Types of political technologies

The essence and distinctive features of political technologies

Real political processes in any complex society and state are extremely diverse. On the one hand, they can be looked at as a manifestation of a specific public sphere, which has social boundaries, internal and external interdependencies, a set of actors, distinctive features etc. On the other hand, these power relationships can be represented as a set of specific problems that require solutions from the state and other political actors, their implementation of appropriate targeted actions, and the use of specific means and resources. But then the situation changes significantly: all macrosocial intergroup relations in the sphere of power are transformed into the interdependence of individual structures and institutions, into specific actions and feelings characters committed in a specific place and in real time. Thus, intergroup competition in the sphere of power appears as practical ways and management procedures, decision-making, conflict resolution, establishment of communications and other processes that reveal a different level of political dependencies and connections. In this sense, the processes of exercising power and managing society will be oriented towards factors that capture the complex interweaving of the most diverse - psychological, material and other - phenomena that actually influence the course of events.

Thus, solving a specific problem means not so much a person’s understanding of the goals and means of achieving them, but rather the development of specific ways to implement them in practice, i.e. the use of certain technologies to solve the problem. In general, a technological solution to a problem does not mean understanding WHAT it is, but HOW to defuse a specific situation. That is why, with the help of technology, it is revealed new meaning and the essence of power. Technologies pose the problem of measuring political events in a new way and lay the foundation for specialized activities to regulate (control) political phenomena. Forming a special perspective for understanding political processes, technologies show that the essence of this phenomenon can radically depend on the methods used to solve a particular problem. For example, mass slander, the spread of misinformation, and the refusal to provide television airtime to representatives of certain parties can turn the process of forming government bodies into free choice citizens of their representatives in imposing on them the interests and will of the circles that control the media.

So, we can say that political technologies are a set of consistently applied procedures, techniques and methods of activity aimed at the most optimal and effective implementation of the goals and objectives of a particular subject at a certain time and in a certain place. In general, as a set of certain knowledge and skills that provide the subject with solutions to specific problems in the sphere of power, political technologies are also referred to as political marketing.

As a rule, the need for the formation of political technologies manifests itself where and when there are repeated, sometimes even stereotypical actions and at the same time there are very specific requirements for the conditions and results of this type of activity. More specifically, the reasons for their appearance include::

The need for a more rational, simpler and more effective way to realize the practical goals facing the various participants in the application process political power and government;

Reducing the unpredictability of interactions in the sphere of power, the abruptness of the processes of redistribution of state resources, unfolding in conditions of unpredictable development of the situation, fraught with unexpected explosive forms of protest social activity and other force majeure circumstances;

The need for the use of economical and resource-saving methods for managing state (corporate) property, personnel and technical structures;

The need to impart stability to the relationships between participants in a particular process, accelerating the training of personnel in advanced methods of action and, ultimately, expanding the ability to achieve goals a large number subjects in different but similar conditions;

The need to manage the object of human claims;

The ability to more clearly define the critical threshold values ​​of a particular process, beyond which subjects lose the ability to carry out effective and efficient actions to manage the situation.

In other words, the main pathos of using political technologies is to optimize the fulfillment of their tasks and responsibilities by various subjects. Technologies are functionally aimed at achieving goals in accordance with the interests, functions and goals of subjects, which may consist of attracting and saving resources, stabilizing or destabilizing the situation in the state, organizing election campaigns, operational information support for decision-making, coordinating interests in the development of government programs etc.

Political technologies how a set of techniques and procedures for purposeful activity not only organizes the means of achieving the goal, but also consolidates sequence of actions, development of appropriate algorithms of subject behavior. It is algorithms that identify and consolidate the most optimal and effective ways to solve a particular problem, and also make it possible to transfer and replicate the acquired experience.

In essence, algorithms represent a certain “dry residue” of the subject’s target activity, the result of rationalization, simplification and standardization of the techniques and procedures used by him. In practice, technologies crystallize from a diverse number of ways and mechanisms of relationships between subjects and objects, interactions of counterparties, external and internal factors. In other words, technology is established only when, in the process of achieving a goal, a known sequence of operations is formed (and fixed in a certain way), fixing the order of application of certain techniques and means of achieving a specific goal.

