The origin, types and functions of political elites. Elite theories Modern theories of elites
The main typologies of elites
G.Moska and V.Pareto focused more on the structure and general principles the functioning of elites, therefore, the supposed grounds for classifying the elites of the founding theorists are quite broad. As criteria, they tried to apply such large-scale indicators as political stability or instability, forms of government, economic conditions and even the "level of civilization." It should be noted that, despite unsuccessful attempts to classify the elites on the basis of these criteria, Pareto and Mosca identified the form and peculiarities of the organization of power (or political regime) as a possible basis, highlighting the tendency of the elite towards "autocratic", "democratic" or mixed "liberal "regimes (Mosca), as well as dividing the methods of the elites' realization of their own power (Pareto). According to Pareto, there are elites who rely on their intelligence and cunning, and elites guided by categories of violence, religious and other irrational factors. To more easily distinguish between these types, Pareto used the terms of Machiavelli, calling them the elites "foxes" and "lions", respectively.
Researchers of the elites of subsequent generations also proposed various variants of the classification of elites, and in most cases the followers acted within the broad framework of the concept of G. Mosk. The most common classification principle used in modern models was proposed in 1950 by R. Aron.
R. Aron identifies 3 types of elites: 1) a cohesive, monolithic structure with a high level of centralization of internal relations (Soviet Union); 2) disciplined, personifying the arena of dominance of one group in the general management layer (Nazi Germany); 3) divided; asserting pluralistic competitive interaction between different elite groups.
A typology close to Aron's classification is proposed by K. Beck and J. Maloy - 1) a close-knit closed elite (Soviet Union); 2) divided closed elite (developing countries); 3) divided open elite (Western democracies).
The Aron tradition is completed by one of the later classifications (1985), developed by G. Field and J. Higley. Scientists distinguish 4 types of elites: 1) ideologically cohesive (communist regimes, as well as Nazi Germany), which is characterized by high level internal integration and implementation of the values of only one ideology; 2) disunited (in most developing countries), characterized by a minimum level of structuring, and, often, fierce competition between elite groups; 3) partially cohesive (took place in post-war Italy and Japan, in France in 1960-70), which is distinguished by the presence of the most influential faction in the elite group, within which the norms of the elite of the first type are established; 4) consistently cohesive (most European countries at the end of the twentieth century), which is characterized by broad structural integration and procedural agreement between all influential elite groups, while demonstrating ideological and political differences.
Elites in a transforming state
States that are at the stage of transformation are characterized by an increase in the role of elites in the political system. This is due to an increase in the level of responsibility of the ruling stratum, since it is during the transition period that the basic principles and mechanisms of the functioning of the state system of the future are laid.
In this aspect, the “capacity” of the elite is of paramount importance, expressed in the presence of an effective mechanism for controlling processes within the state, as well as in the possibility of attracting effective socially significant resources.
In the structure of the ruling stratum, two groups are distinguished, which to the greatest extent determine the effectiveness of the functioning of the elite as a whole - this is the political and economic elite. The political elite includes the highest and middle echelons of the executive branch, the parliamentary corps, and the courts of the highest and middle levels. The economic elite is represented by the heads of enterprises of the financial, industrial and agricultural sectors, influential in the economic system of the state. The consequence of the objective coexistence of the two most influential groups in the elite stratum is constant competition between the political and economic elites. Of course, in any state there is a certain specificity of such a struggle, the result of which is usually the conquest of an advantageous position of one of the main elites.
And from the point of view of the theory of elites, this position is more preferable for a transitional state - it is very important for it to prevent a split of the elite into opposing groups. In conditions when a single integrating state ideology has not yet been finally formed, the so-called "games of the elites", which are based on extremely narrow goals, can lead to deep social cataclysms, which will be extremely difficult to stop later.
Regardless of the type of elite that has won a priority position, the latter, in any case, continues to remain the integration nucleus of society, the most important task of which is to preserve the integrity and a high level of consolidation in society. Moreover, according to many researchers, only the elite are capable of fulfilling this mission.
In conclusion, let us return to the problem posed at the beginning of the chapter: how can the presence of an elite be combined with democratic foundations recognized in all developed states? necessary condition state development? Given the objective nature of the emergence of the elite in society, as well as the characteristics of the ruling stratum that allow it to maintain its influence, in modern conditions there is reason to call a democratic state, the elite (elite) of which pursues goals that coincide with the goals of the bulk of the population, or correlates its aspirations with interests of the majority of citizens.
The political elite can be classified according to various criteria.
By the level of authority and socio-political
status the elite happens: ruling(the elite itself) or opposition(counter elite);
on level of competence : highest, nationwide
(federal level), which makes decisions that are significant for the entire state ; average, regional(regional, regional, republican), which
acts as a barometer of public opinion; local, municipal(city, district);
on style, on forms and methods of government: elite fox
(masters of political maneuver and compromise, social balancing and surprise blows, roundabout maneuver and political manipulation) and elite-lions, which is distinguished by strong charismatic qualities, conservatism, a penchant for forceful leadership and pragmatism;
on the nature of the interests expressed: professional,
demographic, ethnic, religious;
on results of activity: constructive elite,
pseudo-elite, anti-elite;
on forming technologies: closed and open.
by type of government allocate : totalitarian, liberal,
dominant, democratic elite.
This diversity does not mean that elites are not interconnected. On the contrary, they cannot exist one without the other, they are closely intertwined both vertically and horizontally. They are no less connected both in form and in the content of their activities. Moreover, many prominent representatives of the upper echelons simultaneously represent the political, economic, military, religious, and even sports elite.
The political elite also has its own structure. The structure of the political elite(the classification of the Polish political scientist V. Milanovski) is as follows:
"Ruling elite" - a group that governs society on behalf of the state;
"Potential elites" - groups striving for power;
"Selector" - groups prepared to perform managerial tasks;
"Amateur elites" - groups that lost the elections, but are actively preparing for the next elections (opposition and supporters of the political regime);
“Veto groups” - groups within the ruling elite, on which the final political decision-making depends;
“Connected group” is an informal (anonymous, shadow) association that has an active influence on the policy of state power institutions.
The elite by status includes the president and vice-president of the country, members of the presidential council, leaders of representative bodies of power and deputies, the prime minister and his deputies, ministers, heads of administration and heads of representative bodies of power of the constituent entities of the Federation, heads of diplomatic missions abroad, the upper layer of the military bureaucracy, leaders of political parties and social movements, leaders of leading mass media. This is the ruling elite - the elite in the narrow sense of the word.
