Types of political processes and their brief characteristics. Types and stages of political processes
Based on the objects of influence, political processes are divided into foreign policy and domestic policy.
According to the nature of the transformation of the state, they distinguish:
Revolutionary and evolutionary political processes.
In the first case, there is a rapid and qualitative change in the power structures of the state, a complete revision of its constitution, increasing conflict, a renewal of political elites, which is accompanied by the radicalism of decisions made and the predominance of violence in their implementation.
The evolutionary political process is based on legitimacy political power. Here's the resolution social problems occurs gradually, peacefully, on the basis of legal competition political parties, interaction between the elite and the masses, sustainability of decision-making procedures and institutions; the predominance in political behavior of the ethics of compromise, consensus, tolerance of dissent and the mandatory presence of the institution of political opposition.
There are also open and closed political processes.
An open political process is characterized by transparency and accessibility for citizens participating in the political decision-making process.
Closed political processes are characterized by a lack of transparency and publicity when making political decisions, exclusion or significant limitation of the political activity of citizens, complete absence control over the ruling elite by society.
In general, it is important to know that no matter what type political process No matter what, predicting its results is a thankless task; more often than not, these forecasts turn out to be unsuccessful.
Topic 11. ACTIVITIES OF POLITICAL ENTITIES
PROCESSES
1.1 The nature and functions of political elites and leaders.
1.2 Mechanisms for the formation (recruitment) of the political elite.
1.3 Processes of change (circulation) of political elites and leaders.
1. 1 The nature and functions of political elites and leaders. The term “elite” comes from the French “elite” - the best, chosen, chosen. Since the 17th century it has been used to designate goods highest quality. The Oxford University Dictionary in 1823 first used the concept of “political elite” to describe the highest social groups of society. However, the term “elite” was not widely used in social sciences until the beginning of the 20th century, that is, until the appearance of the works of V. Pareto (1848-1923), G. Mosca (1858-1941), R. Michels (1876-1941). 1936).
The concept of “elite” refers to a narrow and relatively closed circle of people with a fairly constant and limited number, with strong internal connections, and having more significant weight compared to those around them.
The variety of existing definitions of the elite reflect its value and functional qualities. The term “elite” has firmly entered into sociological and political science dictionaries and implies the following content:
Persons with the highest performance in their field of activity (V. Pareto);
The most politically active people are power-oriented (G. Mosca);
People who have received the greatest prestige and status in society (G. Lasswell);
Persons with power who exercise the most important functions(Keller);
The creative minority opposing the uncreative majority (Toynbee);
Individuals who have intellectual and moral superiority over the masses (Ortega y Gasset);
Along with the term “elite”, the phrases “ruling elite”, “ruling groups”, “ruling circles”, etc. are widely used in everyday life. In modern Western political science, the tradition of using the categories “ruling elite” and “political elite” has become established.
The political elite is a relatively small, privileged group that concentrates in its hands a significant amount of political power, monopolistic decision-making, and exercises control over their implementation.
The existence of the political elite is determined by the following factors:
1. Social inequality of people, their unequal abilities, opportunities and desire to participate in politics;
2. Increasing professionalization of politics and the need for special political knowledge for quick decision-making;
3. Professionalization of managerial work and its separation into a special environment of activity (management), including political;
4. Wide possibilities for using management activities to obtain various social benefits and privileges;
5. The practical impossibility of exercising comprehensive control over the ruling elite;
6. Political passivity of the broad masses of the population, whose main vital interests usually lie outside the sphere of politics, the prevalence of absenteeism;
The political elite is an organizational minority, a controlling group that is part of a class or social stratum and has real political power, giving it the opportunity to influence all spheres of society.
The essential functions of the political elite can be described as strategic, communicative, organizational, and integrative.
In political science, an attempt has been made to classify political elites according to various reasons:
1) By place in the political system and participation in the exercise of power distinguish between the ruling elite and the non-ruling elite (counter-elite). The ruling elite directly makes political decisions that determine the development program of the entire society. The non-ruling elite (counter-elite) is trying to influence this process by available means. Competition in the field of elite activity is very fierce and is constantly growing. The change of the ruling elite is a natural process in which there are stages of origin, development, obsolescence and death of elites.
As a result, the ruling elite can be recognized as following properties:
Any society is elitist, it welcomes the ruling elite;
Internal organization, cohesion and group identification;
Ambitiousness and strong will to organize and regulate the lives of the masses;
Integration and representativeness;
Maintaining power through force and “flirting” with the masses;
Change in power as a result of competition;
2) By level of competence and scope of power The elite is divided into higher (national), middle (regional), and local (administrative). The highest political elite, significant for the entire country, makes the most important strategic political decisions. This includes the president and his entourage, the head and members of the government, leaders of parliament, senior judiciary authorities, leaders of influential political parties and blocs. The middle elite includes representatives of elected authorities: deputies, governors, mayors, leaders of regional branches of parties and movements. The administrative elite includes the highest stratum of civil servants and administrative officials who carry out the technical execution of decisions made.
