Лекции по "Политологии"

Meanwhile from experience of development of the modern democratic states appears that successful social and economic and political reforming are possible only at system use рекрутирования the elite, based on the competitive beginnings and high requirements to business and moral qualities of political and administrative heads. Rather weak political activity of citizens, low productivity of activity of modern Russian elite, incompleteness of formation modern, that is corresponding to "history calls” supervising layer and at the same time its paramount importance for country transformation - all it does a problem of political elite especially actual for the present and the future Russian society. 

 

 

 

 

 

POLITICAL LEADERSHIP

 

The true essence of all social processes consists in erecting to a throne of the most capable person

Thomas Karlejl

 

I. Leadership as the social and political phenomenon is universal. Political leaders are most the men of weight, capable to mobilise a society or its considerable part for achievement of socially significant purposes. The leader in translation from English (leader) means "leader", “a specifying way”. The sense of this word reflects mission of the person-leader, its place and a role in a society, processes in which it is involved, its functions. For the leader ability of influence on other people, ability to organise their joint activity for achievement of socially significant purposes is characteristic. The political leader, personalising power and management system, personifies this power in the opinion of all society or groups of citizens:

Political leadership as the phenomenon is a way of interaction of the leader and weights in which process the leader makes considerable impact on this weight. It, in essence, represents a special sort of the power consisting in ability of one person or several persons, being on top of an imperious pyramid, to force others to do that positive or negative that they, most likely, would not do in general;

Political leadership is a kind of the political activity representing process of interaction in which course one people (leaders) know and express requirements and interests of the followers and owing to it possess prestige and influence, and other (supporters) voluntary give them a part of the imperious powers for realisation of purposeful representation and realisation of public interests;

Political leadership is a constant, priority influence from the certain person on all society, the political organisation or the big social group;

Political leadership is an administrative status, the social position connected with acceptance of imperious decisions, it is a supervising post;

Political leadership is a symbol of a generality and the sample of political behaviour of group (groups), ability to realise (their) its interests by means of the power.

Proceeding from such understanding of a phenomenon of leadership, the political leader can be defined as the person who carries out functions on management of a society, the political organisation or movement, is capable to change a course of events and an orientation of political processes in the country. Political leaders put forward the programs defining a course of historical development of a society. Each leader is original as a policy phenomenon, but at all their variety at them it is possible to find out important general properties in all:

- A passionarity as Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev has defined (1912-1992) known redundancy of biochemical energy at some people. Ten thousand the people, actively politicising in any country, hardly incur responsibility for destinies of the people only for the sake of the power, glories or riches as hope to catch them often do not come true. At all at them, most likely, the aspiration to change world around exceeds a self-preservation instinct. However an orientation of energy of many пассионариев quite often appear not at the right time and out of place, they perish as the high-grade seeds which have got to unprepared soil. But those from them, whose offers find the response in a society as correspond to its actual requirements, become political leaders;

- Initiative or acceptance on itself of responsibility for the initiative of political actions, a direction and mobilisation of political force. Thus it is impossible to assert that the deep understanding of laws of development of a society is peculiar to all leaders. The history has shown that many leaders were not the cleverest and the most formed of the contemporaries, some in general appeared adventurers;

- Possession certain political intuition. She allows leaders to seize that others cannot see or calculate in concrete situations. The intuition appears much more important scientific knowledge, theoretical preparation. Outstanding political leaders were not scientists, political scientists even if them and called “coryphaeuses of all sciences”;

- Ability to convince, is faster - to carry away and to conduct behind itself people. It, most likely, display of certain charisma.