An integral element of the cadre of the highest political level in a democratic society is counter-elite- a group of the most influential persons from opposition parties and movements, members of the so-called shadow cabinets, opponents of the official government course from financial, industrial and commercial structures, critical authoritative representatives of the creative intelligentsia, scientists. The counter-elite possesses all the characteristic features of the elite proper, except for the main thing: it does not have real power and does not have direct access to state administrative functions. She fights for their acquisition and the status of a subject of politics in the rank of the ruling elite.
An important structural link of the elite stratum is near-elite environment- the closest assistants of those who really make politics. These are advisers and consultants of different ranks and profiles, members of councils, commissions and working groups, authoritative lawyers, publicists, scientists, writers and artists - first of all, those who make up, as they say now, the leadership team. These people play the role of a kind of managers who, although they do not occupy key government positions in the relevant power structures, nevertheless, are endowed with sufficient powers and real informal opportunities to influence the decision-making process.
Taken together, the elite itself, the counter-elite and the near-elite environment represent elite in the broadest sense of the word... Without such an elite, without harmony and organic unity of its structural elements, and even more so without the competence and professionalism of those in power, not a single social entity can normally exist.
4. The relationship between the ruling elite and the counter-elite: an analysis of classical elitist theories.
Elite theory was developed by the famous Italian sociologist Wilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) in a number of works. Pareto, in particular, pointed out that in every area of human activity there are individuals showing better results than others. They constitute the so-called upper class, or elite. The border separating it from the rest of the population is not clear-cut and definite ... “We have two strata of the population, namely: the lower stratum (non-elite); the highest stratum, the elite, divided into two parts: a) the ruling elite; b) non-governing elite ”.
In practice, there are no clear procedures that determine the place of each individual in these strata, but there are some kind of social “labels” that help to achieve this goal (for example, the label of a lawyer). “The ruling elite includes people with labels that they belong to the political service of a sufficiently high level, for example, ministers, senators, deputies, heads of departments of ministries, chairmen of appellate courts, generals, colonels, but at the same time it is necessary to exclude those who managed to infiltrate their ranks without the qualities corresponding to the received label ”. Wealth and family ties help break into the ruling elite, including people who do not have elite properties.
Pareto not only argued about the division of society into two strata: the upper, which usually includes the managers, and the lower, where the ruled are located, but also talked about the constant exchange of individuals between them. He called the last process the circulation of elites. It helps maintain social balance and stability in society. The ruling class is being restored not only numerically, but, more importantly, qualitatively thanks to people from the lower classes who bring energy and will to hold on to power. It also recovers due to the fact that it loses its most degraded members. Stopping the process of elite circulation, or the presence of significant obstacles to it, leads to catastrophic consequences for the ruling stratum. The social equilibrium associated with the accumulation of the higher elements in the lower classes and the lower in the upper classes is violated. In the ruling elite, the number of elements that do not possess the qualities necessary for governance and who resort to violence and terror to retain power are increasing. Over time, this leads to a complete degradation of the ruling elite and a significant increase in the proportion of people with elite qualities among the lower classes of society. They form the so-called counter-elite, which begins a struggle for power with the ruling elite and attracts the people to their side to achieve their goals. A situation arises that favors revolutions, which, according to V. Pareto, are always a struggle and a change of elites.
To retain power, the ruling elite always relies on a certain combination of coercion and consent of the governed. People in power tend to use power to maintain their privileged position and abuse it for their own gains and advantages, which they almost always confuse with those of the country. The aggravation of this problem makes it possible for the counter-elite to attract to their side a large number of dissatisfied ordinary citizens.
Another Italian elitist scholar Gaetano Mosca (1858-1941), , who did not use the term “elite” in his works and preferred to use the concepts “political class” and “class of the ruled,” proposed several important provisions that develop Pareto's ideas about the relationship between the elite and the counter-elite.
First, it is the concept of the second stratum of the political class. Mosca came to the conclusion that below the first stratum of the ruling class there is always another, more numerous stratum, which includes all those capable of ruling the country. Without this stratum, no political organization is possible, since the first stratum would have to directly direct the actions of the masses. Mosca emphasizes that the competence of any political organism ultimately depends on the level of morality, intelligence and activity of the second stratum. It is from this stratum that the counter-elite is formed, in Pareto's terminology, which ensures the change of the political class.
Second, Mosca pointed out three main ways in which the political class achieves its affirmation and renewal: inheritance, elections, and co-optation. On the one hand, all political classes strive to consolidate their dominant position. On the other hand, there are always new forces that seek to replace the old ones. Therefore, there is a constant struggle between aristocratic and democratic tendencies. Depending on whether the first tendency prevails or the second, either the closure and crystallization of the political class takes place, or its more or less rapid renewal.
Both the first and second tendencies are dangerous for the society. The first contributes to the degradation of the political class; the second violates political stability and continuity. Mosca gives preference to the type of society that is characterized by a balance between these tendencies. He believes that a certain stability of the ruling class is necessary so that the latter does not experience significant changes with each generation, and that the penetration of elements from the lower class is also beneficial, as long as this does not happen too quickly and not too significantly. This situation is possible only in mixed types of political regimes: aristocratic-liberal and democratic-autocratic. By the latter, modern political science understands those that function in the developed countries of the West.
German sociologist Robert Michels (1876-1936) developed a controversial concept of the impact of organizational development on democracy. On the one hand, he pointed out that modern world lives in an era of democracy, and large organizations accompany democratization and impede revolution. On the other hand, large and organizationally complex associations characteristic of modern society are ruled by cliques whose policies inevitably deviate from the preferences of their constituents. Michels called this tendency "the iron law of the oligarchy."
The complex of tendencies that impede the implementation of democracy are difficult to disentangle and systematize. These tendencies lie: in the essence of human nature, in the essence of political struggle and in the essence of organization.
In all modern societies, democracy through the development of mass organizations leads to the establishment of an oligarchy. “As a result of the organization, each party or trade union becomes divided into a ruling minority and a ruled majority ... It is the organization that gives rise to the dominance of the elected over the voters, who have powers over those who have given them these powers, representatives over the representatives. Whoever says organization means oligarchy.
Michels pointed out the presence of two most important components in the counter-elite: the lower stratum, in this case, hired workers, and a narrow group of intellectuals, natives of the bourgeoisie, who led the proletarian masses. Every great movement of the oppressed in history grows out of incitement, cooperation and leadership from the very groups of society against which it is directed. Without the help of better educated and more capable representatives of the upper class, the lower class is unable to realize their own interests and to wage a political struggle for their realization.