3) According to the degree of elite representativeness come with high and low representation. The differences between them lie in the degree of expression of the interests (professional, ethnic, religious and other) of various subjects of society.
4) According to the structure and nature of intra-elite relations there are integrated and disconnected political elites. Elites with high degree integration develop unified system political values, general rules political competition and the exercise of power, coordinate the main goals and methods of the policies pursued. They are characterized by consensual relationships with a low degree of conflict. Weakly integrated (disconnected) elites are characterized by an intense political struggle for spheres of control and resources of power, for mastering strategic positions.
5) According to the intensity of circulation and methods of recruitment open and closed elites are distinguished. Open elites are characterized by the following features: fairly free access to the elite based on competition and taking into account business personal qualities, dynamic circulation, and the ability to innovate and reform. Closed elites are characterized by slow circulation, limited access to new members based on strict formal characteristics (nobility, party affiliation, religiosity, etc.), corporatism and inability to quickly respond to ongoing social changes. Such elites are more prone to turning into closed oligarchic groups and self-degeneration.
The term “political leadership” is widely used in modern political science and political practice. A leader (from English “leading”) is a person who has a decisive influence on other people and the ability to direct their collective actions.
Political leadership- this is the constant priority influence of an individual (group, party, association) on the entire society or a significant part of it with the help of real power and political decisions.
The phenomenon of leadership was of interest to many thinkers and researchers (Plato, Plutarch, Machiavelli, Nietzsche), psychologists (Freud, Adler), sociologists (E. Bogardus, M. Weber, M. Hermann, G. Almond). Wide scientific and public interest in the institution of leadership emphasizes its versatility and social significance. “People cannot do without leadership, just like they cannot do without food and water,” emphasized former president France De Gaulle.
There are many theories that explain the nature and origins of leadership.
Trait theory(E. Bogardus) argues that certain personal qualities(mind, intelligence, energy, communication skills, etc.) allows a person to become a leader. However, the individual traits of a leader based on this theory are no different from the psychological and social qualities any personality.
Situational theory proves that a leader is a function of a certain situation, and he can emerge as a result of a successful combination of circumstances under which his outstanding qualities will be in demand (Hitler, Stalin, Gorbachev).
Leader follower theory defines the nature of leadership based on a special form of relationship between an authoritative person and the environment whose interests she expresses. However, leaders cannot always live up to the expectations of their constituents (followers) and can even threaten the existence of a country or nation (Hitler, Stalin).
Psychoanalysis concept(S. Freud) explains the nature of leadership by the presence in an individual of special psychological traits and motives that push him towards political dominance, imposing his will, etc.
Some people compensate for psychological stress and personal inferiority complexes with the help of unlimited power, the use of force, etc.
Existing systems in political science classifications (typologies) political leaders are driven by the desire to predict their behavior.
M. Weber's typology is based on methods of legitimizing political power and proposes three ideal types of leadership:
1. Traditional (leaders, elders, monarchs);
2. Rational-legal (elected leader according to current laws);
3. Charismatic - based on the deification of leadership and belief in its exclusivity, holiness and supreme justice;
According to the methods and methods of exercising power, they are divided into authoritarian and democratic types of leaders .
In modern political science, the typology of leaders proposed by M. Hermann is used, based on the characteristics of their political activity:
A standard-bearer leader capable of captivating the masses with an attractive great goal or idea;
A servant leader who serves as a spokesman and advocate for the interests of his constituents;
Leader-ideologist, preacher and inspirer of a certain ideology;
A leader-trader can present his ideas attractively, makes them “buy” and implement them;
Leader-firefighter, focuses on current problems and their solutions;
The Institute of Leadership performs the following main functions in society:
Management (on making political decisions);
Integration related to the unification of people, nations,
social strata based on common ideas and values;
Communicative, providing a connection between power and
society;
Mobilizing, aimed at organizing implementation
certain goals and objectives;
Social arbitrage function;
The function of legitimizing a political regime with the help of personality
1.2 Mechanisms for the formation (recruitment) of the political elite. The problem of recruiting the elite is one of the most important in elitology. Unlike professional elite communities, the political elite is an “open” system. In other words, a person who does not have special training, as a rule, cannot claim a place in the corresponding professional elite (musician, actor, scientist, etc.). While the circle of the political elite may include individuals different professions with unequal social, educational and other status. The main reason for the “openness” of politics, according to political scientists, is its fundamental feature as universality: the processes occurring in this area are a form of expression not only for political, but economic, social, national, spiritual and other contradictions.