Interest to leadership and attempts to comprehend this difficult social phenomenon originate in an extreme antiquity. Antique historians of Gerodot (484-420 BC), Plutarh (apprx. 45 apprx. 127), Poliby (apprx. 220 apprx. 120 BC) paid the main attention to leaders, commanders, heroes, monarchs, legislators who for them served as a live embodiment of the power and history. In XIX century the French sociologist Emil Djurkgejm and a number of other scientists have put forward idea that in due course the role of persons in the power and a society will decrease, giving way to public structures and institutes. The forecast, however, has not justified. It has appeared, as in difficult organised state citizens it is easier and охотнее trust people being in power, than anonymous structures thanks to that similar leadership possesses a number of specific features:

- As a rule, between the national leader and a society there is no direct interaction, it is mediated by parties, political groups and movements, mass media;

- It has many-sided character as the leader is always focused on the coordination of various social interests, forcedly aspires to the justification of mass expectations of favorable results from its activity;

- Political leadership корпоративно;

- It to some extent институционализировано, that is activity of the leader is limited by existing social relations, norms, decision-making processes;

- The phenomenon of political leadership is based on abilities of the head among which the American sociologist E.Bogardus marks a strength of mind, will, charm (magnetism) of the person, resoluteness, hypnotic abilities, a keen intuition, sense of humour, a step, ability to draw to itself attention.

II. Having analysed various approaches to the leadership characteristic, the American scientific R.Stogdill has revealed that practically in all cases it was considered or as focus of group processes or as art to cause the consent, or from the point of view of role differentiation in power positions. Obvious personal character of political leadership induced many scientists at the characteristic of leaders to regard as of paramount importance those or their other personal properties and qualities. Thomas Karlejl in XIX century has managed to formulate the first teoretiko-conceptual constructions on problems of activity of leaders and leaderships as social phenomenon. Karlejlja consider as the founder rather popular in a science “theories of lines”.

Modern the theory of lines in leadership definition have arisen under the influence of researches of the English psychologist F.Galtona trying at a dawn of the XX-th century to explain leadership on the basis of a heredity. The belief was the basic idea of such approach that if the leader possesses the qualities distinguishing it from followers it is possible to allocate these qualities. Very many researchers carried to them a moral maturity, integrity of character, social boldness and enterprise, an insight, independence of strong harmful inclinations, will power, absence of excessive experiences. In 1940 American K.Berd has made the list of 79 lines mentioned by various researchers as ”лидерские”. Among them have been named initiative, sociability, sense of humour, enthusiasm, friendliness etc. But any of these lines did not take a strong place in the list: 65 % of the named lines have been mentioned only once, 20 % - twice, 4-5 % - three times and only about 5 % - four times.

Authoritative and widespread way of the description of political leadership are situational concepts according to which occurrence of the leader always is result of a place, time and circumstances. The situational theory of leadership underlines a relativity of lines which should be inherent in the leader and assumes that qualitatively different situations and circumstances can demand qualitatively different leaders. Separate scientists (for example, M.Shlessindzher Jr.) absolutise such dependence, the nations, progress, general will, etc. J consider the leader as "the toy", carrying out certain a problem on behalf of a class. Schneider asserts thereupon that the number of military leaders in England was always proportional to number of conflicts in which the country has been involved. To remove from the situational theory of suspicion that it represents leaders puppets, E.Hartli has assumed:

- If the person becomes the leader in one situation it is not excluded that it it becomes and in another;

- As a result of stereotypic perception leaders in one situation are considered by group as “leaders in general”; 

- Becoming the leader in a certain situation, the person gets authority which its election as the leader and promotes next time;

- The leader choose the person having motivation to achievement of this position is more often.

The theory of lines and situational concepts as two extreme approaches in a leadership problem have given birth in a science to the third, more or less compromise lichnostno-situational explanation of the nature of leadership. In 1952 G.Gert and S.Milz was allocated with four factors which were necessary for considering by consideration of a phenomenon of leadership:

Lines and motives of the leader as person;

The image of the leader and the motives existing in consciousness of its followers, inducing them to follow it;

Characteristics of a role of the leader;

Institutional context, that is those official and legal parametres in which the leader and its followers works, solving those or other problems.

With the advent of the lichnostno-situational concept leadership began to be considered as human relations, instead of as the characteristic of a separate individual. Supporters of the lichnostno-situational approach try to find the compromise in a recognition of identical importance of a role of the internal and external factors determining activity of the leader. The most typical concept of this kind is “the theory конституэнтов”, asserting that the leader - not who other, as the spokesman of expectations external in relation to it of group of followers. Conformity of the leader to the status is in that case defined not so much by its personal qualities, how many its abilities to satisfy interests of those who promoted its eminence.