Within the counter-elite itself, there is a circulation of individuals and groups: some people move upward, occupying bureaucratic positions in the organization, while others move down the socio-economic ladder. The political organization of the opposition, its development and strengthening creates a kind of social lift for the most capable representatives of the lower class. The organization promotes the expansion of the middle class, a slow but sure process of improving the material situation of the lower status groups, their deproletarization.
It is important that the process of circulation within the counter-elite promotes the promotion of the most talented and capable members of society to the highest positions. Thus, democracy is transformed into a form of government for the best, into an aristocracy.
Michels also analyzes the problem of leadership in the counter-elite. There is a gradual transition from “spontaneous leadership” to oligarchic through two intermediate stages: 1) professional and 2) stabilized leadership. The interests of specialists often come into conflict with the interests of the masses, although the latter are rather heterogeneous in their composition. Ultimately, the winners are the professionals who ensure the stabilization of their privileged position. But since the interest of specialists is "conservative", associated with the retention of leading positions in the organization, they are forced to attract to their side certain groups of ordinary members of the organization in the fight against competitors. The organization is gradually replenished with leaders-representatives of ordinary members of the movement. They are less ideologized than the old professional leaders, because they are more closely associated with the masses, seeking to express their interests, which are mainly pragmatic, not theoretical.
Thus, according to classical elitist theories, the following conditions are required for the counter-elite to succeed:
in society, the problems of elite circulation should become aggravated, as a result of which the degradation of the ruling group will be accompanied by a significant increase in the proportion of people with elite qualities among the groups of society that have no relation to power.
secondly, a crisis of legitimacy of the current government should emerge, ensuring the transition to the side of the counter-elite not only of many ordinary people seeking protection and patronage in it, but also of representatives of the so-called “second stratum of the political class”.
Organizationally, the counter-elite should combine elements of a mass movement of the lower classes and an intellectual core represented by people from the ruling stratum.
the political organization of the counter-elite must ensure the internal circulation of the elements, ensuring the filling of leading positions by the most talented and efficient representatives from different strata of society.
The coming to power of the counter-elite ultimately depends on a skillful combination of political pragmatism and the principled character of its political program.
The idea that exists in the mass consciousness that in modern conditions broad strata of the population can exercise power functions, fully participate in the political process, in reality turns out to be an illusion. In practice, their participation is limited to elections, while political elites exercise real power. Elites (translated from French means "the best", "chosen") in many ways define the face of any society, since it is they who form the goals and prospects of its development. They do this by making strategically important decisions and using the resources of state power for their implementation.
Pointing to the dependence of the level of development of society on the quality of the political elite, N. A. Berdyaev even deduced the "coefficient of the elite", which is the ratio of the highly intellectual part of the population to the total number of literate people. If the elite coefficient approaches 1%, then this threatens the collapse of the state, stagnation in public life, and the elite itself is turning into a closed caste, deprived of opportunities for renewal. If the coefficient of the elite is more than 5%, then this means that the society has a high potential for development.
What determines the special role of the elite in politics?
1. Theories of elites
Political elites as subjects of politics. The reason for the existence is angry
Really, political power exists only when there are interactions of subjects of politics about power, which constitute what is called the space of political power. Recall that the subjects of politics are a person, social group, organization, state, which directly or indirectly participate in political life, are able to influence others. This ability to influence other people is called political subjectivity and includes the ability and ability to make political decisions, the availability of means of implementing the decisions made, and practical participation in political activities.
A special place among the subjects of politics is occupied by political elites, which is due to the role of politics as a mechanism for ordering and regulating social relations, for the realization of generally significant interests. Political and administrative functions in society are carried out by the political elite through the adoption of the most important political decisions. There is no politics without the elite, since the implementation of political and administrative functions requires special knowledge, which is usually absent in the majority of the population. In addition, political elites represent group interests in politics, create optimal conditions for their implementation and coordination.
Consequently, the political elite is a privileged group that occupies leading positions in power structures, directly involved in making the most important decisions related to the use of power.
The existence of political elites in society is associated with a number of reasons, primarily with the need for the existence of people with special knowledge, skills, experience, allowing them to carry out managerial functions. Since complexly organized social systems need professional management influence, so far there is a division of labor into managers and governed. In addition, political inequality in society is caused by the inequality of mental, social and other conditions that create various opportunities for social groups and individuals to engage in politics. One more reason should be indicated, namely: managerial work is highly valued and stimulated in society, while proximity to power opens up wide opportunities for the realization of individual needs, which makes many people strive for power institutions. Finally, the existence of the political elite is due to the passivity of broad strata of the population, who are busy solving their own everyday problems and do not strive for power.
Classical theories of elites
The term “elite” was introduced into political science by V. Pareto, who noted: “The main idea of the term“ elite ”is superiority ... to the highest degree. " V. Pareto, as well as G. Mosca (1856-1941) and R. Michels (1876-1936) - representatives of the Italian school of political sociology - can be considered to have completed the creation of the classical concept of the elite. They, firstly, recognized the natural existence of political inequality in society, and secondly, they viewed the elite as a close-knit group with exceptional qualities and realizing its superiority over everyone else.
Elitist theories were a kind of reaction of Western political science to socialist teachings that denied the need for an elite and emphasized the decisive role of the masses in history. It is no accident that in elite theories the analysis of elites was carried out in the context of their significance for the development of the history of human society, and the history of society, in turn, was presented as the history of the circulation of elites.
“Elites,” wrote V. Pareto, “emerge from the lower classes and in the course of the struggle rise to the higher ones, flourish there and eventually degenerate, are destroyed and disappear ... This cycle of elites is a universal law of history”.
However, G. Mosca, V. Pareto and R. Michels substantiated the existence of political inequality between the ruling minority and the controlled majority in different ways.
Professor G. Mosca, a member of the Italian parliament, believed that the basis of the domination of the political elite was its power and organization. This approach is called overbearing, although it is sometimes called organized. “In all societies, from those barely approaching civilization and ending with modern, advanced and powerful societies, - wrote G. Mosca, - there are always two classes of people: the class that rules, and the class that is ruled. The first class is always less numerous, performs all political functions, monopolizes power and enjoys the advantages that this power gives, while the other, more numerous class is governed and controlled by the first, and in such a way that ensures the functioning of the political organization. "
The power of the ruling minority over the majority, according to G. Mosca, is inevitable if only because the minority is simply better organized. The group cohesion and like-mindedness of the ruling class rests on its intellectual and cultural superiority. This superiority is ensured by a special education, during which the elite is imbued with the conviction of their indisputable right to rule. “The ruling minority is formed in such a way,” noted G. Mosca, “that the individuals of whom it is made up differ from the masses in certain qualities that give them certain material, intellectual, or even moral superiority; in other words, they must have some necessary qualities that are extremely valuable and give weight in the society in which they live. " The qualities that open access to the elite have changed throughout history. At first, as G. Mosca believed, the sources of power of the ruling class were military valor, wealth, and theological knowledge. But gradually the importance of intellectual abilities, education, and management skills grew more and more.
