Conditions and factors of political stability. social stability

TEST

COURSE: POLITICAL SCIENCE

"Political stability"

SAMARA 2006

Political stability is an integral part general concept the stability of the state. Synonyms for "stability" are "constancy", "immutability", "stability". “Political stability is seen as the psychological ability of the population to maintain a calm behavior, regardless of external or internal unfavourable conditions. Political instability develops only in those cases when the mass of people is psychologically prepared to react aggressively to any social and economic events” (A.I. Yuryev). An increase in tension in the problem areas of society leads to a violation of psychological and political stability. That is, the presence in society and the escalation of destabilizing factors. The level of political stability in a society can be measured. An indicator of political stability is the ratio of the level of social/political aggressiveness of the population and the level of social/political subordination of the masses. However, stability does not necessarily mean the absence of change and even reform. Moreover, a relative, albeit minimal, level of stability is essential for reformers to succeed. The level of stability can differ significantly and vary - from balancing on the verge of a large-scale civil war to total immobility and immutability of political forms. Therefore, it seems legitimate to single out not only the levels or degree of stability - instability, but also different types political stability. In this regard, researchers distinguish, firstly, dynamic stability, adaptive and open to changes and the influence of the environment, and, secondly, mobilization, or static stability, functioning on the basis of fundamentally different mechanisms of interaction with the environment. An example of the latter can be some of the political regimes that functioned in pre-Soviet and Soviet Russia. The Russian experience convinces us that an authoritarian charismatic leader is able to ensure the stabilization of society on the path to a breakthrough to new frontiers of social and economic progress. No matter which of the strong, reformist-minded political leaders we take - Peter I, Alexander II, early Stalin - everywhere we see grandiose socio-economic results, the speed of accomplishment of which cannot be compared with the terms in which such transformations were made in the West. However, as soon as the energy of the tops weakened for some reason, and the development of society was hampered, stabilization

Political stability in Russian literature is understood as:

A system of links between different political subjects, characterized by a certain integrity and efficiency of the system itself.

Ordered processes in politics, the inconsistency and conflict of which are regulated with the help of political institutions.

The agreement of the main social and political forces about the goals and methods of social development.

State political life society, manifested in the stable functioning of all political institutions in society, associated with the preservation and improvement of structures, with their qualitative certainty.

A set of political processes that ensure the existence and development of political subjects in the political system.

You should also refer to the most popular approaches to determining political stability in Western political science:

but). First of all, stability is understood as the absence of real threat illegitimate violence or the state's ability to deal with it in a crisis situation.

Stability is also seen as a function of democracy, which includes, among other things, the participation of citizens in government through institutions civil society.

b). Stability is also interpreted as the functioning of one government for some long period of time, which implies, accordingly, its ability to successfully adapt to changing realities.

in). The presence of a constitutional order can also be considered a determining factor of stability. S. Huntington, in particular, defines stability according to the formula “order plus continuity”, assuming such a development option leading to this goal, in which the model of power organization retains its essential characteristics for a long period of time.

G). Stability as the absence of structural changes in the political system or as the ability to manage them, In other words, in a stable system, either political process does not lead to radical changes, or - if such changes are nevertheless observed - they are subject to a strategy developed in advance by the ruling elite.

Thus, as Pavlov N.A. emphasizes, one of the most significant problems of functioning political system- Ensuring its stability. This means that the system maintains its institutions, roles and values under changing conditions of the social environment, the implementation of its main functions. Stability, stability of the political system is such a state when any deviations in the actions of political subjects are corrected by the implementation of established, legitimate norms.

Political stability should also be understood as an integral part of general condition the stability of the state. This interpretation of the concept gives a new dimension to the emerging concept of " sustainable development» society. Political stability is ensured not only by the action of political factors proper, by the balance of the elements of the political system, and by the stability of political relations. An indispensable condition for political stability is stable relations between the peoples living on the territory of the country and the state.

Stability is correlated with situational and operational parameters of political dynamics, and stability is correlated with its strategic, historical dimensions. Stability in the country can be achieved through a tactical and temporary agreement between the main political forces, but the strategic stability of political life may still be very far away, as was the case in France in February 1848, when the workers and bourgeois who initially formed the Provisional Government were already in June of the same year, they clashed on the streets of Paris in barricade battles. Organic stability, inertia, in contrast to simple stability, is associated not simply with the easily disturbed balance of two or more social forces, their more or less unstable truce, but with the action of a certain integrating formula into which the political culture of the whole society is molded for a relatively long time. So, political stability expresses such a state of political dynamics, in which a temporary equilibrium (or balance) of the forces of the main political factors is achieved, after which subsequent destabilization, violation of this balance is possible. The processes of establishing temporary stability in the absence of strategic stability are very typical for many political regimes in Asian and African countries, the states opposite to stability and stability are instability and instability. The extreme form of instability of political dynamics is a systemic crisis in all spheres of public life, the long and growing nature of which sometimes leads to revolutions and the collapse of the old political system. Classical examples of such political cataclysms are the revolution of 1789 in France, the events of 1917 in Russia, or the degradation, anomie, and then the collapse of statehood in Somalia, torn apart during the civil war by warring clans. A. de Tocqueville notes two significant reasons that gave rise to the instability of the political dynamics of France, which led the country in 1789 to great revolution: firstly, a radical change in the balance of power between the two leading classes, the nobility and the bourgeoisie, when the latter, even before the revolution, seizes bureaucratic control over the management of French society, and secondly, the decline of the old political institutions that supported the former balance of social forces. He adds to this that the administrative reforms of 1787 (provincial assemblies, etc.), which dramatically changed the institutional structure of France, increased its political instability, and thus the reforms brought the revolution closer.