Therefore, technology should not be mixed with separate mechanisms, techniques or methods of interaction. Technology is both the process of using techniques aimed at achieving a specific goal by a real actor, and result this activity. And to be even more precise, technology is the result of a certain interaction of these methods of activity, appearing when repeated actions to achieve a set goal have demonstrated more optimal and economical ways to solve the issue.

Of course, some types of purposeful human activity, due to their complexity, can be technologized not entirely and completely, but only at certain points in the process of achieving the goal. That is, in the process of activity, a subject can only use local technologies that can only partially rationalize and streamline certain areas of interaction. For example, in the sphere of political decision-making, where, as a rule, poorly structured tasks are solved and where, therefore, the proportion of unforeseen circumstances is high, political technologies usually represent a set of actions that mainly serve only certain phases of the development and implementation of goals (for example, coordination of actions legislative and executive bodies authorities). In general, they are not able to rationalize and optimize this process.

Consequently, political technologies can operate in the mode of complete completion of the cycle of implementation of a particular process, or they can be associated with the optimization of only its individual phases and stages. Even more complex complexes of power-management relationships (for example, relationships within informal, shadow groups integrated into the process of adoption government decisions) are, in principle, unable to form technological chains even for their individual fragments.

Technologies as certain algorithms of action represent a form political engineering , conditioned both by the properties of the actor person(his knowledge, experience, attitude to implementation, etc.), and material (spiritual) used in his activities resources And technical components. For this reason, the formation and application of technologies, the rhythm (tempo) of their implementation are strictly related to the qualifications and competence of the subject, his practical knowledge and skills in using certain technical resources. As a rule, low availability of technical or human resources reduces the effectiveness of technology use. Therefore, not so much the effectiveness of application, but the very existence of political technologies directly depends on the state of the acting subject, on his ability to use the accumulated experience and realize the available opportunities in a specific situation. Errors and incompetence of a subject (especially one endowed with authority and responsibility), from which no status or title can save, can not only reduce the functional significance of technologies, but also completely change the direction of their actions. So the use of political technologies (primarily in the most important areas for the state and society) involves the selection of subjects in terms of qualifications, practical experience, psychological stability, ability to act in non-standard situations, etc.

The found action algorithms can also act as a means initiation, source of motivation for the internal mechanisms of regulation of both the political system and its individual elements. In other words, having become an element of the activity of one or another individual (group of persons), constantly busy making decisions, resolving conflicts or performing other specific functions, technology becomes one of the mechanisms self-tuning And self-organization this area of ​​human activity. In this sense, technologies can be not just a list of optimal and effective actions, but also act as a way to strengthen control over the process of achieving goals, a form of managing this activity. And in any case, the highest criterion for the effectiveness of the use of technology is the actual achievement of the intended result.

At the same time, assessing the effectiveness of technologies is an extremely risky activity, because it is aimed at obtaining reliable information O real mechanisms of power and control. Considering that very important and significant resources are redistributed in the sphere of political power, the activities of many people (structures, institutions) involved in this process are fundamentally aimed at concealing the necessary information about the adoption of relevant decisions and the technologies used. Therefore, the price of such information can be extremely high.

However, the importance of assessing technological procedures is not only associated with the danger of monitoring real processes of power. Its importance is also determined by the fact that in the sphere of political power, for example, in the field of public administration, various kinds of attempts constantly appear to create such methods of interaction between structures and institutions of power that, having formal features technological improvement of the process (say, coordination of industry interests) are actually a means of achieving completely different goals (in particular, covering up the private entrepreneurship of certain officials). So political technologies are often deliberately imitated, hiding behind their own external forms completely different goals and interests of the acting subjects.

Political technologies extend to the entire field of political power and public administration. Because of this, they are included both in conventional (legal) processes of using political power and the corresponding distribution of state resources, and in non-conventional ones, involving the use of techniques and procedures that are directly prohibited by law or contrary to political traditions (technologies of subversive actions, terrorism or conducting staged elections, manipulation of public opinion, etc.).

Technologies limited according to the place and time of their use. A specific combination of techniques, methods and methods of activity as a specific system of this activity has its own “internal time” (I. Prigogine). But for all its certainty and fixedness of actions tied to the spatio-temporal parameters of the situation, technologies also have mechanisms to overcome such dependence. And first of all, this dependence is overcome due to the presence in them of a “self-tuning gene”, adaptability to the situation.

