Лекции по "Политологии"

IV. Parties in comparison with other groups of interests possess considerable specificity. Since Aristotle and till XVII century in parties - then from named факциями - saw “political bodies”, comparable with live organisms the Russian historian Timothy Nikolaevich Granovsky (1813-1855) connected occurrence of parties with Ekaterina Medici's policy. Actually parties of antiquity and the Middle Ages were клиентелами - time associations for support of any persons. Political parties in their modern understanding began to be created to historical measures rather recently. At first in England in 70-80th of XVII century it was generated the Tory party (conservatives) and вигов (liberals). They competed among themselves for influence on the royalty. Political parties in continental Europe appear in the course of parliamentarism formation in XVIII-XIX centuries

In historical origin of parties many thinkers, since T.Gobbs, saw the reason of their occurrence in spirit of the contradiction peculiar to the person. E.Berk wrote that “the party represents the organisation of the people united for the purpose of advancement by joint efforts of national interest, being guided by some specific principle concerning which all of them have come to the consent”. А де Tokvil considered parties as the associations embodying human rights to association with others, as the form of display of its personal liberty. In the end of XIX century the German researcher V.Hasbah considered party as “the union of people with identical political views and the purposes, aspiring to a gain of the political power for the purpose of its use for realisation of own interests”. M.Ja.Ostrogorsky (1854-1919) has noticed aspiration of parties to submission to itself of all displays of political activity of the person. Марксисты in the doctrine about parties “new type” have seen the main source of updating of political shape of the whole world. Eventually in treatment of parties the approaches accenting organizational aspects of their activity (R.Mihels), inherence of these organisations from the state system (M.Djuverzhe) have prevailed. Giovanni Sartori considers as party any political group participating in elections and capable to spend the candidates for state structures. Joseph Lapalombara (a sort. 1925) recognised that party is any political group which has received the official status, having the formal organisation, connecting the centre with periphery and capable to participate in elections. Jean-Lui Klermonn characterised party as the organised force uniting citizens of one political direction for mobilisation of public opinion in definite purposes, for participation in authorities or for orientation of the authorities to realisation of the requirements. Now it is considered to be that parties were generated as the specialised, organizational ordered group uniting those most active adherents or other purposes (ideologies, leaders) and the employee for struggle for a gain and use of the higher political power.

V. Long history of existence of parties выкристаллизовала internal groups typical for them and associations: party leaders, party bureaucracy, a brain staff, ideologists of party, a party active, rank-and-file members of party and supporters of party. In the event that the party comes to power, in its structure party members - legislators ”and“ party members - members of the government ”are allocated“. The party as between the population and the state carries out a link of vertical communication two groups of functions grasping almost all phases of political process. Formation of the budget of party, management elections, maintenance of discipline of party bureaucracy concern internal functions and member weight etc. External, most important functions of party, reflect its aiming at a gain and power use in interests of group of the population supporting it.

In an ideal the political party purpose consists in representation realisation in political system of those levels of population which interests it expresses. By means of parties the society and the state интегрально incorporate in the indissoluble whole. Here special value has that circumstance that in a modern difficult and advanced society people with the special interests, aspirations, orientations, installations can participate in political life as members of the various unions, associations, parties that allows to speak about possibility of their control over the state and the power. Thereupon parties, connecting a civil society and the state, promote overcoming or softening of the conflicts immanently inherent in these relations. Parties not only do not weaken, and, on the contrary, strengthen the state, strengthening its feedback with a society. So, competitive parties dominating in the liberally-democratic countries operate at two levels. First, each party creates a network of the organisations or the structures penetrating all or the majority of regional and local communities and by that strengthening in them the national beginning. Secondly, the orientation of parties on a competition with each other promotes that the national political system is put over all concrete groupings of officials, irrespective of their rank and position.