The political system cannot be stable if the ruling elite subjugates its main activity and the innovations initiated by it only to its own interests and ignores the interests of the majority. In this case, "it can only be supported by force, deceit, arbitrariness, cruelty and repression." Its subjective activity comes into conflict with the objective needs and nature of society, which leads to the accumulation of social discontent, leads to political tension and conflicts.

Conflicts in the functioning of the political system play an ambiguous role. Their occurrence is an indicator of a certain trouble or an aggravated contradiction. But conflicts by themselves cannot significantly affect the stability of the political system if the latter has mechanisms for their institutionalization, localization or resolution. To say that irreconcilable conflicts are an endemic feature of society is not to say that society is characterized by constant instability."

These words of R. Bendix are true, although they can be attributed with great reservations to interethnic conflicts that are difficult to transform, of any kind, and the consequences of which are the most destructive. This is largely due to the fact that the causes that cause them are, as a rule, complex. Among them are "existing or newly emerging social differentiation along ethnic lines, unequal access to power and resources, legal and cultural discrimination, propaganda of xenophobia and negative stereotypes." The inter-ethnic rivalry that arises on this basis can take on tough forms and continue for years (or even decades), shaking the foundations of the political system of society.

POLITICAL STABILITY- the state of the political system, characterized by the presence of the necessary conditions and factors that ensure the preservation of its identity by society, civil peace and agreement on the basis of achieving a balance of interests of various social actors and political forces, timely legitimate resolution of emerging problems and contradictions in the field of politics using the mechanisms and means provided for by law.

In the history of political discourse, there have been various models of political stability. In antiquity, agreement (homonoia) was conceived as a harmonic ratio that has a numerical character. Thus, Solon's reforms proceeded from harmony, established by means of precise proportions and ensuring agreement between the various groups of the policy (2/1, 3/2, 4/3).

In the Middle Ages, political stability was achieved through the strength of tradition and authority. christian church.

In modern times, in connection with the separation of powers, the model of balance between them, achieving a balance between various political forces, became the decisive model. Differentiation of the political system modern society, the plurality of its political forces significantly complicate the achievement of social integration. Nowadays, there is more and more awareness of the relative nature of political stability, subject to fluctuations and built on the basis of ideas. systems approach and self-organization.

Political stability, as well as the stability of society, is due to the laws of functioning and development of society, the nature and methods of interaction of its subsystems, changes and evolution of which do not entail the destruction of the functional unity of the structure and their balance.

Political stability is ensured by the political system of society (its main element is the state) and the effectiveness of the implementation of its functions, which in turn depends on the mass support of citizens: government bodies, public statements of political leaders in power, the effectiveness of political actions, and 2) from "systemic support", i.e. from the stability of positive assessments and opinions, indicating the approval by society of the activities of power structures in general, the domestic and foreign policies pursued by the state. An important factor in “systemic” support is trust in political leaders and the political regime, the readiness of various social groups defend their interests on the basis of and in accordance with the law, legal and moral standards.

Mass Support political regime it is also expressed in the acceptance by the majority of the population of the entire set of basic political values (the principle of separation of powers, openness, multi-party system, pluralism of opinions, freedom of speech, independence of the media, etc.), which determine the nature and methods of functioning of this political system.

The main conditions affecting the level of mass support for the existing political regime also include: the level of material security and social security of citizens; the existence of democratic institutions and mechanisms that ensure the participation of the population in the political process; security and legal guarantees of the individual.

Of particular importance is mass political support in the context of reforms, when society as a whole and its political system, in particular, are going through a period of transition from one state to another, becoming unbalanced for some time, and therefore less stable. Under these conditions, there is a contradiction and even a gap between social norms and values approved (implanted) by power structures, and social norms and values that dominate the mass consciousness. In the mass consciousness, due to a number of reasons - inertia, a more steadfast adherence to fundamental values - there may be a rejection of the norms and values of the ruling groups, tension and even conflict between the masses and the authorities. It is important to take into account that in society there is always competition between groups for leadership, a change of groups that claim to be more visible political role and greater political status. These groups, organized into political movements and parties, can lead the opposition in different forms. They will be the more successful, the more they reflect national interests and goals, cultural values and mentality. Opposition groups are able to come to power provided they manage to mobilize and lead the masses, uniting them with ideological slogans and programs. Much here depends on a politically authoritative leader who is popular in populace Oh. In maintaining political stability special meaning have established themselves in society, codified in legal laws and legitimate ways of fighting for power. The historical experience of illegitimate political struggle - from political conspiracies to political revolutions - shows that it is destructive for political stability and is fraught with the collapse of society. An illegitimate struggle for power can be both explicit and latent. Hidden forms of illegitimate struggle for power, without coming to the surface of public life, can seriously weaken the stability of the ruling regime, destroy its internal consolidation and ultimately lead to serious political upheavals.