One of the most indicative modern treatments of political leadership is “the market theory”. From the point of view of this theory the leader acts as original special type of dealer as the blessings (safety, justice, well-being, etc.), and its purpose is reception of the income of a difference between мобилизуемыми and really spent for the decision of certain problems resources. To the influential modern doctrines explaining the nature and appointment of leadership, the relational theory concerns also. In it arguments and arguments are under construction on the basis of the complex, system account of the factors concerning environment, individual and personal qualities of the dominating person, and also to features of a situation and other circumstances defining behaviour of the leader. Within the limits of the given theory numerous techniques of effective selection and preparation of leaders are created.

III. Functions of the leader are mainstreams of its activity. Their quantity depends on such factors as type of political culture of a society, the political mode, a maturity of a civil society, a standard of living of the majority of the population etc. Among the basic functions of the leader are allocated:

- интегративная;

- ориентационная;

- инструменталистская;

- The mobilisation;

- Social arbitration and home nursing;

- легитимации a political order.

The variety of functions carried out by the political leader, conditions of their realisation, and also other external and internal factors of activity finds the reflexion in different типологиях leaderships. So, political leaders distinguish on:

- To level of their control over the power (correcting and oppositional);

- To activity scale (national and regional);

- To style of behaviour (authoritative and democratic);

- To character of a management (formal and informal);

- To the relation to social changes and reforms (conservatives, reformers, dogmatic persons, fundamentalists);

- To role relations to the purposes of political movement (ideologists, idealists, pragmatists);

- To the relation to opponents (compromisers, fanatics).

Classical типологизация political leaders belongs to Max Veberu who allocated their following types: traditional, is rational-legal and charismatic. The American political scientist K.Hodzhkinston has allocated among leaders of leaders-careerists, leaders-politicians, leaders-technicians, leaders-poets. On the basis of the emotional relation to the leader of its followers S.Dzhibb has allocated three types: the leader-patriarch, the leader-tyrant, the leader - "ideal". It is rather popular in a science and the classification offered by the American researcher of M.Hermann:

The leader-standard-bearer possessing high public prestige, offering plans and programs of radical transformations;

The leader-dealer embodying style of behaviour who allows it to conduct the auction on an exchange of services for support;

The leader-attendant successfully operating in routine conditions for the sake of interests of the population;

The leader-fireman showing ability to operate in the conditions of crises, any unexpected complications in internal life of the country or in its world situation;

The leader-puppet dependent on will and interests of the nearest environment.

V. Considerable interest represents studying of styles of leadership as set of methods and methods of activity of the political leader, character of interaction with members of groups supporting it and followers. Three styles of leadership are traditionally allocated:

Authoritative - for it the emphasis on strict measures and management methods - categorical orders, uncontested instructions, barefaced threats is characteristic;

Democratic - for successful achievement of the purposes activity and initiative is encouraged, in an arsenal of methods encouragements, compensations, a praise, support dominate;

Not interfering or discharged style of leadership is based on position of the detached onlooker which is occupied usually with the leader who is not showing aspirations to any activity, but watching closely an event.

VI. To new tendencies in development of the leadership, one of the most ancient and universal institutes of mankind and existing everywhere where there is a power and the organisation, it is possible to carry:

- Consideration by political leaders of internal policy in the countries headed by them as component of global process;

- Increase of a role and influence of informal leaders;

- Strengthening of concentration of activity of leaders on the decision of economic and social problems;

- Reduction of probability of occurrence of political leaders-heroes and leaders-antiheroes;

- Reduction of borders of the power of political leadership at the expense of perfection of system of division of the authorities and expansion of borders of a civil society.

 

THE STATE AS POLITICAL INSTITUTE

 

All states, all powers possessing or possessing the power over people, were also an essence or republics, or the states operated autocratically.