In other words, in technology there is always a place for the subject’s creativity, improvisation, and non-standard actions. Strengthening this improvisational principle serves as a kind of signal for the transition to new types of interactions with counterparties, improving the structure and developing original methods of activity. At the same time, technology is the enemy of arbitrariness. They are by their nature opposed to intuition and precedent as the leading methods of realizing human goals. Technologies are aimed at rationalizing and simplifying actions in the name of achieving a goal and that is why they are prone to a certain formalization and institutionalization, and normative consolidation.

Because of this, technologies have certain upper limits that they must not cross, so as not to turn into a form of outright subjectivism. But they should not freeze, so as not to disrupt the correspondence of the process of goal achievement to the dynamically developing situation. Rotating between these poles of formalization and subjectification, technologies are constantly in danger of degenerating either into a set of dogmas or into a complete improvisation of subjects.

Depending on the nature and scale of the operating entity, technologies differ significantly in their parameters: resources, assessments of their effectiveness, etc. Thus, technologies designed to optimize the activities of mass political actors are, as a rule, more intermittent and therefore less reliable. Therefore, in order to confidently manage the behavior of large social strata, regulate the dynamics of public sentiment, etc., it is necessary to use more stringent and stringent regulators, large investments, resource provision, etc. are needed.

Into the structure of political technologies, as a rule, includes three most significant components: specific knowledge; specific techniques, procedures and methods of action; as well as various technical and resource Components.

Principal role knowledge is due to the fact that political technologies are essentially the embodiment special forms reflections of reality, which are aimed at finding means and methods for practical solutions to problems arising in the sphere of power and government. In this sense, the technological level of knowledge of reality is not only a form scientific and applied knowledge, but at the same time expresses an assessment of political problems from the point of view of the subjects interested in their solution.

Thus, technological knowledge is a cognitive-projective, ideal-transforming activity, which includes techniques not only of the everyday, but also scientific knowledge in reality, as if synthesizing their approaches to solve a specific problem. This gives technological knowledge its own logic of reflection and explanation of phenomena, which is not inherent in either scientific forms of reflection or ordinary approaches separately.

Unlike theory, which is not directly related to practice and mediates its relationship with it by certain ideal constructions that do not exclude various interpretations of real phenomena, technological knowledge directly and quite unambiguously perceives reality, internally organizing itself on the basis of a reflection of reality and specific events. Technological knowledge is distinguished by the fact that it is not an ideally constructed abstraction that... is tied to a specific three-dimensional space with a specific reference point,” but works with a specific problem, a situation that exists in real time and possessing such topological (depth, width and other metric characteristics) and temporal (temporal) parameters of events that exclude the very possibility of speculative completion of ongoing events with logically deducible properties.

If scientific knowledge idealizes an event (situation), then technological knowledge concretizes logical objects; If scientific knowledge is addressed to the practice-universe, then technological reflection is addressed to a separate fragment of reality, reflected by an equally specific subject. Therefore, from the point of view of a technological attitude to the world, this fragment of practical reality requires not logical comprehension, but a practical answer. Such a response should be formed within the framework of the fundamental limitations of a specific situation and not imply a theoretical expansion of a specific event to a class of similar phenomena. As a result, all the truths of technological knowledge are fundamentally mobile (relative), exclusive and unique.

Technological knowledge considers any event as a certain fragment of reality that has own logic movement, sources of development, limits of growth, etc. and presupposes the presentation of a certain problem that needs to be solved. Thus, the content of technological knowledge is formed on the basis of the positions of the one who reflects the event (technologist, analyst); someone who sets specific goals for solving a problem related to a given situation (customer), as well as who acts at the stage of solving the problem (executor). Consequently, each of them is capable of changing the content and form of technological information.

This tripling the subject technological knowledge indicates that its entire cognitive strategy is based on reducing objective conditions to a subjectively interpreted situation both at the stage of diagnosis and at the stage of updating knowledge. The inclusion of the ideas of these subjects in the assessment of the situation shows that there can be any number of target orientations within the framework of technological knowledge about the same problem. Therefore, specific problems can be technologically interpreted and “embedded” in a wide variety of political processes.