The mechanisms for recruiting the elite mean the principles of promoting it into the elite society. The most important such principles are:
a) consanguinity;
b) noble origin (elite by origin);
c) possession of wealth, property;
d) education, possession of knowledge (information);
e) professional competence;
f) party, national, religious affiliation;
g) protectionism;
h) personal devotion to the system, leader, religion, etc.
i) seniority or length of service;
j) appointment to a position;
k) delegation through elections;
In practice, two main systems for recruiting political elites have emerged - guild and entrepreneurial; they determine: who, how and from whom carries out the selection, what its order and criteria are; circle of people carrying out the selection (selectorate); the motives for his actions.
What are the main features of the two models of recruiting modern political elites?
The guild system (from German gilde - corporation) - assumes:
Closedness of the elite from the masses;
A clear hierarchy within the elite with slow progression through the ranks of power;
The presence of many formal requirements for holding positions (education, work experience, party experience, etc.);
The selection of candidates is carried out from certain social
groups (estates, classes, castes, clans and others);
Decisions, including personnel decisions, are made by a narrow circle of people;
Stability and sustainability of the elite, its values and regulations;
Lack of competition and unlikely conflict relationships;
Continuity and predictability of the actions of the elite;
Merging of elite and bureaucracy;
Political scientists (M. Djilas, M. Voslensky) call the nomenklatura method of selecting elites an example of a guild system.
The nomenklatura reproduces traditional connections (kinship, clan), absolutizes the official ideology, excluding competition, demonstrates conformism and ostentatious formal activism.
The entrepreneurial system (from the French entrepreneur - entrepreneur) system is distinguished by:
Openness to the masses, recruitment from the most different layers society;
Specific selection with a small number of formal requirements for candidates for the elite;
Making decisions taking into account all interested forces;
Main value is the individual activity of elite participants;
The main resources of this elite are leadership and innovation;
Dynamism of the elite.
In the entrepreneurial system, preference is given to promising candidates who have completed career stages in a shorter period of time. Here, mass politics, elections, appeals to public opinion, and media politics play a big role in the nomination of candidates. Self-promotion is important in this system, which does not exclude the possibility of joining the political elite random people, capable of producing only an external effect.
The bureaucratic apparatus acts as an important channel for elite formation mainly in developing countries. However, even in such developed countries as Germany, Japan, Sweden, the predominant part of the highest political elite owes its position to the public service. The priority channel for entering the elite in Russia is also the civil service.
The role of elite recruitment channels is played by significant social institutions. For example, religious organizations and trade unions.
1.3 Processes of change (circulation) of political elites and leaders. The struggle and change of elites, according to the classics of elitism (Pareto, Mosca, Nichels), occurs in any society and is a pattern of social development.
G. Mosca believed that there were two trends in the development of elites: aristocratic and democratic. The first is manifested in the desire of the political class to become hereditary, leading to its casteism and closedness, and, consequently, to degeneration and stagnation. The second, democratic, trend is expressed in the renewal of the political elite at the expense of the most capable of governing and active social strata. Such renewal prevents the elite from degeneration and makes it capable of effectively managing society.
V. Pareto formulated the theory of the circulation of elites, with the help of which social dynamics can be explained. Social history, as the scientist believed, there is a history of succession of privileged minorities (elites), which are formed, struggle, achieve power, exercise it, decline and are replaced by other elites. This phenomenon of the emergence of new elites occurs in the course of continuous circulation, ensuring the social balance of the social system. The cessation of such circulation leads to the degeneration of the ruling elite, to a revolutionary breakdown of the system.
The German sociologist R. Michels was pessimistic about the possibilities of elite dynamics and renewal even in a democracy. He formulated the “iron law of oligarchy,” according to which the ruling elite are permanently entrenched on the “pedestal of power” due to their inherent qualities and strive to perpetuate their dominance.
The processes of renewal and change of political leaders depend on the nature and types of political regimes.
In non-democratic regimes (totalitarian, authoritarian), leadership degenerates into leaderism and can become lifelong, turning into a cult of personality (Hitler, Stalin).
The change of leaders and the mechanism of transfer of power from leader to leader occurs within the surrounding clan, clan, party. The new leader inherits the power technology of his predecessors.
Unlike leaderism, leadership is not inherited. In democratic political systems, each new leader emerges through a mandatory periodic competitive election procedure. Leadership cannot be lifelong. It should be confirmed by actions, innovative ideas and their translation into reality. One should not equate a political leader with a manager. The latter, as a rule, appears as a result of appointment to a post and has official status. The ideal option is the coincidence in one person of the qualities of a leader and the status of a manager.