Nikolo Makiavelli

 

The state is the central political institute integrating a society. It concentrates in itself and realises imperious powers, possesses ability to operate and purposefully to regulate social processes. The state is an institute, organising joint life of the population in certain territory and a due social order providing there, maintenance of corresponding norms and rules of a human hostel. Long time it was identified with a society, its social organisation. And only in XVI century, thanks to N.Makiavelli's works in which the term stati (from Latin status for the first time was used - position) for a designation the term "state" has appeared the person who is distinct from a society of structure of the power, also. Political scientists thus recognise that development of the state and historically, and for a number of societies of the present passes some stages.“ Than the state is more developed, especially it is separated from a society finding during New time quality "civil" in a counterbalance “to a society political”, that is actually to the state, - the Russian scientist V.B.Pastuhov confirms. - the state mediates movement of the basic contradiction of human activity - between its public character and the individual form of realisation … Developing, the state, as well as any other social phenomenon, passes a formation stage, and then consistently acts as the phenomenon “in itself","for itself","for others”. To three last stages there correspond three basic phases of development of statehood: the state-class, the state-bureaucracy, the state-nation ”.

At the same time only classical treatments of the state are so numerous that there is a serious doubt in possibility to express all its basic signs, and also historical forms in one definition. Конфуций Platon - “fair human space” saw in the state “the big family”, and. The state named simple set of citizens (Aristotle), the union of free people for observance of the right and the general advantage (Гроций), the Supreme power concentrated in one person (or meeting) and reducing all воления citizens in a single will (Gobbs), car for suppression of one class by another (Marx), земнобожественным (Gegel) etc. Development of the scientific maintenance of a category of the state is traced by a being about XIV century, and its formation in present understanding - as sets of the institutes providing functioning of a control system by a society - has occurred only in XVIII century Some representation about available approaches to judgement of essence of the state gives them типологизация in British “to the Encyclopedia of management and a policy” (1992):

- The legal approach reduces the state to the system of the right which is based on the sovereignty of the public power (Hans Kelzen [1881-1973]);

- The historical direction investigates the state as evolution of its bodies and forms from an epoch by an epoch, considers its qualities occurring at different times through a prism of change of statuses-conditions;

- The socially-anthropological approach suggests to comprehend the state as type of the social organisation in a context of all society (Marx, Djurkgejm, Leon Djugi, Max Veber);

- The philosophical method of knowledge the state reflects special representations about this institute realised as a certain fair order of association of citizens;

- The politological approach breaks up to a considerable quantity of private concepts: pluralists (Robert Dal, David Truman) for the state consider as the main thing balance search between competing groups, the organisation of their interaction what needs high-grade division of the authorities, the strict account of roles of various social movements; корпорационисты (Phillip Shmitter) consider the state as a unit where, despite presence of the differentiated interests between large public groups and associations (corporations), the strong and centralised state keeps solving levers of the power; at неомарксистов the points of view it is separated: for Ralfa Milibanda it continues to express interests economically a ruling class and only in force majeure (for example, during war) can operate irrespective of class interests; at Nikosa Pulanzasa (1936-1979) state more is not the domination tool over a society. From its point of view, that it protects durability of capitalist manufacture even then when enters into the conflict to some segments of a class of capitalists is much more important; the opinion of Klausa Offe is reduced to that the modern state is excluded from process of accumulation and only carries out the necessary functions with use of redistribution of means

II. Signs, structure and state functions developed, since IV millenium to River Х, in process of development родоплеменных relations and isolation of separate groups of persons which gradually concentrated administrative functions in the hands, fixing them in the form of the steady imperious organisations. Depending on features of evolution of various civilisations, these universal processes of formation of the state possessed known specificity. For example, in the West features of development of material and spiritual life have connected formation of this political institute with formation of class representation of citizens, occurrence of institute of private law, gradual restriction of the power of governors by the law and the right that imposed certain restrictions on state intervention in economic activities of people and natural human rights. In the east formation of the state structures occurred against practical omnipotence of tops over a society and rigidity of forms of social consolidation of the last in the form of domination of clans, castes, communities. Such historical conditions, interfering with development of a private property and critical consciousness of societies of the given type, have essentially limited possibilities of legal regulators and potential of civil activity of the population in state formation. As a whole the state was generated as institute of the organisation of joint life. In these purposes it forms and supports norms and rules of a social hostel, supervises their performance by the power and citizens, limits influence of group and corporate structures.