With a technological approach, the problem of developing a coordinate system that can lead to an understanding of the composition, structure, form, and nature of changes in certain events (situations) comes to the fore. This presupposes the inclusion in the technological database of not only conclusions and assessments of a special nature (estimates of the ratio political forces, their ideological programs, etc.), but also the information that reveals this situation from economic, everyday, environmental and other points of view.

Depending on the nature of solving practical problems, technological knowledge can occupy the most various positions regarding the theoretical conclusions made by academic science regarding this type of objects. To paraphrase O. Comte, we can say that technologies are those representations that mediate the “knowledge” mindset with the “action” mindset. Therefore, in a number of cases, a carrier of technological knowledge may, while performing his task, not pay attention to certain theoretical conclusions. Thus, scientific and theoretical research results can be absolutely indifferent to solving a specific practical problem. Moreover, the conclusions of fundamental science can be ignored even when they are objectively necessary to solve a specific problem. And such a choice can be dictated not only by the goals or characteristics of the approach of the analyst, customer or contractor, but also by their resource capabilities, as well as other practically significant factors.

The technological assessment of the situation also forms its own sign (semantic) structures. Thus, if the language of science always presupposes, although varied, but still a strict categorical-conceptual form, then technological knowledge is based on a much freer order of formation of semantic structures. In his analytical vocabulary, strict concepts coexist with sensory images, terms defined in their semantic meaning - with polysemantic ones. Here there are not only linguistic forms that display complex semantic shades, but also non-specialized communication structures (colloquial speech, everyday vocabulary, abbreviations of a living language, slogans, folklore, etc.). So technological knowledge is based on a more fluid language, sign structures that emphasize subjectivity, the individuality of the researcher and are oriented towards instrumental goals, empirical communication and the expansion of information about events.

Technological knowledge ultimately represents the subjective basis of political engineering, which deals with political design (forecasting, planning and programming) and organization practical activities institutions of power. Therefore, the main value for technology is not even the knowledge of how something can be done or accomplished, but a specific skill, the skills of taking actions and achieving goals.

The content of such specific skills and abilities, which are expressed in the use of certain techniques, procedures, techniques and methods of action, is directly determined by specific goals or, ultimately, the characteristics of a particular subject area of ​​policy. For example, in the field of decision making, these may be techniques for coordinating and measuring the interests of the parties when developing certain goals public policy; within the framework of resolving international conflicts - ways of finding compromises between the conflicting parties or influencing them by conciliating (arbitration) structures; in the information sphere of political power - methods of misinforming the public or, on the contrary, fighting against slanderous fabrications of rivals, etc.

The use of certain techniques and procedures directly depends on the state of the acting subjects and on the specific conditions in which the problem is being solved. So, not familiar with modern methods organization and management election campaigns the technologist cannot apply methods and techniques that can ensure victory in the elections for his customer. In conditions of strict state control over the conduct of elections, as a rule, it is not possible to use many “black” and illegal technologies to combat competitors, etc.

Specific techniques and methods of activity directly depend on the availability of certain personnel structures, the technical equipment of the actors, the availability of certain (financial, etc.) resources that influence the content of political technologies. For example, the use of technologies for information support of public policy (especially when it comes to goals of strategic or significant commercial importance) is impossible without technical structures designed to protect state secrets; the election headquarters of one candidate or another, constrained by material resources, is usually forced to refuse, for example, organizing his appearances on television or using other effective but expensive technologies of competition that are necessary to achieve victory in the elections; the use of management technologies in crisis conditions is impossible without structures that duplicate decision-making, without additional resources, personnel reserve, etc. Thus, the presence of these components of political technologies imposes the most significant restrictions on the methods of solving problems, the use of certain methods of activity or, on the contrary, can significantly increase the effectiveness of the latter.

Types of political technologies

Variety of political technologies. Technologies are embedded in a wide variety of processes that ensure the formation and use of political power at various levels of organization of the state and society, thus contributing to the formation of not only universal, but also typical properties of political technologies.

The most common ones are functional types of political technologies that involve rationalization and algorithmization of the role loads of various subjects of management and power (for example, decision-making, coordination of interests, negotiations, communication with the public, etc.) and, ultimately, aimed at managing and controlling these processes . Instrumental varieties of political technologies imitate the use of techniques aimed at rationalizing specific activities, but in fact have completely different goals and cover them up.