Related information.
The development of any state is a process that can consist of a variety of components. It involves the authorities solving a variety of problems and the participation of a wide range of actors. The same can be said about one of the aspects of state building - the development of the political system. It also builds into a process. What might its characteristics be?
What is the political process?
Let's explore the process. What could be its definition? IN Russian science This is understood as a sequence of events, phenomena and actions that characterize the relationships of various subjects - people, organizations, authorities - in the sphere of politics.
The process in question can take place on different levels and in different areas life of society. For example, it can characterize communications between subjects within one government agency or the entire government system, or take place at the municipal, regional or federal level.
The concept of a political process may imply a rather broad interpretation of the corresponding term. Moreover, each of its interpretations may mean the formation of independent categories within the framework of the phenomenon under consideration. Thus, they distinguish various types political processes that may be characterized by significant differences from each other. Let's take a closer look at this feature.
Classification of political processes
In order to explore the types of political processes, it is necessary first of all to determine the possible grounds for classifying this phenomenon. What criteria might apply here?
In Russian science, there is a widespread approach according to which the political process can be divided into domestic political and foreign policy, depending on the nature of the key subjects directly influencing its course.
Another basis for classifying political processes is classifying them as voluntary or controlled. Here, the described phenomenon is considered in terms of the characteristics of the mechanisms of participation of subjects in relevant communications.
There are such forms of the political process as open and shadow. Key criterion here is the publicity of subjects influencing the corresponding phenomena.
There are revolutionary and evolutionary types of political processes. Key criterion in in this case- the time frame during which certain changes are implemented at the level of communication between subjects, and in many cases - the methods by which they are carried out.
Political processes are also divided into stable and volatile. In this case, what matters is how stable and predictable the behavior of the subjects influencing the course of the phenomenon under consideration can be.
Let us now study the specifics of the development of political processes within the framework of the noted classification in more detail.
Foreign policy and domestic political processes
So, the first basis for classifying the phenomenon under consideration is the classification of its varieties as foreign policy or domestic policy. The process classified as the first type involves the participation of subjects who are directly related to the institutions of government and society that function within a single state. These could be people holding positions in government, heads of enterprises, public structures, parties, or ordinary citizens. The foreign policy process assumes that its course is influenced by subjects of foreign origin - heads of state, foreign corporations and institutions.
Some researchers highlight communications carried out exclusively on international level. Thus, a process is formed. Events and phenomena characteristic of it may at the same time influence the state of affairs in individual states - for example, if we're talking about about discussions regarding the writing off of a country's external debts, or the imposition of sanctions.
Voluntary and controlled processes
The next basis on which certain types of political processes are determined is the classification of the phenomena under consideration as voluntary or controlled. In the first case, it is assumed that subjects influencing the course of relevant events act on the basis of personal political will, guided by their beliefs and priorities. This can be expressed, for example, in the participation of people in the elections of the head of state. Attendance at them is voluntary, as is the choice of candidate. Controlled political processes assume that the subjects influencing them act on the basis of the requirements of the law or, for example, due to administrative influence from authorized structures. In practice, this can be expressed, for example, in the presence of visas required by one state for the entry of citizens of another: in this way the migration aspect of the international political process is controlled.
Public and shadow processes
The next basis for classifying the phenomenon under consideration is classifying its varieties as open or shadow. Political processes of the first type assume that the subjects influencing it conduct their activities publicly. This is what happens in most developed countries: in particular, people elect a president from among candidates who are known to everyone. The procedures for electing the head of state are fixed in laws and are available to everyone for review. The president, whom the people elected, has powers known to everyone and implements them. But there are countries in which senior officials are also elected, but real ones can be accepted by non-public entities, the essence of which is incomprehensible to ordinary citizens, and access to relevant information is closed. In the first case, the political process will be open, in the second - shadow.
Revolutionary and evolutionary political processes
Political processes may vary depending on the methods by which their subjects carry out certain activities, as well as the speed of changes that characterize certain aspects of communications. Regarding evolutionary processes: methods, as a rule, are based on the provisions of sources of law - laws, regulations, orders. Changing them involves quite time-consuming parliamentary and administrative procedures. But in case of instability in the state, the sources that predetermine the methods used by the subjects of the political process can become slogans, manifestos, demands that are not related to existing laws. As a result, events and phenomena that are not typical for the first scenario are possible. Thus, a revolutionary political process is formed. It often happens that significant changes affect the entire structure of government.
Stable and volatile processes
The political process - in society, in the international arena - can be characterized by stability or, conversely, volatility. In the first case, the subjects influencing the relevant events and phenomena will rely on norms and customs that do not change noticeably over a long period of time.