Ensuring the political stability of society is achieved through legal guarantees of the security of the participation of citizens and political organizations in political activity and especially in opposition (protest) movements defending their political interests and claiming political participation in power. In many democratic countries of the world, significant experience has been accumulated in political struggle (and primarily in the struggle for power) that does not lead to cataclysms and national upheavals. Reformed Russia has yet to gain such experience. Different countries have put forward and are implementing special stabilization programs, their experience of overcoming the economic and political crisis, restoring political stability without changing the socio-political system, modernizing the economy under state control and regulation, taking into account the difference in socio-political systems and historical conditions, national and state features in its adaptation is just as important for Russia.

Political stability depends on the level and nature of political activity, on the positions of political leaders, on their ability to express national interests and consolidate the political will of citizens, on their ability to critically analyze their activities, and on their observance of moral and legal norms.

An important condition for the political stability of society during the period of reforms is their legal security, achieved on the basis of the unity of the constitution (basic law), federal and local legislation. The system of laws existing in society must change in accordance with new conditions and new challenges of the time. An untimely change, lagging behind or delaying the improvement of constitutional norms and current legislation has a destabilizing effect on the political process, on the interaction of political subjects and branches of power.

An indicator of the political stability of a society is its ability to neutralize negative external influences (subversion, international terrorism, economic blockade, political pressure, blackmail, disinformation, the threat of force, etc.). Such negative impacts can bring the political system into a state of extreme instability and even destroy it. In this regard, the unleashing of a civil war or large-scale political violent acts by both supporters and opponents of the existing system is especially dangerous. Therefore, an adequate reaction of the state to a threat to its sovereignty, its social interests and the security of its citizens is so important.

Literature:

1. political theory and political practice. M., 1994;

2. Semigin G.Yu. Political stability Russian society in the context of reforms. M., 1996;

3. Parsons T. The system of modern societies. M., 1998;

4. Ivanov V.N. Russia: finding the future. M., 1998;

5. Russia: overcoming the national catastrophe. M., 1999.

Political stability - steady state a society that allows it to function and develop effectively in the face of external and internal influences, while maintaining its structure and ability to control the process of social change.

The term "political stability" appeared in British and American political science, where it was used to analyze changes in the political system, to search for optimal mechanisms for its functioning.

The state of political stability cannot be understood as something frozen, unchanging, given once and for all. Stability is considered as the result of a constant process of renewal, which rests on a set of unstable equilibria between system-forming and system-changing processes within the system itself.

Political stability is presented as a qualitative state of social development, as a certain public order, in which a system of connections and relations dominates, fighting the commonality and continuity of goals, values and means of their implementation. At the same time, stability is the ability of the subjects of socio-economic and political life to resist internal and external actions that disrupt the system and neutralize them. In this understanding, stability is perceived as the most important life support mechanism for the development of the social system.

The main thing in political stability is to ensure the legitimacy, certainty, effectiveness of the activities of power structures, in the constancy of the norms of values. political culture, habitual behavior types stability of political relations. It is known that the greatest successes have been achieved by those societies that have traditionally focused on the values of order. And vice versa, the absolutization in society of the value of changes led to the fact that the resolution of problems and conflicts was achieved at a high price. In order for development and order to coexist, coherence, sequence, stage-by-stage changes and, at the same time, a realistic program capable of connecting ends with means - resources and conditions - are necessary.

It is the choice of the goals of political changes that correspond to the means, possibilities, ideas of people that determines the order (norm) of development. Transformations that are divorced from their real economic, social, cultural and psychological prerequisites, no matter how desirable they may seem to their initiators (the elite, the ruling party, the opposition, etc.), cannot be perceived as a “norm”, “order” by the majority of society. The reaction to unprepared changes, to disordered development, turns out to be overwhelmingly destructive.

The degree of political order is also influenced by the dynamics of social interests of different levels of community and ways to ensure their interaction. It is important here not only to take into account the specifics, autonomy of interests, the multiplicity of activity orientations, but also an understanding of their compatibility. In society, there should be zones of coordination of interests and positions, uniform rules of conduct that would be accepted by all participants in the political process as an order. The formation of a political order takes place on the basis of the existence of common fundamental interests among different political forces and the need for cooperation in order to protect them.

As for the ways of regulating the dynamics of the social interests of society, they can be confrontational (conflict) and consensus. The first type proceeds from the possibility of overcoming or sometimes even eliminating a certain group of interests. In this case, violence is considered the only force for political integration, for achieving order. It is seen as an effective method of solving emerging problems. Consensus type of regulation social relations proceeds from the recognition of different social interests and the need for their agreement on the fundamental problems of development. The basis for this consensus is general principles, values shared by all participants in political action. The most dangerous thing for the political order is the loss of confidence in the political and moral values and ideals of the people.

Political stability and political order are achieved, as a rule, in two ways: either by dictatorship or by the broad development of democracy. Stability achieved through violence, suppression, repression is historically short-lived, has an illusory nature, since it is achieved “from above” without the participation of the masses and the opposition. Another thing is stability based on democracy, a broad social base, and a developed civil society.

Stability is made up of the attitudes of the population to the existing political power, the ability of the political regime to take into account the interests of various groups and coordinate them, the position and condition of the elite itself, the nature of relations within society itself.

There are absolute, static and dynamic political stability.