In any society, the elite strives to monopolize their dominant positions and pass them on to their descendants, trying to become a hereditary caste. This is hindered by the emergence of new sources of wealth, knowledge, religious ideas, which cause conflicts between the elite and other strata of society. G. Mosca argued that the history of civilized mankind is reduced to "a conflict between the desire of the dominant elements to monopolize political power and inherit the possession of this power in the desire to invade their place by new forces." Therefore, for society, it is equally dangerous both the transformation of the elite into a closed caste, when it degenerates, and its rapid renewal. There is only one way out of this situation, G. Mosca believed, - to find a balance between these two tendencies.
V. Pareto included in the elite only those who demonstrate their outstanding qualities or proved the highest abilities in their activities. Inequality between the elite and the rest of the mass is due, according to V. Pareto, to the natural state of affairs - inequality in origin. "Human society is not homogeneous," he noted, "and individuals differ physically, morally and intellectually." The aggregate of groups of "individuals who operate with high performance in any area is called the elite." V. Pareto even introduced a system of indices (points), according to which he assessed the level of people's abilities.
V. Pareto divided the elite into ruling and non-ruling (counter-elite). The ruling elite directly and effectively participates in management, possesses the charismatic properties of leaders. The counter-elite is a potential elite in terms of abilities and personal qualities, but is deprived of the opportunity to make political decisions. He distinguished between two types of elites, successively replacing each other. The first type - "lions", they are characterized by openness, decisiveness in management, reliance on forceful, authoritarian methods of ruling. Leos are good for stable situations because they are extremely conservative. The second type - "foxes" who rule using various means of manipulation, deception, demagoguery, more often resort to bribery, distribution of rewards than to the threat of violence. "Foxes" prevail in conditions of instability, in transitional periods of the development of society, when energetic, pragmatic rulers capable of transformations are required.
Social changes in society are, according to V. Pareto, a consequence of the struggle and "circulation" of elites. V. Pareto was the author of the theory of the circulation of elites. A society dominated by elite "lions" is doomed to stagnation; a society dominated by elite “foxes” is distinguished by its dynamic development. Progressiveness and stability in the development of society can be ensured with a proportional influx of leaders of the first and second orientation into the elite. Cessation of the circulation of elites leads to revolution. The revolution is, according to V. Pareto, the most radical way to renew the elite, as a result of which the old elite gives way to the new one. The new elite is dominated by "foxes" who eventually degenerate into "lions", supporters of violence and despotic rule.
Another explanation of the division of society into ruling and ruled was given by R. Michels. He opposed the party elite and the party masses. The masses are incapable. to management, they have become accustomed to their disadvantaged position, therefore they are nominating leaders. But even the most democratic party leaders eventually turn into authoritarian leaders, break away from the masses, and forget about their interests. An apparatus (bureaucracy) is being created around the leaders, carrying out the day-to-day leadership of the masses. This apparatus is degenerating into an oligarchy, into the upper layer of a bureaucratic structure, divorced from the masses. R. Michels' conclusion: since the masses are incompetent, they need leadership and organization from the ruling elite. The very principle of organization is the subordination of inferior to superior, the need for special knowledge leads to the emergence of a party oligarchy. On this basis, R. Michels denied the possibility of the existence of democratic government. He called the inevitability of the emergence of an elite and bureaucracy as the iron law of the oligarchy. The masses have as much interest in the elite as the elite in the masses, since the latter are able to provide support to the leaders.
2. Modern political elite: sources of power and selection systems
Contemporary theories of the elite
A lot of time has passed since the beginning of the 20th century, when the classical theory of elites was formed. However, her research traditions continue today. In modern political science, there is a special branch of knowledge - elitology, which studies the elite, the conditions for its formation, the role in society, and ways of influencing social changes. Scientists believe that they have existed, exist and will continue to exist, despite the radical changes that have taken place in the world: access to education for broad strata of society, a noticeable increase in the standard of living of the population of most countries of the world, universal suffrage, which gives everyone access to politics. These changes have transformed only the sources of power of the political elite, the ways of its formation in different countries... Accordingly, the interpretation of the elite has changed somewhat: now it is considered either as a homogeneous group, or as consisting of several groups.
A new tradition is opened by the name of the American political scientist Wright Mills (1916-1962), who in his work "The Power Elite" defined the modern American elite as a group of statuses and strategic roles, in which he included "those who occupy positions of command." However, since power in modern society is institutionalized, those who are at the head of social institutions occupy "commanding strategic posts in the social structure." Among the "institutions" the most significant for society, according to R. Mills, are political, economic and military institutions. Those who lead the state, corporations, the army, and make up the power elite. Thus, in the structure of American society, according to R. Mills, three elite groups dominate: economic (corporate leaders), political (political leaders), and military (leadership of the armed forces). There are close relationships of solidarity, mutual support and exchange between these three institutions of power. This nature of relations is due to the coincidence of their objective interests in ensuring the stable and progressive development of society.
The French political scientist R.-J. Schwarzewberger. This "caste" in France is a "triangle of power" made up of political scientists, senior administration and the business community. She absolutely controls power, forms the government, runs the state, runs large corporations and banks. The oligarchic nature of power, according to the political scientist, stems from the fact that France does not adhere to the principle of separation of powers, and therefore the elite is a single class, and not divided into parts of the leading groups. As a result, a close-knit and versatile elite emerged in the country, which monopolized power in the political, administrative and economic sectors.
The elite in Soviet-type societies has a fundamentally different nature. It was tried to identify the Yugoslav politician, writer-publicist and sociologist Milovan Djilas (born 1911), who was one of the leaders of the Union of Communists of Yugoslavia. He is the author of the concept of a “new class” (the book in which he presented it was called “New class”). After the socialist revolutions, in his opinion, a new political class comes to power, consisting of former revolutionaries and the state bureaucracy. The basis of the class is the Communist Party. Possessing a monopoly on political power, this class subjugates national property. Its nature is not economic, as in Western countries, where the elite has power due to the ownership of the means of production, but political: it is the monopoly of power that ensures the monopoly of property.
So, in modern political science, there are different definitions of the elite. If in the classical theory of elites there were two approaches to defining its nature: 1) the elite as a group occupying positions of power in the leadership (this concept of "political class" was developed by G. Mosca); 2) the elite as the most valuable and productive part of society (V. Pareto's approach), then the first approach prevails in modern interpretations.