In the second scenario, it is possible to turn to sources containing provisions that can be interpreted or changed quite freely due to the preferences of the subjects of the political process.
Structural components of the political process
Let us now study the structural aspect of the phenomenon under consideration. What are the common talking points? Russian researchers related to this issue? The structure of the political process most often involves the inclusion of the following components:
Subject (authority, public, political structure or specific citizen capable of influencing the course of relevant events and phenomena);
Object (the area of activity of the subject, characterizing the purpose of his actions, priorities, preferences);
Methods on which the subject relies when solving his problems;
Resources at the disposal of the subject of the political process.
Let's study in more detail the specifics of each of the noted points.
The essence of the subjects of the political process
So, the structure of the political process presupposes the inclusion of subjects in it. These most often become government bodies as independent institutions or specific ones. The political process in Russia, as many researchers note, is characterized by the significant role of the individual in the relevant sphere of communications. On the scale of the entire state, the key role can be played by the president, in the region - by its head, in the city - by the mayor.
Objects of the political process
Their nature may be different. Thus, some researchers consider economic and political processes in a single context, considering the former to be a type of object for the latter. The development of the national economic system, business, solving problems of employment of citizens - these problems are relevant for any state.
Accordingly, the goal of the subjects of the political process, who are senior officials, may be to achieve positive results in the relevant areas of work. That is, the economy in this case will be the object of the political process.
Methods of the political process
The nature of the methods in question can also vary significantly. A subject of power, called upon to solve problems of modernizing the economic system of the state and other problems, must first of all somehow obtain his position. In this case, we are talking about methods based on which a person can take power into his own hands.
The political process in Russia assumes that these will be elections - at the level of a municipality, region or country as a whole. In turn, the actual solution of problems, for example, in modernizing the economy, will be implemented on the basis of a different method - lawmaking. For example, it can initiate the adoption of certain legal acts aimed at stimulating the development of the country's economy.
Resources for the Political Process
A subject of power may have at his disposal the most effective methods solution of the assigned tasks, however, if he does not have at his disposal necessary resources, then the plans will not be realized. How can the corresponding component of the political process be represented?
First of all, this is, of course, capital. If we talk about politics, these can be budget funds or borrowed funds. The term “resource” can also be interpreted in a slightly different way - as a certain source for maintaining the legitimacy of power. This will no longer necessarily be finance. Such a resource can be the expression of the will of people, citizens of the state. It is formed in this way, implying constant interaction between government and society. At the same time, by analogy with the financial sector, a resource in this case can be understood as a credit of trust on the part of citizens, which the subject of public administration must justify.
So, the term “political process” we are considering can be understood, on the one hand, as a set of events and phenomena that are observed at one or another level of communications, and on the other hand, as a category with complex structure, which includes quite dissimilar elements. In turn, individual components political process will also be characterized by complexity, and their essence can be interpreted through a variety of approaches.
Political processes differ from each other in scale, duration, factors, nature of interaction between factors, etc. In political science, there are various types of political processes. There are several ways to typology political processes, based on different criteria.
Based on the diversity of political processes, several types can be distinguished. These are, first of all, everyday political processes (“small” factors and units of measurement), which are primarily associated with processes with direct interactions of individual, group and partially institutional factors. An example is the legislative process in a parliament.
Another type of political process is the historical political process (larger factors - mainly groups and institutions). These are processes associated with the commission of a historical event. Thus, a political revolution can be presented as a process of this kind. As the same historical process the emergence and development of a political party may be considered.
Finally, these are evolutionary political processes that are characterized by the participation of “large” factors (institutions, the political system), and are also measurable using large-scale time units. Such processes could be, for example, the process of transforming a polis into an imperial capital, or the modernization of the political system as a result of a series of political reforms, or the transition to democracy by dismantling authoritarian rule, holding constituent elections, and then consolidating them through a series of regular competitive elections.
There are other criteria for distinguishing individual types and varieties of the political process. So, A.I. Soloviev makes similar distinctions based on differences in subject areas. In addition, A.I. Soloviev distinguishes open and closed political processes. Closed political processes “mean that type of change that can be fairly clearly assessed within the criteria of better/worst, desirable/undesirable, etc. Open processes demonstrate a type of change that does not allow us to assume what character - positive or negative for the subject - the existing transformations have or which of the possible strategies in the future is more preferable... In other words, this type of process characterizes changes that occur in extremely unclear and uncertain situations, which imply increased hypotheticalness of both performed and planned actions.” Also, he distinguishes between stable and transient processes. Stable processes presuppose “stable reproduction of political relations,” while transitional ones imply the absence of “a clear predominance of certain basic properties of the organization of power,” which is carried out in conditions of “imbalance in the political activity of the main subjects.”