The absolute (complete) stability of political systems is an abstraction that has no reality. In all likelihood, even “dead” systems devoid of internal dynamics cannot have such stability, since it implies not only the complete immobility of the political system itself and its elements, but also isolation from any outside influences. If absolute stability is possible with a high level of well-being, the enormous strength of traditions, the leveling of inequality, the Marked system of power, then its destabilization under the influence of both external factors, and the growth of internal crisis phenomena will only be a matter of time.

Static stability is characterized by the creation and preservation of immobility, constancy of socio-economic and political structures, connections, relationships. It rests on the notions of the inviolability of social foundations, a slow pace of development, the need to preserve the conservative in the dominant ideology, and create adequate stereotypes of political consciousness and behavior. However, the viability of a political system of this degree of stability is extremely limited. This state can be the result of rigid resistance to both external and internal changes (closed systems). Sometimes political systems of static stability try to improve their state by, for example, carrying out an “active” external (militarization, expansion, aggression, etc.) and domestic policy. But, as a rule, if these modernization attempts do not coincide in time, do not take into account the objective progressive course of development, do not rely on a broad social base of interests, do not take into account geopolitical opportunities and the reaction of the world community, then the political system is destroyed and the “closed” society is transformed into a more mobile social formation capable of adapting to changing conditions.

The current state of the social environment is characterized by a new dynamic level of political stability. It has been worked out by "open" societies that have learned the mechanism of renewal and consider socio-economic and political changes within the existing socio-political environment as a stabilizing factor. They are able to perceive and assimilate internal and external impulses that transform them, organically include in the democratic process mechanisms not only to prevent, but also to use conflicts to maintain the stability of the political system.

Dynamic systems have the necessary degree of stability, stability, ensuring their self-preservation and at the same time not being an insurmountable obstacle to change. They are possible only in a democracy. Under these conditions) the state of stability is always relative, there is a regime of constant self-correction of the political system. Summarizing a huge amount of factual material, S. Lipset concluded that economic development and the competitive nature of the political topic are compatible.

In a society with many problems of economic, social and political development, democracy complicates the solution of problems of political stability. In conditions of economic inequality, the absence of civil society, acute conflicts, and the large number of marginal strata, democracy can turn out to be a very risky form of development. The democratic type of development in liberal, pluralistic systems has other possibilities.

One of the main prerequisites for political stability can be considered economic stability, the growth of prosperity. The close relationship between economic efficiency and political stability is obvious: the socio-economic factor affects the place and distribution of political power in society and determines the political order. It is known that economic crises, a decline in production, and a deterioration in the standard of living of the population often led to the destruction of the political system. The experience of change in Russia and Eastern Europe showed that the strength of dictatorial regimes ultimately depended on the success of their economic system. Economic weakness, inefficiency inevitably leads to political collapse. Relatively high rates of economic growth and the absence of pronounced disproportions in the distribution of income are also important.

The condition for stability is the presence in society of a balance (consensus) of the interests of various groups, which shows the objectivity of the existence of a sphere of potential consent of a political nation. A political nation is a community living in a single political and legal space, whose laws and norms are recognized as universal, regardless of class, ethnic, confessional, and other differences. The political nation is a product of the political system as a specific type of social production.

The balance of interests ensures the legitimacy and effectiveness of the political system, the necessary degree of approval and acceptance of democratic rules and norms of political behavior. But not only the willingness of citizens to defend various goals and most contribute to the process of adapting the political system to new situations and changes, but also the presence of social trust, tolerance (tolerance), political consciousness of cooperation, respect for the law and loyalty to political institutions.

The basis of political stability is a strict separation of powers, the presence of checks and balances in the functioning of the various branches of power. A large stream of "filters" - interest groups, pressure groups, parties, parliamentary commissions and committees can reduce the quantitative and qualitative overload of the political system to a minimum. Reduction of social space for direct, immediate forms of pressure (participation in activities executive power, multi-stage, articulation and aggregation of interests are able to maintain political order, political stability.

The main subjects of domestic political stability are the state and the political cells of society. Moreover, depending on their activity, they can also act as objects of the political process. There are two types of internal political stability: autonomous and mobilization,

Mobilization stability arises in social structures, where development is initiated “from above”, while the society itself is, as it were, mobilized to achieve the goal on certain period. It can be formed and function as a result of crises, conflicts, general civil upsurge or through open violence, coercion. In systems of this type, the dominant interest may be the interest of the state, the ruling party, an authoritarian charismatic leader, who take on the responsibility of expressing the interests of society and capable of providing a breakthrough for society in this period of time. The physical and spiritual potential of the leader can serve as the main resources for the viability of mobilization political stability; military status and combat readiness of the regime; state of affairs in the economy; the level of social tension in society, capable of separating the bearer of power from the people; the presence of a political coalition on an anti-government basis; mood in the army and others social factors contributing to the growth of crisis phenomena) in the political system. The ruling elite of mobilization systems do not feel the need to change as long as their status allows them to maintain social positions. The system of mobilization stability has the legitimacy of a general pore6 or open coercion. Historically, this type of political stability is short-lived.

Standalone stability type, i.e. independent of the desire and will of any specific social and political subjects, arises in society when development begins “from below” by all structures of civil society. No one specifically stimulates this development; it exists in every subsystem of society. There is a unity of power and society, necessary for the “behavior of profound socio-economic and political transformations and ensuring the stabilization of the ruling regime. An autonomous, or open, system performs the functions assigned to it mainly by legitimizing power, i.e. voluntary transfer of a number of managerial functions to the highest echelons of power. And this is possible on a large scale only under conditions of a gradual strengthening of the positions of the democratic regime. With this type of stability, social contrasts and contradictions (religious, territorial, ethnic, etc.) are reduced to a minimum, social conflicts are legalized here and are resolved by civilization in other ways, within the framework of the existing system, the conviction that the country is prosperous in comparison with others is cultivated, the dynamics is maintained welfare growth.