VI. The Variety historical and социокультурных conditions of development of the countries and the people has led to occurrence of the various party structures different from each other by a structure, functions, lines of activity. Therefore there is a set of criteria according to which classification of parties is made:

- Under social programs of activity when share on socialist, liberal, communistic, conservative, class, nationalist, religious etc.;

- On the ideological bases of their activity when they act as доктринальные (protection of the ideology), pragmatical (guided by practical actions), charismatic (uniting round the concrete political leader);

- On methods of performance of programs, appearing as revolutionary (societies aspiring to radical qualitative transformation) and reformatory (aimed at improvement of public life without sharp structural changes);

- On character of political actions, acting as reactionary, conservative, moderated, radical, extremist;

- On participation in selected public authorities, being as correcting and oppositional;

- In a place in a political spectrum, it being represented as left, centrist and right;

- On style of dialogue between party leaders and member base, differing as democratic and not democratic;

- On the character of membership dividing them on personnel (differ small number, free membership, organizational friability or discipline), mass (aimed at involving in the numbers as it is possible большего numbers of people);

- On the organizational structure defining them as parliamentary (as primary formations territorial committees act), labour (representing a version of the parliamentary parties supposing collective membership including labour collectives), vanguard (are constructed on principles of democratic centralism and territorial and production association of the members).

VII. Party systems represent set of stable relations and relations of parties of various type with each other, and also with the state and other institutes of the power. To number of the factors, making the greatest impact on formation of party systems, concern: character of social structure of a society; the current legislation, социокультурные traditions. Depending on character of an interparty competition the maintenance of party systems is formed under influence:

- смычек this or that type, that is short-term associations of parties for the decision of strictly certain problems when the leading role is incurred by party elite, and opinion of rank-and-file members are not considered;

Blocks, that is the hierarchical unions in which four kinds of partners co-operate:

The predominant forces imposing all rest base interests;

The parties of the second plan entering into blocks on the terms of predominant forces;

The parties-relays even more dependent on the basic players in the block;

Supernumeraries, to whose interests in the block practically do not pay attention;

- Coalitions, that is the long-term associations generated on the basis of rational representations about possibilities of partners to provide a prize and assuming equal relations of all participants.

It is necessary to underline that on number of parties operating in the countries political scientists allocate following party systems:

One-party in their despotic and democratic versions. Absence in such system of political rivalry has given Z.Nojmannu's grounds to consider that in a society it is impossible to consider one party as party in true sense of this term as etymology of a word "party" demands its correlation with other "parts";

полуторапартийные, that is in them the coalition consisting of dominating party and close it on sights, but less popular and influential organisation operates;

Two-party - with two rather equal on popularity and влиятельности competing parties, each of which is capable to win on elections the majority of places in Legislative Assemblies or to receive a majority of votes on executive power elections;

Two and a half party in which presence of two authoritative parties is combined with activity intermediary, but simultaneously the alternative organisation playing a role of the "third" force;

Multi-party systems with number more than three parties struggling for the power, each of which, nevertheless, is not capable to win support of the majority of voters. They are typical for the parliamentary forms of government and in most cases have the result the coalition governments or the cabinets.

VIII. For Russia essential features of party building are characteristic: the parties creation has begun considerably later, than in countries of Western Europe; their formation has begun with working class associations while parties of tops of ruling estates began to be created only in the course of the first Russian revolution, after the edition of the imperial Manifesto on October, 17th, 1905 Russian multi-party system developed not for long, approximately till summer of 1918, then has interrupted almost for 70 years.

Development of modern party system has passed some stages in Russia:

- Occurrence of informal public organisations (1986 - 1988);

- A stage of action of popular fronts and party structures (1988 - 1989);

- The first wave of formation of parties (in 1990 has arisen LDPR, a democratic platform in the CPSU, in 1991 the People party of free Russia has been founded);

- The second wave of party building (in 1991 - 1993 have arisen Party of economic freedom, consolidation Party, the Peasants party, etc.);

- ломка systems of protoparties and formation of new political parties - ПРЕС, the block “Choice of Russia”, "Apple" (1993 - 1995);

- The period of extensive development of the multi-party system which subjects compete not for a power gain, and for deputy mandates in parliament (1995 - 2000);

- The period of purposeful efforts of power structures on creation of this or that updating of system of several large parties (2000 - on the present).

Present multi-party system in the Russian Federation is rather original. As neither the parliamentary majority, nor a parliamentary coalition do not possess the right of formation of the government, struggle of parties on elections and elections lose the basic sense by which they are allocated in modern representative democracies. Elections in the State Duma of the fourth convocation in December, 2003 have brought a victory of party “United Russia“ which has provided to itself under party lists idle time, and for the account одномандатников - and the constitutional majority. 5 % - ный a boundary were overcome by two more parties - the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and LDPR, and also block "Native land". Out of parliament there were both applying for participation in liberalism of party - "Apple" and “the Union of the right forces”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

POLITICAL SYSTEMS AND POLITICAL MODES

 

Any steady type of human relations which includes the power as the main components, a management or authority, is political system.