Types of elites
The appearance and functions of the political elite in different countries differ markedly. This is due to the influence of many factors. Taking into account the influence of these factors, the classifications of the elites are based.
The elite, which has state power and makes the most important political decisions, is called the ruling elite. The part of the elite that is deprived of the opportunity to exercise power functions is the counter-elite. According to the way in which the political elite is renewed, a closed elite is distinguished (it is replenished by people from certain classes, estates, for example, the aristocracy, while representatives of other classes are denied access to the elite) and the open elite opposing it, access to which is open to all social groups.
In contrast to the American and Western European classification, the Indian political scientist P. Sharan distinguished the traditional and modern types of elites. They differ in the resources of ruling. The power of traditional elites is based on customs, religion, and rituals. In the traditional elite, the scientist included religious elites, aristocracy, and the military leadership of developing countries.
The modern elite is rational, based on the law and formal rules. It consists of four groups: the upper, middle, marginal and administrative elites. The top elite are those who occupy leading positions in power structures and make all the most important decisions. Although it is possible that those who do not officially hold leading positions, for example, the head of the president's security, personal friends, etc., can influence this process.Usually, the top elite in Western democracies is represented in the proportion of 50 representatives from every million inhabitants of the country, but decisions are usually made a narrow circle of people of 50 people.
The middle elite includes people with a certain level of income, professional status and education. These indicators allow them to professionally judge which political course is acceptable to society and which is not. The average elite is 5% of the adult population. Those groups that lack one of the three indicators are included in the marginal elite. After acquiring the missing trait, they can enter the middle elite. And finally, the administrative elite is the highest layer of civil servants, which includes the heads of ministries, departments, and committees. She carries out executive functions, although she has a significant influence on power, since she is sophisticated in management.
Elite selection systems
The dependence of the level of development of society on the effectiveness of political decisions made by the elite necessitates careful selection for the performance of power and management functions. In Western countries, politics has long turned into a profession, therefore, serious attention is paid to the process of preparation and selection for the elite. The most important questions are: who, how and from whom selects, what criteria should a candidate for a managerial position meet?
In various countries, systems of selection or recruitment of elites that are inherent only to them have developed.
Political scientists distinguish two systems of selection for the elite: the entrepreneurial and the guild system. The selection of these systems is rather arbitrary, since in practice their various combinations are used. However, the predominance of elements of a particular recruiting system allows us to talk about a specific selection mechanism in a particular country.
Entrepreneurial (entrepreneurial) system allows you to select candidates for the elite, depending on personal qualities, not in last- from their ability to please people. This makes it possible to select candidates - applicants for positions of power from different groups of society in terms of property status. The system is characterized by openness, democracy, a limited number of "filters", that is, formal requirements that a candidate must meet. The entrepreneurial system presupposes intense competition between candidates for leadership positions, in which each candidate must rely on his own ingenuity, wit, and activity. A selector (from lat. Selectio - choice, selection), that is, those who select, in this case everything is adult population... The entrepreneurial system is widespread in countries with stable democracies.
Such a system is not designed for a serious choice based on the principle of the candidate's professional competence and the quality of his education. She is well adapted to the requirements of the time, moment. For example, the President of the United States was the actor R. Reagan, who before being elected to this post was not a professional politician and did not have any legal, economic or political science education. However, this did not stop him from becoming one of the most popular presidents of post-war America.
The most significant drawback of the entrepreneurial selection system is the possibility of random persons, adventurers capable of producing an external effect, entering politics, and the poor predictability of their behavior. In addition, the entrepreneurial system has a high degree of heterogeneity of the elite, the possibility of conflicts within it.
The guild system (by analogy with medieval guilds - associations of merchants and artisans) assumes a slow advancement of a candidate up the ranks of power, which is associated with a large number of formal requirements for an applicant for a leading position: educational level, party experience, experience of working with people, etc. Selection candidates are carried out from certain social groups (estates, classes, castes, clans, etc.) or any party. The recruiting system is a closed system. A narrow circle of leading workers of the party, movement, corporation selects candidates.
This system is very conservative, there is no competition in it, so it is prone to reproduction of one type of leadership, dooms the elite to gradual extinction, transformation into a closed caste. Although at the same time it provides a high degree of predictability in politics, excludes conflicts within the elite. Elements of a guild selection system are also typical for democratic countries, where, for example, there are parties with a strong structure (strict party discipline, fixed membership, etc.).
The effectiveness of the activities of the political elite depends not only on the system, recruiting, but also on the political orientation of its members, the degree of support for it by the population, social origin, party affiliation of the elite. In Western countries, the elite is usually represented by people from those groups of the population that have a high social status (economically wealthy classes), university education. But in some countries it also includes representatives of workers and farmers.
A special kind of guild approach is the nomenclature system of recruiting. It was widespread in the socialist countries. It was distinguished by the fact that the replacement of key posts in almost all spheres of public life was carried out by party leaders of a certain level. That is, elitism and elite as a manifestation of economic inequality were replaced by elitism and elite, which were formed on the basis of political inequality. Moreover, the nomenklatura elite was built according to a hierarchical principle (with strict subordination), when each candidate consistently rose from step to step. With such a system, conflicts within the elite are practically excluded, the continuity of the political course, the reproduction of one type of leadership is ensured. At the same time, such a system of selection for the elite had serious shortcomings, which practically cost her her life. Among them, one can name, for example, such as cultivating personal loyalty of the candidate to the leadership, servility and flattery, ostentatious activity, etc.
The attitudes of the value theory about the value-rational nature of the selection of elites in a modern democratic society develop the concepts of plurality, pluralism of elites, which are perhaps the most common in today's elite thought. They are often referred to as functional elite theories. They do not deny the elite theory as a whole, although they require a radical revision of a number of its fundamental, classical attitudes. The pluralistic concept of the elite is based on the following postulates:
1. Interpretation of political elites as functional elites. Qualification preparedness to perform the functions of managing specific social processes is the most important quality that determines belonging to the elite. “Functional elites,” writes E. Holtmann, “are individuals or groups with special qualifications necessary to occupy certain leadership positions in society. Their superiority in relation to other members of society is manifested in the management of important political and social processes or in influencing them. "
2. Denial of the elite as a single privileged relatively cohesive group. In a modern democratic society, power is dispersed between various groups and institutions, which, through direct participation, pressure, the use of blocs and alliances, can veto undesirable decisions, defend their interests, and find compromises. The power relations themselves are changeable, fluid. They are created for specific decisions and can be replaced to make and implement other decisions. This weakens the concentration of power and prevents the stable ruling layer from collapsing.