An important factor in autonomous stability is the heterogeneity of the population in terms of status, employment, and income. The political system is open, there is the possibility of balancing between the growth of the extraction, regulatory function and the response to society's attitudes towards public policy. The political system, without claiming to be the main subject of social change, is designed to support existing economic relations. Democracy in autonomous systems becomes a stable tradition and a common civilizational value.

The dissatisfaction of the masses with the policy of the ruling elite gives rise to a systemic crisis, destabilizes society as a whole and its subsystems. It is the contradiction between the government and society that is the Equal cause of the instability of society.

The factors of instability include the struggle for power between competing factions of the ruling elite, the creation of a threat to the integrity and very existence of the state, the personification of power, the predominance of the corporate interests of the ruling elites in state policy, the presence of interethnic and regional contradictions, the difficulty of ensuring the continuity of political power, foreign policy adventurism, doctrinairism. in politics, etc.

Instability can manifest itself in such forms as a change in the political regime, a change of government, an armed struggle against the ruling regime, the activation of the opposition forces, etc. A change of government and peaceful forms of activation of the opposition lead to a change in political leaders, a change in the balance of power within the political elite, but in general the regime can remain stable, as can political ideas, structures and ways of implementing policies. A pronounced political instability is associated with the emergence of an immediate threat to the political regime, when the failure of its policy is combined with the disintegration of state power and the decline in the legitimacy of the regime, and the opposition gets the opportunity to overthrow the existing government.

Thus, the problem of stability in dynamic systems can be considered as the problem of the optimal ratio of continuity and modification due to internal and external incentives.

Among the methods used by the political elite to ensure political stability and political order, the most common are the following: socio-political maneuvering, the content of which is to weaken the opposition of the "infringed" part of society (the range of maneuvering methods is quite wide - from separate deals, temporary political blocs to the proclamation of populist slogans capable of diverting public attention); political manipulation - the massive impact of the media in order to form public opinion of the desired direction; introduced opposition forces into the political system and their gradual adaptation and integration; use of force and some other methods.

The problem of political stability involves the analysis of the concept of “political risk”.

In foreign practice, risk is most often interpreted as the probability of unforeseen consequences in the implementation of decisions. Accordingly, they talk about the level or degree of risk. An assessment of the degree of political risk based on an analysis of possible scenarios for the development of events makes it possible to choose the optimal solution that reduces the likelihood of undesirable political events.

Within the framework of the general country risk, non-commercial, political, and commercial risks are distinguished.

The term "political risk" has many meanings - from predicting political stability to assessing all non-commercial risks associated with activities in various socio-political environments.

The classification of political risk is carried out on the basis of the division of events caused either by the actions of government structures in the course of pursuing certain public policies, or by forces beyond the control of the government. In accordance with this principle, the American researcher C. Kennedy proposed the division of political risk into extralegal and legal-governmental (Table 12).

Extralegal risk means any event whose source is outside the existing legitimate structures of the country terrorism, sabotage, military coup, revolution.

Legislative-government risk is a direct consequence of the current political process and includes events such as democratic elections leading to a new government and changes in legislation relating to those parts of it that deal with trade, labor, joint ventures, monetary policy.

In determining the “political risk index”, attention is drawn to the following factors:

Degree of ethnic and religious differences,

Social inequality in the distribution of income

degree of political pluralism,

Influence of left radicals,

The role of coercion in maintaining power,

The scale of anti-constitutional actions,

Violations of the legal order (demonstrations, strikes, etc.)

In the classification proposed by the American scientists J. de la Torre and D. Necar, internal and external sources political and economic risk factors (Table 13).

An analysis of internal economic factors makes it possible to general characteristics economic development of the country and highlight the most vulnerable areas. External economic factors determine the degree of influence of external restrictions on domestic economic policy: high degree dependence on a significant amount of external debt increase the risk of intervention in investment activities. The problem is that assessments of internal socio-political factors are largely subjective. Under certain conditions, the external political environment can play the role of a catalyst for political instability in the country.

It should be noted that the analysis of political risk in Russia has some specifics.

First, political traditions, the imperfection of democratic institutions, and a turning point in historical development have determined the significant role of the personal factor, which needs to be given additional attention when assessing political risk.

Secondly, a significant factor of uncertainty is the presence of many different types of political and territorial entities with different economic potential, heterogeneous in terms of national composition and based on different historical, political, cultural and religious traditions, regional conflicts have both a direct effect on the general political situation and an indirect impact on the situation in other regions, since the solution of regional problems requires additional subsidies, which leads to an increase in the federal budget deficit, changes in tax laws, spending cuts (and hence increased social tensions), increased public debt, fluctuations in interest rates and exchange rate, i.e. to the deterioration of the political and investment climate in the country.

In the 90s. political factor in terms of the strength of his influence on the course of events in Russia, he surpassed all others. In general, the risk caused by ongoing processes is extremely high and can be characterized as a risk transition period: any events in political life can have consequences much more devastating than in a stable developing country

20. Political stability.

Political stability is a stable state of society that allows it to function effectively and develop in the face of external and internal influences, while maintaining its structure and ability to control the process of social change.