Robert Dal

 

I. To understand mutual relations of various authorities, ways and forms of interaction of political structures, "political" measurement of the person political science uses the system theory which allows to consider the world political as difficult organised integrity consisting of set of elements co-operating with each other when change of character of each of them conducts to change of quality of all "ensemble".

Aristotle with that end in view used concept "state system", in a XIX-th century Alexis де Tokvil (1805-1859) for same enters into a scientific turn concept of political and state "order", Herbert Spenser (1820-1903) and Emil Djurkgejm (1858-1917) - the term “political system”. Already in the XX-th century Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) for same Max Veber (1864-1920) - through integrating role of the state bureaucracy, a bit later Vladimir Ilich Lenin (1870-1924) - through cementing role of party of proletariat as central institute of the power etc. tried to describe integrity and orderliness of political life of a society through mechanisms of circulation of elite, It is considered that the Russian scientist Alexander Aleksandrovich Bogdanov (1873-1928) who have created in the first decades of the XX-th century тектологию - “a general organizational science” where the doctrine about the organisation approximately corresponds to present semantic value of system was one of founders of the system approach of modern type. The further development of researches in this direction has allowed to create the general theory of the systems which bases Ludwig has formulated a background of Bertalanfi (1901-1972) who have made scientific definition of system and its major features - complexities, stability, an openness/closeness etc.

Tolkott Parsons (1902-1979), David Iston (a sort became trailblazers in application of the system analysis in political researches. 1917), Gabriel Almond (1911-2002), Charles Dojch (a sort. 1912). Parsons the first has developed model of political system which has been cut off from social and economic on it social and economic and cultural factors and is built on the basis of own most common features. Easton considered political system as set of the various, interconnected kinds of activity which influence acceptance and execution of decisions. This scientist described process of functioning of system as process of interaction of its three elements:“ Input "," conversion "and" an exit ”. On"input"various requirements of the public or expression of solidarity and support by citizens of the authorities on various questions move. As a result of processing by elite circles of these requirements those or other decisions which are transferred to system"exit"where they in the form of state policy certificates are offered for acquaintance and performance are made. Last element of system includes the mechanism of"feedback"providing self-checking and self-development of political system.

G.Almond developed a bit different approach to consideration of political system. In its opinion, the main things for it the functioning special-purpose character, and maintenance of the legitimate compulsion directed on stabilisation of the power in a society is not. Thereupon the central place in political system was taken away to political culture. This scientist rather fancifully represented also structure of political system. It included in it and the elements operating on the basis of rules of law and regulations (parliaments, it is executive-administrative organs etc.), and statuses (citizens and groups), and concrete roles of agents (kinds their expert and activity), and communications between them.

Essentially other approach to treatment of political system has been offered K.Dojchem who has developed its information-cybernetic model. In the book “management Nerves: models of political communications and control” (1963) it has considered political system as difficult set of information streams and the communication communications defined by levels of those or other political agents, the roles executed by them solved by problems, features of process of processing, transfer and storage of messages, and also other reasons and factors. In the general view the scheme of interactions of such information-communicative processes was shined with it on four basic phases: on an input - the block of the data made on the basis of use of various external and internal, governmental and public, official and secret-service sources of informing of institutes of the power; The processing of the data including correlation of received messages with dominating values, norms and stereotypes, current situation, preferences of ruling circles, and also with already available information; the information selected thus becomes the basis for decision-making for the purpose of settlement of a current condition of system; on an exit these decisions provide realisation of corresponding functions of system.

The system approach to the policy studying, applied by Parsons, Easton, Almondom, Dojchem and other researchers in 50-70-s' years ХХ century, working out of conceptual representations by them about the political world as to system carry out an important methodological role and now. The concept of political system allows to see, on the one hand, political life as a complete picture of behaviour of people, and with another - to consider interaction of a policy with its environment. In a modern political science set of various elements, interaction of a policy with other public phenomena or spheres etc. In 80-90th years ХХ centuries the system approaches which have developed in political science is more than two tens definitions of political system which treat it as a complex of ideas, have started to lose former popularity. And though today these models are still used, especially at comparative analyses, in scientific community theories which use system methodology only as a separate processing method of research began to arise or offer ideas replacing it.