The political process is a dynamic characteristic of politics. Therefore, it can be argued that the forms of existence of the political process are political changes and political development. Many researchers highlight various types political processes, understanding by them the types of political changes and political development.
Depending on the nature of the changes, evolutionary and revolutionary types of political development are distinguished. By evolutionary we mean a type that includes gradual, step-by-step qualitative changes. Revolutionary is a type of development focused on scale and transience. Despite the heuristic significance of identifying these types, one should recognize the conventions of their distinction in relation to political development. In reality, political development is evolutionary in nature, revolutions are only part of the evolutionary path. Their scale and transience are fundamentally important only from the point of view of everyday life and history.
Quite often, stable and crisis types of development are distinguished. It is assumed that a stable type of political development is characteristic of societies where there are sufficient institutional guarantees and social consensus that prevent sudden changes in political course, and even more so sudden change political regime. At the same time, it is assumed that the basis for stable development is the ability of the system to adequately respond to environmental challenges. This contributes to the gradual and smooth nature of the changes.
The crisis type of development is characteristic of societies where such necessary conditions are absent and the system is unable to provide adequate responses to external changes. Then political development takes place in the form of a crisis, which can affect both individual aspects of political life and the entire system. The development of a full-scale crisis leads to an unstable state of the system or even to its collapse.
The distinction between these two types of political development should also be considered conditional. In fact, stable or crisis development is very often understood not as the evolutionary dynamics of a political system, but as a characteristic of everyday and historical political processes occurring within its framework. However, reports, for example, about a government crisis do not at all indicate the crisis nature of the political development of a given political system.
It should also be noted that in practice, the impetus and, in a certain sense, the engine of development of any political system are systemic crises. Crises arise as a result of inconsistency between structures and methods of communication between elements of the system and emerging needs. Their resolution requires qualitative changes in the system or its individual parts. In practice, we can usually observe an alternation of crises and periods of relative stability. Thus, the crisis nature of changes should be considered and political stability not as characteristics of political development as a whole, but as features of its individual moments.
Types of political development are also distinguished based on its content. Among them, globalization deserves special mention. Other types of political development are political modernization and democratization.
According to the objects of political influence, political processes are divided into foreign policy and domestic policy. Foreign policy regulates the state's relations with other subjects of foreign policy activities. The content of internal political processes varies significantly in many countries. It depends on the forms of government and forms of government of specific states, the democratic or non-democratic political regimes existing there, the qualities of the ruling elite and other factors. The foundation of the internal political process of any country is the relationship between socio-economic structures, the existing social structure of society, and the degree of satisfaction of the population with their situation.
We can talk about evolutionary and revolutionary political processes. During the revolutionary process, both peaceful and non-peaceful means, violence, are used. Transformations are carried out in a relatively short time, are often of a landslide nature and do not always achieve the results for which they were designed.
The basis of evolutionary development is the legitimacy of the authorities, common socio-cultural values of the elite and the masses, the ethics of consent, the presence of constructive opposition.
From the point of view of the publicity of the ruling circles exercising their powers of power and decision-making, open and hidden (shadow) political processes.
At open In the political process, the interests of groups and citizens are identified in the programs of parties and movements, in voting in elections, through discussion of problems in the media, through contacts of citizens with government institutions, through accounting public opinion. This practice has developed in democratic states.
Shadowy, hidden political structures are located at the highest and middle levels of government. We are talking about the hidden actions of government agencies, secret documents, orders, the existence of bodies with secret functions (security agencies) and completely secret institutions (intelligence, counterintelligence, etc.). Illegal activities and corruption of officials and authorities may occur. Under certain conditions, illegal (shadow) structures of a non-political nature are formed (parallel economy, black market, underworld organizations, mafias and mafia corporations of various kinds). They tend to merge with legal government structures and can have a serious influence on them, even to the point of hidden participation in the political life of individual regions. They promote their representatives to deputies, to positions in the state apparatus, etc.
This situation may arise if the state transfers power functions to its individual structural units, for example, political investigation bodies, secret police, party formations. This was the case in the USSR in the 20-50s, when revolutionary tribunals, troikas, and state security agencies had power that was not controlled by the population.
From the point of view of the stability of the political system we can talk about stable and unstable political processes. Stable process is based on a stable social structure, an increasing standard of living of the population, and the legitimacy of the regime. Citizens support the rules of the game and trust the authorities. All participants in the political process are committed to cooperation, searching for compromise solutions, and are united by a commitment to democratic values. People are confident in their ability to influence the government, because the government takes public opinion into account in its decisions.