The term "political stability" appeared in British and American political science, where it was used to analyze changes in the political system, to search for optimal mechanisms for its functioning.

Political stability is presented as a qualitative state of social development, as a certain social order dominated by a system of connections and relations that fight the commonality and continuity of goals, values and means of their implementation. At the same time, stability is the ability of the subjects of socio-economic and political life to resist internal and external actions that disrupt the system and neutralize them. In this understanding, stability is perceived as the most important life support mechanism for the development of the social system.

The main thing in political stability is to ensure the legitimacy, certainty, effectiveness of the activities of power structures, the constancy of the norms of the values of political culture, the habitual types of behavior, the stability of political relations. It is known that the greatest successes have been achieved by those societies that have traditionally focused on the values of order. And vice versa, the absolutization in society of the value of changes led to the fact that the resolution of problems and conflicts was achieved at a high price. In order for development and order to coexist, coherence, sequence, stage-by-stage changes and, at the same time, a realistic program capable of connecting ends with means - resources and conditions - are necessary.

which would be accepted by all participants in the political process as an order. The formation of a political order takes place on the basis of the existence of common fundamental interests among different political forces and the need for cooperation in order to protect them.

As for the ways of regulating the dynamics of the social interests of society, they can be confrontational (conflict) and consensus. The first type proceeds from the possibility of overcoming or sometimes even eliminating a certain group of interests. In this case, violence is considered the only force for political integration, for achieving order. It is seen as an effective method of solving emerging problems. The consensual type of regulation of social relations proceeds from the recognition of different social interests and the need for their agreement on the fundamental problems of development. The basis for that consensus is the general principles, values shared by all participants in political action. The most dangerous thing for the political order is the loss of confidence in political and moral values and ideals on the part of the people.

There are absolute, static and dynamic political stability. The absolute (complete) stability of political systems is an abstraction that has no reality. In all likelihood, even “dead” systems devoid of internal dynamics cannot have such stability, since it implies not only the complete immobility of the political system itself and its elements, but also isolation from any outside influences. If absolute stability is possible with a high level of well-being, the enormous strength of traditions, the leveling of inequality, the Marked system of power, then its destabilization under the influence of both external factors and the growth of internal crisis phenomena will only be a matter of time.

(militarization, expansion, aggression, etc.) and domestic policy. But, as a rule, if these modernization attempts do not coincide in time, do not take into account the objective progressive course of development, do not rely on a broad social base of interests, do not take into account geopolitical opportunities and the reaction of the world community, then the political system is destroyed and the “closed” society is transformed into a more mobile social formation capable of adapting to changing conditions.

They are able to perceive and assimilate internal and external impulses that transform them, organically include in the democratic process mechanisms not only to prevent, but also to use conflicts to maintain the stability of the political system.

recognized as universal, regardless of class, ethnic, confessional

And other differences. The political nation is a product of the political system as a specific type of social production.

And committees can reduce the quantitative and qualitative overload of the political system to a minimum. The reduction of social space for direct, immediate forms of pressure (participation in the activities of the executive branch, multi-stage, articulation and aggregation of interests can support political order, political stability.

is initiated “from above”, while the society itself is, as it were, mobilized to achieve the goal for a certain period. It can be formed and function as a result of crises, conflicts, general civil upsurge or through open violence, coercion. In systems of this type, the dominant interest may be the interest of the state, the ruling party, an authoritarian charismatic leader, who take on the responsibility of expressing the interests of society and capable of providing a breakthrough for society in this period of time. The physical and spiritual potential of the leader can serve as the main resources for the viability of mobilization political stability; military status and combat readiness of the regime; state of affairs in the economy; the level of social tension in society, capable of separating the bearer of power from the people; the presence of a political coalition on an anti-government basis; mood in the army and other social factors contributing to the growth of crisis phenomena) in the political system. The ruling elite of mobilization systems do not feel the need to change as long as their status allows them to maintain social positions. The system of mobilization stability has the legitimacy of a general pore6 or open coercion. Historically, this type of political stability is short-lived.

society. There is a unity of power and society, necessary for the “behavior of profound socio-economic and political transformations and ensuring the stabilization of the ruling regime. An autonomous, or open, system performs the functions assigned to it mainly by legitimizing power, i.e. voluntary transfer of a number of managerial functions to the highest echelons of power. And this is possible on a large scale only under conditions of a gradual strengthening of the positions of the democratic regime. With this type of stability, social contrasts and contradictions (religious, territorial, ethnic, etc.) are reduced to a minimum, social conflicts are legalized here and are resolved by civilization in other ways, within the framework of the existing system, the conviction that the country is prosperous in comparison with others is cultivated, the dynamics is maintained welfare growth.

An important factor in autonomous stability is the heterogeneity of the population in terms of status, employment, and income. The political system is open, there is a possibility of balancing between the growth of the extraction, regulatory function and the response to society's attitudes towards state policy. The political system, without claiming to be the main subject of social change, is designed to support existing economic relations. Democracy in autonomous systems is becoming a stable tradition and a civilizational value.

The dissatisfaction of the masses with the policy of the ruling elite gives rise to a systemic crisis, destabilizes society as a whole and its subsystems.