3. The division of society into the elite and the masses is relative, conditional and often blurred. Between them there is a relationship of representation rather than domination or permanent leadership. Through various democratic mechanisms - elections, referendums, polls, press, pressure groups, etc. - it is possible to limit or even prevent the action of the "law of oligarchic tendencies" formulated by Michels and keep the elite under the influence of the masses. This is facilitated by the competition of the elites, reflecting the economic and social competition in modern society. It prevents the formation of a single dominant leadership group and makes it possible for the elites to be accountable to the masses.
4. In modern democracies, elites are formed from the most competent and interested citizens, who are very free to be part of the elite and participate in decision-making. The main subject of political life is not the elite, but interest groups. The differences between the elite and the masses are based mainly on the unequal interest in decision-making. Access to the leadership layer is opened not only by wealth and high social status, but above all by personal abilities, knowledge, activity, etc.
25) Ways of recruiting elites. Elite recruiting nomenclature system. Obviously, the quality of the elite largely depends on the principles of its education.
It is known that political recruiting is the involvement of people in active
political life. And the most important place is occupied by the creation of a political elite, from
which is formed by the legislative and executive bodies of the state,
the state apparatus, the leading personnel of state institutions. Research
To do this process means to understand how people get involved in politics, get nominated
to leading political posts (including becoming political leaders
rami), establish political contacts as they make political careers.
In stable political systems, elite recruitment is carried out in
according to carefully designed procedures (usually consecrated
traditions), as a result of which the personal composition of the elite with more or less
updated regularly, and the political structure itself remains largely
degree unchanged. The situation is different amid a sharp breakdown in political
Political elite- the most active part of the ruling political class, playing a leading role in the management of society, with the greatest power and based on the institutions of violence.= The highest and legitimate stratum (layer) of managing society and maintaining its stability. It relies on the institutions of violence (army, police, bureaucracy). Has the right to physically coerce citizens to implement their acts and laws.
Typology of elites:
By activities(economic, political, military);
By personal qualities(charismatic, oligarchic, professional, aristocratic);
By attitude to power(dominant, potential, oppositional);
By positions in the hierarchy management (ruling, higher, middle, marginal);
By type of government(despotic, totalitarian, democratic, liberal);
By form of ownership(agricultural, industrial, financial, intellectual);
By types of recruiting(selection): the blood elite (by birth), open (from all segments of the population), closed (only from their own "guild", their class).
Elite theories- Michels, Mosca, Pareto, Berdyaev. Explained the reasons for the emergence of the ruling elite due to:
1) inequality of abilities, qualities people and their positions in life;
2) inevitability division of society into a leading minority and a ruled majority;
3) prestige and importance managerial work (status, position in society);
4) privileges received from management: distribution of resources, funds and other benefits.
12. Essence and nature of political leadership .
Political leadership- interaction between the leader and his followers, based on support for the decisions and actions of the leader by his supporters and their willingness to follow him... = The constant and legitimate influence of an individual in power on a group, organization and society as a whole.
Depends on personal qualities, on the situation (in peacetime they choose soft ones, in wartime - strong-willed, tough ones), on the ability to express and defend the interests of their group or class, on the quality and number of adherents and opponents.
13. Functions and typology of political leadership .
Max Weber :
1. Traditional Leadership: The right to leadership is acquired through ancestry. The basis is tradition.
2. Rational-legal Leadership: Leans on a recognized legal order through elections. The basis is the law.
3. Charismatic Leadership: Leadership depends on the personality of the leader, his charm, passion, passion. It relies on the emotional dedication of the followers. The basis is the personal qualities of the leader. Short-lived, grows into either 1 or 2.
Tucker :
1 - conservatives: reliance on the strict preservation of the existing system;
2 - reformers: for the transformation of the system through reforms;
3 - revolutionaries: for the global transformation of the formation by means of a coup.
Hermann :
1. Standard bearer: your vision of the future and knowledge of the means to achieve it.
2. Minister: recognition through the expression of the interests of their adherents.
3. Merchant: “Sells” his ideas, plans in exchange for the support of voters.
4. Firefighter: speed, adequacy and efficiency of actions in extreme conditions.
P.S. Is there some more oppositional leadership - opposition to official power.
Functions political leadership: analytical(situation analysis, development of an action plan), organizational(mass mobilization, team building, action planning, control), integrative(combining and harmonizing interests based on common ideas), innovative(introduction of new ideas, updates), communicative (connection between the authorities and different social groups), function guarantor of justice, law and order.
14. Political system: concept, structure, functions .
Politic system- a set of state and public institutions exercising political power in society + the relations that have developed between them about power. = Political institutions, structures, processes, forms of behavior, political culture.
Structure, functions:
- State- manages the company;
- Political parties- represent the interests of certain classes;
- Public associations, unions- professional, according to social status, age, etc.
- Socio-political movement- interests of wider strata of the population than parties; temporary association for a common idea.
- pressure groups(lobbying groups) - banking, industrial - to strengthen their position and influence.
- church- especially in the Muslim world. Forms a worldview.
- MASS MEDIA - press, radio, TV, Internet - propaganda of a certain way of life, values. Zombie the most.
15. Types of political systems, their characteristics .
In political science, there are various approaches to defining the types of political systems. Here is some of them:
- Marxist-Leninist concept - according to the principle of the class approach and forms of ownership:
1. Slave (antique and Asian);
2. Feudal;
3. Bourgeois;
Socialist.
5. Mixed type- during transitions from one formation to another and historically transitional type ( state dictatorship of the proletariat), which exists temporarily and presupposes the complete demolition of the old us and the creation of a new type of state. - Classification by Robert Dahl - according to the degree of democratization of power: 1. Democratic; 2. Authoritarian; 3. Totalitarian. - Classification by Gabriel Almond - by the type of political culture: 1. Anglo-American(democratic stable) ; 2. European continental(democratic unstable) ; 3. Preindustrial(developing countries, undemocratic, unstable) ;4. Totalitarian(homogeneous political culture, high level of integration, which is achieved through violence).
16. Political regime. Totalitarianism and its essence and varieties .
Political regime- the system of methods used by the state to exercise its powers and functions + the level of ensuring the rights and freedoms of its citizens by the authorities.
Totalitarian regime : full (total) state control over all spheres of society, their strict regulation and mainly repressive methods of management and coercion. Signs:
- Strict regulation
- Total control of the authorities
- Repressive
- One-party
- Suppression of dissent
Varieties: fascist dictatorship, dictatorship of the proletariat, ...
Authoritarian regime
- Unlimited power in hand one faces.
- Fictitious multi-party system.
- Absence real opposition.
Varieties : absolute monarchy, dictatorship, military dictatorship.