Unstable political process often arises in conditions of a crisis of power, its loss of legitimacy. The reasons for instability can be very different: a decline in production, social conflicts, discrimination against certain social groups, their dissatisfaction with their social status, etc. Instability is manifested in sharp fluctuations in electoral preferences, opposition activity, criticism of the government, and policy imbalances. An unstable political process is characteristic of many CIS countries, where instability appears to be becoming chronic.
In domestic political science, depending on the socio-cultural and socio-economic characteristics of the process, there are technocratic, ideocratic and charismatic political process.
The political process of the technocratic type is genetically characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon and Romano-Germanic states. It is distinguished by the presence of traditions of evolutionism, continuous and gradual adaptation of political institutions and mechanisms to changing environmental conditions, the priority of a technological (procedural) approach when making changes to the political system and role functions, and the exclusion from political practice of radical disruption of political structures that have developed over the centuries.
The political process of the ideocratic type is characteristic of most states experiencing the initial stages of modernization. It is distinguished by the dominance of one idea (ideology), in relation to which there is (achieved or declared) a national consensus.
The political process of a charismatic type is characterized by the omnipotence of a charismatic leader, whose political goals are adjusted to ideological doctrines and political institutions. He largely determines the goals, content and direction of the political process.
Based on the scale of spatio-temporal parameters, political processes can be divided into global and local-regional. The former have an impact on the general course of world politics. The latter affect the interests of the local community and its constituent groups. But it should be borne in mind that often the result of one or another local process can have an impact on world politics. For example, the regional process of the collapse of the USSR at the turn of the 80-90s grew into a global political process of transformation of the entire system of international relations.
Political processes are systemic (global) and private. The systemic process involves the combined actions of political subjects that ensure the formation, functioning and development of the entire political system. Private processes represent the activities of political subjects, embodied in the development of individual elements and aspects of the political system: political-ideological, political-legal, etc.
Political processes can also be classified on the following grounds:
1. By significance for society- basic and peripheral.
2. By type political regimes- democratic and non-democratic.
3. By degree of mass involvement- engaged and non-engaged.
4. By scale, in accordance with the levels of policy, processes can be distinguished from micro-level (interpersonal and intragroup) to mega-level (world-scale processes).
5. By specifics of the organization We can distinguish between vertically organized and horizontally organized political processes. Horizontally organized political processes form equal independent subjects. Vertically organized political processes take place within the framework of the “dominance-subordination” relationship.
6. By degree of control political processes, their participants can be distinguished managed And spontaneous (spontaneous) processes. The specificity of managed political processes is that they are controlled and directed by political subjects. Spontaneous political processes have their own logic of development, independent of the intentions of any individual subjects.
7. By place in the political system can be distinguished:
1. Login processes:
a) articulation of interests - expression and discussion of the needs of citizens and their demands on the government;
b) aggregation of interests - activities during which interests are transformed into political programs.
2. Conversion processes- making political decisions.
3. Exit processes- management, control.
An integral part of the political process is activity as a specifically human form of active relationship to the world around us, associated with its purposeful change.
Political process is defined as “a change in the states of a political system, its functioning in a time mode” (M.V. Ilyin). This concept denotes diverse political events that last over time or a sequence of changing political events.
Main types of political processes:
Formation of bodies of the political system (institutionalization): during it, previously non-existent political institutions are created and relations between them are established, regulated by special norms;
Reproduction of components and features of the political system in the process of its functioning; it is not difficult to see that political life consists not only of continuous renewal, the emergence of previously non-existent political relations and institutions, but also T actions to maintain these relations in a stable state, using mechanisms such as traditions, procedures, legal and ideological regulations;
Making and implementing political decisions that define tasks and methods for solving them, choosing means to achieve political goals, and directions of political action.
The interconnection of these processes gives rise to a complex combination of actions aimed at ensuring the constancy, inviolability of political relations and their changes, giving them dynamics and renewal.
Since political processes affect, quite significantly, social interests, and they are different, people have ambivalent attitudes towards different types of them, giving preference to some and downplaying or completely ignoring others. Extreme positions in relation to political processes are conservatism, which is expressed in the fact that its adherents see the main purpose of political processes in maintaining the constancy, immutability of the political system, perceive any of its transformation as something dangerous and undesirable, and revolutionism, which represents political life as a continuous and abrupt breakdown of the forms of its organization.
Main types of political processes:
- local-regional and global. The division of political processes according to their scale is largely related to the already discussed issue of the space-time continuum of politics. Often the result of one or another local or regional process can affect the general course of world politics. For example, the ethnopolitical conflict between Bosnian Serbs, Muslims and Croats, which was initially internal matter former Yugoslavia, has grown into a political process, the scale of which affects the destabilization of pan-European politics. At the same time, a typical local process that affects only the interests of the local community is elections to municipal authorities and management.