It is the contradiction between the government and society that is the Equal cause of the instability of society.

Thus, the problem of stability in dynamic systems can be considered as the problem of the optimal ratio of continuity and modification due to internal and external incentives.

In general theoretical terms, such categories as “immutability” and “stability” are close to the concept of “stability”. They characterize some specific processes occurring in various fields social life. Thus, immutability implies a process in which, within certain time and space intervals, the state of the objects in question remains essentially the same. Stability defines processes in terms of their ability to keep changes (fluctuations) within predetermined (previously known) boundaries, within certain parameters, and also indicates the ability of the system to restore disturbed equilibrium. Both a destructive process and a creative one can be stable. Stability does not necessarily mean immutability, although it may include it as a special case. More often, sustainability means the constancy and predictability of change. And this brings this category closer to the concept of “stability”. But it would be wrong to identify these categories.

“Stability” is a more complex category; it includes a comprehensive assessment of the nature of the interaction (and possible consequences) of a set of interrelated and mutually influencing elements. In assessing the stability of a political system, it is important to compare the functioning of the system with its real opportunities, forming the “regulating” and “self-regulating” potential of the latter. There are several various kinds system features:

-- extraction (extracting) opportunity, i.e. extraction (mobilization) of material and human resources (finance, support, attraction of talents, etc.);
- controlling, i.e. keeping under control the behavior and activities of various social groups and institutions;
-- distributive (distributive) possibility, ie, the placement and distribution of resources available in society in accordance with actual needs;
-- a reactive opportunity, i.e., timely consideration of the diverse requirements (challenges) coming from society as a whole or from individual groups;
-- a communication opportunity, i.e., using popular ideas in society, slogans, symbols, the ability to increase the effectiveness of the interaction of all elements of the system.

A system with significant (large-scale) capabilities can not only maintain stability, but also stimulate the necessary changes. The balance between stability and change is one of the most important indicators of the effectiveness of the political system.

Thus, we can conclude that “stability” as a concept can characterize only those processes and phenomena that are characterized by changes, causal patterns of both linear and probabilistic properties. This also applies to political stability. A political system that, in the course of its functioning, violates the framework of identity, i.e., comes into conflict with its own nature, loses stability.

An indicator of destabilization is such results of the functioning of the political system that were not expected and unacceptable (undesirable). Assessments of stability (instability) depend both on the availability of relevant information and on the worldview and political positions of participants in political processes, subjects of political life and activity. Therefore, the development of special procedures (indicators) that allow an objective assessment of the state of the political system and the degree of its stability is of particular importance.

In doing so, at least three aspects should be kept in mind. The first one is systemic, including the regularities and tendencies of the holistic, complex development of the political sphere of society, the processes taking place in it at a particular historical time. The second is cognitive, based on the fact that the functioning subject (subjects) has the necessary timely and sufficient complete information about events, phenomena and processes developing on different levels political management. The third is functional, consisting of the plans and programs of the subjects of the political process and taking into account the possible and real results of political activity.

The content of the functioning of the political system is political activity, which has specific features and essential features. First of all, political activity has a pronounced target social orientation. Each of its subjects (bodies of state power and administration, political parties, movements, blocs, etc.) has its own interests, the implementation of which is the meaning of their participation in political life. Behind each of them are certain social (socio-demographic, national, professional, settlement) groups.

A political system capable of combining different interests, instilling skills for cooperation and harmony, and coordinating group and corporate political activities can be classified as stable political systems.

Political activity is inextricably linked with the problem of power and the nature of its functioning. Power can be supported by the broad masses and various associations of citizens, and it can also cause rejection of it. Support can be, firstly, the so-called “situational”, which is based on the assessment by society of specific decisions made by state bodies, the political course pursued by the state, public statements, specific political actions, and the personal qualities of political leaders. Secondly, it is diffuse, extending primarily to the political regime, embodying the most characteristic features of the relationship between society and the state. It is a kind of set of positive assessments and opinions, which helps society to accept (or at least tolerate) the actions of power structures as a whole. Diffuse support is characterized by a series characteristic features, in particular, the duration of the course, close connection with the processes of socialization and the acquisition of political experience by individuals, the focus on assessing the political regime as a whole, and not the officials of power.

Trust is an important component of diffuse support. It arises due to the satisfaction of different groups of the population with the activities, first of all, of power structures that make decisions adequate to their social expectations.

Support for the political regime is carried out at two levels: elite and mass. The main factor of elite support is the degree of socio-economic development, which ultimately determines the amount of resources to be redistributed among various associations of people. Support for the authorities by the masses consists in the acceptance by the majority of the population of values (freedom of speech, pluralism of opinions, independence of the media, etc.), on which a specific political system of social and political norms (constitutional, legal, moral, etc.) is implicitly or explicitly based .), which determine the behavior of political leaders and power structures. Among the main conditions that influence the support of the masses of the existing regime are the long-term and sustainability of democratic transformations in society, the degree of participation of the state in managing the economy, social security personality, national equality, the constant growth of the standard of living of different groups of the population, the real security of the individual.

It is important in political activity to take into account the dialectics of the objective and the subjective in any political processes, the participants of which are different groups of the population. A feature of the Russian mentality is the personalization of political life, which means the orientation of Russians not so much towards political programs and parties, but rather towards the personalities of political leaders (government leaders). Hence, criticism of the latter was sometimes perceived as criticism of the political system as a whole and was pursued in every possible way, and the strengthening of personal power did not cause active protest.