18. Democracy: concept, principles .
Democratic regime
1. Source of power - people.
2. Eligibility and regular turnover authorities.
3. Competitive multiparty system.
4. Legal political opposition.
5. Real freedom of speech.
6. Striving to create a civil society and the rule of law.
19. Political regimes and their comparative analysis .
1. Democratic regime : liberal management methods, respect for human rights and freedoms, political pluralism. The methods of influence are limited by law and are under the control of the society. Signs:
Source of power - people.
- Eligibility and regular turnover authorities.
Competitive multiparty system.
- Legal political opposition.
Real freedom of speech.
Striving to create a civil society and the rule of law.
2. Authoritarian regime : concentration of power in one hand, methods of management through coercion and repression, overt restriction of the rights and freedoms of the individual. Leaders are an absolute monarch, a dictator, a leader with unlimited authority.
- Unlimited power in hand one faces.
- Fictitious multi-party system.
- Absence real opposition.
3. Totalitarian regime : an extreme form of authoritarianism. Full (total) state control over all spheres of society's life, their strict regulation and mainly repressive methods of management and coercion. Signs:
- Strict regulation all aspects of society, mainly based on some kind of ideology. Anything that is not permitted is prohibited.
- Total control of the authorities for all spheres of society and the activities of its members. Even over personal life (what they think and talk about).
- Repressive justice system: maximum penalties, accusatory bias, criminal penalties (not fines, but prison).
- One-party system, absence and suppression of political competition.
- Suppression of dissent... Potential pockets of resistance to the regime are nipped in the bud; citizens are prohibited from publicly discussing and evaluating the ruling regime; freedom of the press, speech and defending one's opinion is excluded.
4. Military-dictatorial regime : seizure and retention of power by the military under the pretext of restoring order + military-police methods of management, restriction of the rights and freedoms of the individual. Signs:
Concentration of power in hands military.
- Significant limitation democratic rights and freedoms.
Arbitrary violation power constitutionally proclaimed rights and freedoms under the pretext of establishing and maintaining order in the country.
20. The role of elections and the political life of society. Suffrage: principles and types. Absenteeism .
Elections- a method of forming a system of representative power, carried out by voting.
Should be free, periodic, obligatory, open, vowel, alternative ( at least 2 candidates), fair (objective and protected from falsification).
Role elections:
1. Representation public interests (of different social groups and strata).
2. Legitimation Power: Power elected by the people is legal.
3. Social barometer political life: the degree of influence of different political forces, the attitude of citizens to the political regime, the ruling elite and the opposition.
4. Recruiting the political elite.
5. Institutionalization participation citizens in the political life of the country.
6. Political socialization citizens: adaptation to a given political system.
Suffrage- 1) the right of citizens to participate in the formation of elective institutions of power; 2) A set of legal norms that ensure and regulate the formation of elective institutions of power.
Views suffrage:
2) Passive- right to be elected.
Principles suffrage:
1. Principle universality- all adults and mentally healthy citizens participate.
2. Principle equality- every citizen participates in elections on an equal basis with others.
3. Age qualification - the right to participate in elections from a certain age.
4. Census citizenship- Electoral rights are granted only to citizens.
6. Principle direct suffrage - voting directly, in person. Indirect suffrage - voting through an elected college of representatives (election of the President of the United States).
7. Census settling- the condition of living in this territory for at least a certain period (in Japan - 3 months).
8. Census sex- recognition of voting rights only for men (some Muslim countries).
9. Property qualification - the right to participate in elections only if you have property of a certain size or pay taxes.
Absenteeism- evasion from voting... The reasons are political apathy, lack of worthy candidates, disbelief in the possibility of personal influence on the situation in the country, + “everyday” absenteeism - bad weather, illness, absence from the city.
21. Electoral systems and their types .
Electoral system(electoral formula) - a way of determining the election results.
Three main types:
1. Majority (majority principle): the candidate with the most votes wins. Varieties: a relative majority votes (the candidate needs to get more votes than any of his rivals) and absolute majority (the candidate needs to get 50% of the votes + 1 vote). Australia, Brazil, France. Russia - based on the majority system of absolute majority.
2. Proportional (voting for lists of candidates nominated by parties): the distribution of mandates among parties is carried out in proportion to the number of votes cast. Active barrier barrier (the minimum number of votes that the party must collect to participate in the distribution of mandates is determined). Austria, Denmark, Belgium, Latvia, Switzerland, Netherlands.
3. Mixed (combines the advantages of both systems and mitigates their disadvantages): either with domination of some type, or balanced. Armenia, Germany, Lithuania, Mexico, Japan.
22. Theories of the origin of the state. The essence of the state, its main features and functions .
State- the main institution of the political system of society. Manages society, protects its political and social structure on the basis of law with the help of a special mechanism (apparatus).
Signs:
Availability organ systems and institutions(representative, executive, judicial) exercising the functions of power;
Availability rights, a system of norms that are binding on all members of society;
The presence of a certain territory subject to the authority and jurisdiction (laws) of this state;
Exceptional the right to levy taxes and fees from the population.
Functions :
1. External:
-protection society from external enemies
-development of a relationship with other states;
2. Internal:
- political(exercise of political power),
- legal(development and implementation of laws, protection of the rights and interests of citizens),
- economic(tax policy, loans, investments, sanctions) ,
-organizational(decision making, coordination, control),
- social(taking care of citizens) ,
-cultural and educational(creating conditions for meeting the cultural and educational needs of people).
Theories of the origin of the state :
1. Patriarchal theory (Ancient Greece): the state is the continuation of the paternal guardian authority in the family, exercised for the common good.
2. Theological concept: the state is a sacred and inviolable institution, given by God to organize people's lives ... Thomas Aquinas, Augustine Aurelius.
3. Social contract theory. Locke, Hobbes, Russo: the state is the result of a kind of contract of individuals with the aim of ensuring the rule of law that guarantees the use of natural rights and property.
4. The theory of "violence" or "capture". Gumplovich, Kautsky: the state is the result of an act of violence, the conquest of one people by another, stronger and more organized.
5. Socio-economic (Marxist) concept: the state is the result of the social division of labor and the emergence of classes that are in antagonism to maintain the domination of some classes over others. Marx, Engels
6. Racist concept: the state is a product natural selection among people according to their biological or personal qualities to establish the domination of the "higher" people over the "lower". Nietzsche, Chamberlain.
23. Forms of government and their characteristics .
1. Monarchy : the formal source of power is the monarch. Power is inherited. A stable form of government.
- Absolute- power is completely in the hands of the monarch. Few countries. Saudi Arabia.
