POLITICS AS “INTEREST MANAGEMENT” AND CULTURE AS “CULTURAL POLITICS”

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to demonstrate the essential unity of the presentation of politics as the management of interests and culture as a “cultural policy” (M. Heidegger) - in the liberal version of the political economic paradigm (J. Agamben). Demonstration as a reduction to the obviousness of meaning presupposes philosophical interpretation as a research method. As a result of the analysis, it is established: in the economic paradigm of the political, what is called modernity is represented in the meaning defined by M. Heidegger. Modernity is given as reality in the mind of a new European subject, anxious to guarantee his safe existence. Replacing the sovereign with an “empty space” as a constitutive of the political order and excluding the sovereign decision as destructive to its reality - and the exclusion of the “saint” as the essence of the transformation of the “creation of culture” into a “cultural artifact”, there are two aspects of the process of “self-assertion” of an autonomous subject, presented as reasonable. “Available individuals” are identical in relation to reason as a “differentiation” of “humanity” and differ “accidentally” as freely self-determining with respect to their “features” - interests; politics and culture are fundamentally presented in the liberal version of the economic paradigm - as the management of interests. Subjectivity, which has become, considers itself to be “unquestionable” and is aimed at “providing life” as cash; politics as management and culture as the “organization of experience” guarantee the safety of the subject as a “historiographic animal”, that is, the implementation of the named goal. As a result of the study, the conclusion is drawn: the presentation of politics as management excludes the “place of decision”, that is, it means the impossibility of an event; culture as a phenomenon of modernity is, according to Heidegger, “the organization of experience”, that is, cultural policy, through “historiographic recalculation”, “filling” the void as a constitutive of modernity, ensuring its endless duration in continuous innovations; reality is verified in the representation of the subject, whose efforts are aimed at obtaining a guarantee of this: in planning and calculation as a security policy. Philosophical interpretation is devoid of practical interest, but measuring opportunity and drawing a boundary provides a view as presently given for scientific research and policy.