Them concerns девелопменталистский (from English development - development) the approach which supporters pay attention to importance for functioning of political system of character of "dependences" of a policy (for example, from dynamics of social and economic development), its structural differentiation (a political subsystem of a society providing autonomy). They pay special attention on "the abilities" of system assuming its readiness for "updating" (that is to maintenance of certain degree of adaptation of the state to time calls), "mobilisation" (attraction by the power of human and material resources for the operative decision of problems), to "self-preservation" (to a non-admission to the power of extreme oppositionists) and to tendency maintenance “to equality” political participants.

Along with similar interpretation of a system method there was an idea so-called “new институционализма” which considers the state as the centre systematising to the politician of a society, but does not deny also possibility of growth of organising influence on a policy of such institutes of the power as corporations, клиентелы, pressure groups etc. the Concept in which predominating not which role internally organising to the politician of structure is denied, the French sociologist and political scientist Pierre Burde (has put forward a sort. 1930). For it the policy represents one of versions of "a social field”, the expert of the separate subjects (agents) possessing those or other "capitals" (resources), "positions" (a place in political space), когнитивными (informative) and motivational bases of actions consists of set. Thus, the political order develops, according to Burde, as a result of difficult dynamic interaction of these an expert constantly changing quality of certain political space.

III. The Political system can be defined as complete and dynamical set of the same roles supplementing each other, relations and the institutes of the power co-operating on the basis of uniform norms and values, dominating social groups set by interests in society and allowing them to realise the purposes and intentions. The political system develops of a number of subsystems - standard, ideological, institutional, communicative, - cultural. It, as a rule, is generated by a principle of pyramidal hierarchy with a mass social base in a basis and top in the form of the government. Its subsystems having vertical structures (from mass base - to directing bodies), - parties, the unions of citizens, public organisations are in the same way constructed also.

Basic functions of political system are:

- Definition of the purposes, problems and ways of development of a society;

- The organisation of activity of a society on performance of the sociopolitical purposes and programs;

- Distribution material and cultural wealth;

- The coordination of interests of different social groups and the state;

- Working out of rules and laws of behaviour of people and groups in a society;

- Maintenance of internal and external safety and stability of a political system;

- Formation of political consciousness, familiarising of members of a society with political participation and activity;

- Control over executions of laws and rules, suppression of the actions breaking political norms.

IV. The Political mode. The major characteristic of political system is the political mode (from an armour. regimen - management). In modern political science at definition of a political mode compete the legal approach accenting formal norms and rules of departure of the power by institutes of the state, and sociological, leaning against the analysis of means and ways of realisation of the real public power. As has shown the historical experiment, the sociological approach for he allows to consider as agents of the power not only the government or official structures, but also those which sometimes are not possessing the official status of grouping which really influence acceptance of political decisions has appeared in more adequate way of reflexion of a political mode. The political mode can be characterised as set of the most typical methods of functioning of the basic institutes of the power used by them of resources and ways of compulsion which make out and structure real process of interaction of the state and a society. Guillermos О’Доннел and Phillip Shmitter characterise it as set of the obvious or latent structures, “which forms and access channels to leading governmental posts, and also the characteristics of figures used by them resources and strategy define”.

Political mode - more mobile and dynamical phenomenon, than power system. In this sense evolution of the same system of the power can carry out in the form of several political modes. For example, in the USSR the system of the Soviet power established at V.I.Lenin, was transformed then to the Stalin mode which liquidation has generated so-called “Khruschev's thaw” that then to give way to a collective leadership mode at Leonid Iliche Brezhnev (1906-1982). Modes spend and simultaneously personify a certain state policy, develop and carry out this or that state course, purposefully spend a concrete line of conduct of the state in internal and foreign policy. The most favourable and preferable to ruling modes is the policy of centrism. It promotes minimisation of conflicts, helps to use more structurally political potential of all society, maintains mutually valid relations between elite and not elite layers. At the same time the majority of modes as one of the most widespread means of strengthening of own positions chooses populism. It is such type of a policy which is based on constant promotion by the authorities of unreasonable promises to citizens, on use of demagogical slogans, methods of advances with a society for the sake of growth of popularity of leaders.