- Constitutional- limited or nominal power of the monarch as a symbol of the nation. Spain, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Great Britain, Denmark, etc..
2. Republic : the formal source of power is the will of the popular majority. The head of state is being replaced.
- Presidential- the country is governed by one person elected by the population.
- Parliamentary- the country is governed by a collective elected body.
- Mixed (semi-presidential)- the country is run by both the president and parliament at the same time.
- Theocratic- the country is led by the clergy. Vatican.
24. State-territorial structure .
1. Unitary state- a single state entity, divided into administrative-territorial units that have the same legal status and do not have independence. France, Poland, Belarus.
2. Federation- a union state, which includes constituent units (republics, lands, states, cantons, etc.), which have their own rights, comparable to those of the center. The federation has 2 levels of government: federal and local, + a bicameral parliament, representing the interests of both the subjects of the federation and the entire federation as a whole. USA, Russian Federation, USSR.
3. Confederation- state legal association (union) of legally independent states. The goal is to pursue a common policy, to solve joint defense, economic and other tasks. The most unstable union. United Arab Republic - Union of Syria and Egypt, Senegambia - Senegal and Gambia.
25. Legal state: essence, principles, ways of formation. Welfare state. The main directions, goals, methods of social policy of the social state .
Constitutional state- a state with stable legislation, where law prevails over power.
Principles:
1. The inviolability of the constitution which even the state itself has no right to transgress; stable system of legislation; primacy constitution and laws over other acts, orders and instructions.
2. Equality all citizens before the law.
3. Responsibility of the state before the citizen and the citizen before the state: full guarantee of rights and freedoms, protection from the arbitrariness of the authorities + protection by the authorities of the society from the assassination of antisocial elements.
4. Having an effective law enforcement systems obeying only the law.
5. Developed legal consciousness citizens and officials, respect for the law.
Welfare state- a state oriented towards social justice(the right to work and its decent remuneration, fair distribution of material benefits) and solving social problems(the growth of the material well-being of citizens, the protection of their health, spiritual development, education).
Methods legitimate, democratic, based on social justice.
26. Civil society: concept and characteristics .
Civil society- in which the transformation of "subjects" of the state into free citizens capable of making independent choices is carried out(political, ideological, etc.)
Signs:
Significant limitation of state interference in the economic activities of citizens;
Ensuring a wide range of their economic, political, cultural rights and freedoms.
27. The head of state and his role in the structure of the highest bodies of state power .
Head of state- a person or body considered the supreme representative of the state. It connects the legislative, executive and judicial branches.
In the United States, the president is the chief executive. In Germany, the president has only representative functions. In other countries, he is also the head of the highest judicial and / or legislative branch and / or the supreme commander of the country's armed forces.
In republics, the head of state is the President or parliament, in monarchies - the king or queen, in Japan - the emperor.
RF President appoints elections in The State Duma and dissolves it, enjoys the right of legislative initiative, can return a bill approved by parliament, signs and promulgates laws. But: he cannot pass laws, and the normative acts issued by him must not contradict the Constitution and fundamental laws.
28. Government: the order of formation, powers and functions .
Government- the highest collegial body of executive power in charge of public administration ... RB - Council of Ministers.
Consists of members of the government (ministers) and is headed by the head of state or prime minister.
Functions:
Enforces laws passed by the highest legislature,
Carries out the operational management of state affairs,
Ensures order in society and the protection of the rights of citizens.
Formed in two main ways:
1. Parliamentary(in countries with a parliamentary form of government: parliamentary republic, monarchy, mixed republics.). Formed by the party or coalition of parties with the majority of seats in the lower house of parliament.
2. Extra-parliamentary(in presidential republics, some forms of monarchies and mixed republics). The government is formed by the president.
Credentials:
Develops federal budget and ensures its execution;
Provides a single financial, credit and monetary policy;
Ensures the implementation of a unified state policy in the field of culture, science, education, health care, social security, ecology;
Manages the federal property;
Implements measures to ensure the country's defense, state security , implementation of the foreign policy of the state;
Implements measures to ensure the legality, rights and freedoms of citizens, the protection of property and public order, the fight against crime;
29. Political parties: concept and origin. Types and functions of political parties .
Political Party- an organized group of like-minded people representing the interests of a certain part of the people and aiming at their realization by conquering state power or participating in its implementation.
Appeared in ancient greece (clientele - groups in support of any figure). In the modern sense - from the 19th century. Target - the conquest and exercise of political power... There is a detailed political program and charter... There is organizational structure in the center and in the field. Actively participate in election campaigns.
Types:
By social attribute (what social strata, strata is represented by: bourgeois, peasant, workers etc.);
By ideological feature ( conservative, liberal, socialist, communist, nationalistic, clerical(religious), etc.);
By organizational feature ( personnel- without fixed membership, freedom within the party, they select candidates for power; massive- rigid fixed membership, fees, hierarchy, conduct ideological work);
By orientation , methods of achieving goals ( left- socialist and communist orientation, radical revolutionary methods; rights- conservative and bourgeois values, support for traditions, against reforms and revolutions; centrist- for moderate soft changes and the evolutionary path of development, methods - reforms and compromises).
By relation to the existing regime (ruling- who won the elections and formed the government and opposition- deprived of the opportunity to influence the formation of the government, who are in opposition to the authorities and criticize it).
Functions:
Expression of interests of certain strata and an attempt to realize these interests;
Participation in the formation of the government;
Working out the course of social and political development of the country;
The exercise of political power or an attempt to influence it.
30. Party systems and their characteristics. Transition from one-party system to a multi-party system in Russia and Belarus .
Party system- a set of political parties existing in society and their relationship.
1. Monoparty system - power in society is controlled by one party ( The Communist Party). Typical for a totalitarian society. Leads to stagnation in all spheres of life and bureaucratization.
2. Bipartisan system - only two leading parties (even with the formal presence of others) constitute political competition. In countries with a stable social and cultural environment and traditional values. Great Britain - Labor and Conservatives, USA - Republicans and Democrats... Successively replace each other in power, "swing". Effective development of the country + expression of interests of different strata.
3. Multi-party the system is a real power struggle for more than two parties. Fragmentation of political forces. The result is the unification of parties with similar goals and views, the creation cross-party coalition to win a majority in parliament and form a cabinet of ministers.
In the USSR, there was a monoparty system: there was only one, the communist party. With the dissolution of the USSR and the formation of republics (1991) - the emergence of a multi-party system. There are about 100 parties in the Russian Federation. BUT: the creation of parties often comes not "from below", but "from above": the leader himself looks for supporters for himself, finances them and then creates a party. In RB - the same thing, only fewer parties.
Loading...