- stable and crisis. In politics, acute crisis situations often turned into revolutionary explosions, and a series of reforms by various governments ensured stable evolution, as was the case, say, during the era of F. Roosevelt’s “New Deal” in the USA in the 30s. But, nevertheless, both reform and revolution can be ways to resolve a political crisis. This typologization follows from the deep mechanism of the political process associated with the equilibrium, balance and consensus of the main social forces acting as subjects of the process, or their absence. This was the case in Germany, when after the crisis of the Weimar Republic, the dominance of the Nazis and defeat in the Second World War in the country during the reign of K. Adenauer, a model of a stable political process in Germany was found.
- legal and “shadow”. Any political process includes in its main components the values and norms of the dominant political culture, as well as individual subcultures. These values determine the rules of the political game, the boundaries of what is permitted and what is not permitted, official and unofficial, legal and illegal. For example, uprising and coup, terror and putsch in all countries are taken outside the scope of forms of political life permitted by the constitution and other laws. However, the political process in reality turns out to be wider than the legal framework (although in the ideal limit it may coincide with it), and the rules of political expediency are sometimes higher than the norms of constitutional legality. This is also due to the lack of information, the conspiratorial nature of some fragments of the political field, and the love of professional politicians for “undercover” politics closed to the masses. Even in such a relatively developed rule of law, like the United States, from time to time illegal “shadow” actions come to the surface, like the Watergate case, which led to the resignation of US President R. Nixon
26. World community and modern international relations. Principles of world politics, trends and problems of its implementation.
World community is a political term often used in works on political science, speeches statesmen and in the media to denote the interconnected system of states of the world. Depending on the context, it may indicate different groups of countries, united according to different economic, political and ideological characteristics. Sometimes it means existing international organizations, primarily the UN, as an organization that unites almost all countries of the globe. Often used as a rhetorical device to contrast one state and its policies with a group of other states, called in this context the “world community” (for example, “Iran and world community"or "Israel and the world community").
In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the term “civilized world” was used in a similar meaning, which is now considered politically incorrect.
International relations - This is the sphere of interstate, interethnic communication. In the course of interaction between states and peoples realizing their interests in this area, various relations are formed: diplomatic, economic, social (their subjects are not states, but various non-governmental organizations), cultural, informational, etc.
Current trends international relations:
- internationalization almost all areas public life. It is expressed in the growth of contacts between people, international exchanges and interrelations, and therefore interdependence in the economy, education, culture, science, healthcare, protection of human rights and in ensuring all aspects of human security;
- formation of global problems, the solution of which is possible only as a result of successful interaction and cooperation of all peoples living on earth. These include maintaining peace, minimizing military danger, preserving the environment, combating epidemic diseases and crime;
- demilitarization and democratization - gradual abandonment of military-force methods of solving problems arising in this area (since they turn out to be less and less effective and more and more dangerous, including for the party resorting to them), as well as respect for the rights of all subjects participating in these relations, no matter what They weren't small.
World politics - This is part of the system of international relations, the activity of states to ensure their interests in solving problems arising in the field of international relations. The modern dominant of world politics is the desire to maintain security in its various aspects: military, environmental, legal, technological, information, etc.
World politics is structurally represented by foreign policy activities nation states, UN global activities, international unions, organizations and institutions authorized by states and peoples.
The sphere of world politics covers the entire field of political relations that develops between states and within a supranational framework. Since the main elements of world politics are interconnected, it is possible and necessary to talk about world political relations, about a single world political-temporal space, during which, or in its component parts, the main international political actions unfold. The main priorities of world politics are determined by the need to solve common problems facing humanity and national interests its subjects.
The leading role of politics in international relations due to the following factors:
1) subjects of world politics have enormous resources and opportunities to influence the entire the world around us, have powerful levers of control over both political and non-political international processes. These include UN activities, foreign policy activities sovereign states, leading and authoritative international organizations, bodies, public groups. It is political decisions and agreements of an international nature that act as the basis for the entire world order; they serve as guidelines for the development of the entire complex of relations between states.
2) international relations have a pronounced tendency towards globalization, complexity and expansion, which requires the improvement of international political mechanisms for their regulation.
3) The issues of the security of all mankind and the problems of its survival are more pressing than ever. It is in this direction that the main direction of world politics in the nuclear era is concentrated.
4) Resolving the contradiction of modern world development, between the growing diversity of the world and the political and socio-economic systems operating in it, on the one hand, and the current trend towards the integrity of humanity, towards the development and expansion of mutual relations between peoples and states, on the other, is becoming increasingly important. The unity of humanity also means deepening the freedom of human practice, freedom of choice and orientation towards progress. The guidelines and paths for such unity on the planet are outlined and paved by joint efforts by all members of the world community.