historical civilization and values of the people in the accumulation of public policy factors.

In conclusion, it is important to note that the culture is present significant potential harmonization of human relations in a transitional society undergoing social and cultural crisis in the context of globalization. In this context, culture is directly involved in the system of social regulation of social development as a complex ordered ideological and technological measures called «cultural policy», pursuing the goal of sustainable and safe development of the country. Culture, which has in the positive meaning the unique property of total penetration into the minds of people, it becomes a factor which international and national security: in the case — if this property is laid in a holistic concept of cultural policy of the state, which has the highest human values priorities of national and international character, since equality of all human beings to live in dignity. A key accent in the context of security of the country represented by constant presence of national and cultural values in the concepts of mass-mediated everyday practice. This is particularly important in terms of the dissemination of cultural values among young people.

Список литературы 

1. Востряков Л.Е.      Культурная     политика:      концепции,      понятия,      модели.     —     [ЭР].     Режим     доступа: http://www.cpolicy.ru/analytics/80.html (дата обращения: 02.2015).
2. Обсуждение проекта концепции культурной политики в Республике Казахстан. — [ЭР]. Режим доступа: http://www.mk.gov.kz/rus/zakonodatelstvo/obsuzhdenie_proekta/?cid=0&rid=2289 (дата обращения: 02.2015).
3. Постановление Правительства РК № 1161 «Об утверждении Программы развития сферы культуры на 2006–2008 гг.».— Астана. — 2005.
4. Кащаев А.Е. Проблемы национальной безопасности в контексте развития Восточно-Сибирского региона. — [ЭР].Режим доступа: http://mion.isu.ru/filearchive/mion_publcations/sb-natbez/1_8.html (дата обращения: 2.02.2015).
5. Закон Республики Казахстан о культуре. — [ЭР]. Режим доступа: http://www.invalid.kz/modules/editor/editor/ wysiwygpro/site_files/Zakon/akt/9.1.html (дата обращения: 01.2015).
6. Гуманитарная культура      как      фактор       гуманитарной       безопасности.       —      [ЭР].      Режим       доступа: http://inbelhist.org/gumanitarnaya-kultura-kak-faktor-gumanitarnoj-bezopasnosti/ (date of address: 03.2015).