For an ordinary citizen, both participating in political life and not actively participating in it, a sense of community with the leader (or his immediate environment) has always been important. It gave a sense of stability, especially in the face of radical change. The inertia of political sympathies was actively exploited by all political leaders, who used their "former merits" in the absence of new ones. We should agree with the position of R. Bendix that “there are important bonds between people that can contribute to the stability of society; the actions of each member are oriented towards the actions of others, and all people attach particular value to the collective formations in which they participate.”

In assessing the subjective aspects of political activity, it is important to take into account the following aspects:

-- political positions and the political role of specific leaders in the present and past socio-political situations;
-- the ability to critically analyze social realities and their role in political practice;
-- the ability to express and defend national (group) interests;
- value orientations moral standards, motives and attitudes of political participation.

Freedom of political choice, the pressure of group (corporate) interests can, under certain circumstances, have a decisive impact on the leader's political behavior, the result of which can be a serious destabilizing effect on the entire political system. Its scope and consequences will ultimately be determined by objective prerequisites (conditions). The coincidence of negative subjective and objective prerequisites can lead the political system into a state of extreme instability (crisis) and even self-destruction. Something similar happened in 1991 with the USSR.

A situation of high negative activity of certain political forces is possible, using objective prerequisites (conditions) for their political purposes, but choosing inadequate methods of activity for this. Such impacts on the political system (and through it on the whole society) can lead them to short-term success. But in the end, a “pendulum effect” occurs, when both public sentiment and the political process begin to drift in the opposite direction, and these forces are defeated. As an example of a destabilizing effect on the political situation, one can name the actions of the State Emergency Committee in August 1991.

Political instability and some disorganization of society in the first half of the 1990s are the result, first of all, of the government's radical policy aimed at introducing market economy as the only factor capable of transforming the totality of complex social relations. In reality, they are amenable to purposeful modification only as a result of the use of organizational, managerial, scientific, technical, financial, economic, spiritual and moral measures. At the same time, the state cannot evade the performance of the regulatory function not only in the sphere of the economy, but also in the entire system of social relations.

The use of illegitimate means of struggle for the realization of corporate interests creates a threat not only to the political system, but to the entire society. Especially dangerous is the possibility of unleashing a civil war or other large-scale violent actions, both by supporters of the political regime and its opponents. The result of such a confrontation may be a political upheaval leading to a change of power, to the establishment of a new political regime. History knows many examples of coups, most often carried out in a crisis of the political system or in totalitarian societies, where the mechanism for changing state leaders either did not exist at all or turned out to be ineffective. The arrival of a new leader as a result of a coup, as a rule, stabilizes the political system for a certain time, but this stabilization is short-lived if the contradictions that gave rise to the political struggle remain unresolved.

The political system cannot be stable if the ruling elite subjugates its main activity and the innovations initiated by it only to its own interests and ignores the interests of the majority. In this case, “it can only be supported by force, deceit, arbitrariness, cruelty and repression.” Its subjective activity comes into conflict with the objective needs and nature of society, which leads to the accumulation of social discontent, leads to political tension and conflicts.

Conflicts in the functioning of the political system play an ambiguous role. Their occurrence is an indicator of a certain trouble or an aggravated contradiction. But conflicts by themselves cannot significantly affect the stability of the political system if the latter has mechanisms for their institutionalization, localization or resolution. “To say that irreconcilable conflicts are endemic to society is not to say that society is characterized by constant instability.”

These words of R. Bendix are true, although they can be classified with great reservations as interethnic conflicts that are difficult to transform in any way and whose consequences are the most destructive. This is largely due to the fact that the causes that cause them are, as a rule, complex. Among them are “existing or newly emerging social differentiation along ethnic lines, unequal access to power and resources, legal and cultural discrimination, propaganda of xenophobia and negative stereotypes.” The inter-ethnic rivalry that arises on this basis can take on tough forms and continue for years (or even decades), shaking the foundations of the political system of society.

Thus, the existence of real mechanisms for the rapid detection, prevention and resolution of conflicts remains a necessary condition for the effective functioning of the political system and an indicator of its stability.

The political system, being open, experiences not only internal, but also external influences that can cause its destabilization under certain conditions. The most important indicator of the stability of the political system is its ability to neutralize negative influences from outside.

The main forms of implementation of the latter are subversive activities carried out by special services and organizations, economic blockade, political pressure, blackmail, threat of force, etc. Adequate and timely response to such influences from the outside allows you to protect your own national interests of the state, to achieve favorable conditions for their implementation . The negative impact from outside on the political system may not be purposeful, but be the result of general planetary difficulties and unresolved problems.

At the same time, external influences can also have a positive character for the political system, if the government conducts foreign policy does not run counter to the interests of the world community. The peoples are interested in the consistent implementation of the democratization, humanization and demilitarization of world politics, in the development of measures to ensure the survival of mankind in the conditions of the crisis of modern society and a sharp deterioration in the quality of natural factors. Accounting for these global needs in political practice is approved and supported by other countries of the world community, which strengthens the position and authority of the state, its leaders in public opinion both abroad and within the country.

The outward functioning of the political system, adequate to the actual needs of the development of the world community, makes it more efficient and gives it an additional impetus to stability, and hence security to the country with which the latter is closely connected.