From the point of view of areas in which certain methods of achieving goals are used, we can talk about the so-called subject technologies (for example, electoral, lobbying, computer and information technology, negotiation techniques and procedures used in the diplomatic or military spheres, etc.). It is clear that this approach To assessing the specific properties of technologies not only allows us to record areas of power interaction that are technologized to the greatest extent (in particular, elections to government bodies) or to the least extent. In this sense, one can even state the presence of such political interactions that, in principle, cannot be subject to any technologization, such as, for example, the process of informal coordination of interests in the process of making decisions on state level. This approach helps to see areas of intersection of different techniques, their interchangeability when solving problems in certain areas of politics and public administration.

Closely related to this type of technology are the so-called level technologies that reflect the degree of social organization of subject areas. These include: global, related, for example, to solving global problems - nature conservation, maintaining international security etc., continental-regional, revealing specific actions of states, as well as international organizations and institutions to solve problems in the Middle East, European or any other region, national-state, characterizing the process of exercising power and public administration within one country, corporate, reflecting power and management relations within a separate organization, local, fixing the specifics of the activities of relations between subjects in limited points of political space, as well as interpersonal.

From the point of view of the nature of the duration of use of certain methods of activity, it also makes sense to distinguish the following technologies: strategic, aimed at the long-term result of the actors’ activities; tactical, involving the implementation of short-term goals; sporadic, applied at a time, and cyclic, constantly reproduced in the structure of the subject’s activity.

Considering the focus of technology on expanding the range of subjects capable of applying established activity algorithms when solving similar problems, we can talk about replicable, i.e. designed for widespread use in similar conditions, technologies that, in fact, satisfy these requirements, as well as those that are opposite to them - unique technologies, which are a list of actions that are applicable only in certain, strictly fixed conditions and cannot be reproduced even under similar conditions. The first of these technologies depend less on the properties of the actors implementing them and therefore save maximum time and material resources when carrying out similar types of activities. Unique technologies are applicable only for one-time provision of certain goals, and often only for a strictly defined circle of actors. They, as a rule, are much more expensive and almost completely lose their effectiveness when trying to transfer them even in similar circumstances.

For example, certain “diplomatic” technologies can be repeatedly used in the process of conducting interstate negotiations, and the most important methods and techniques of an election campaign can be used in elections without any restrictions various levels, regardless of the country where they are held, the level (federal or local) of social organization or the time of conduct. At the same time, when resolving any interethnic contradictions with an extremely unique set of parties, reasons, reasons, time of occurrence and other parameters of the conflict, methods and techniques can be used with the help of which the required effect can be achieved only in a certain place and at a certain time.

Taking into account the diversity of operating conditions, dynamic changes, properties and abilities of subjects, we can distinguish hard And soft technologies. The first indicate that the basic parameters of the techniques and methods of activity used by the subjects are predetermined and at the same time unchangeable. Very often, such technologies provide a legal and procedural procedure for coordinating interests between departments and government institutions, for example, maintaining hierarchy in the coordination of government programs, approval of documents, etc. Opposite technologies demonstrate methods of activity in less institutionalized conditions, those methods and techniques that allow flexible adaptation of the goals and resources available to the subject to changing conditions.

In other words, these are self-adjusting technologies, situationally changing algorithms of action, which ultimately expand the experience necessary to improve the process of achieving goals in a particular area. And if the first can be regarded as modes of activity, mainly reproducing structures, functions and relations of power, then the second - as formative, completing political system and the state management system to the level of current requirements. The latter essentially record the process of renewal and even degeneration of technologies, their transition to newly emerging algorithms.

Normative and deviant technologies. From the point of view of the degree and nature of activity regulation (which is of particular value for the analysis of transition processes), there are regulatory And deviant technologies. Regulatory technologies are methods of activity that are strictly determined by the laws, norms, traditions or customs existing in society (organization). Deviant technologies are the opposite of them; they are methods of activity that deviate from such requirements and standards. These include, for example, a whole range of things that are contrary to law or norms. public morality"gray" and "black" technologies. As practice has shown, at critical points in the political process, namely during elections to the highest bodies state power, foreign and domestic political crises, there is an unprecedented flourishing of this kind of technology. Subjects of influence and power often resort to leaking compromising material, blackmail, information leaks, slander, and in some cases even terrorism, organizing conspiracies, coups, etc. Very often, such forms of activity become sources not only of scandals, but also of crises that change the course of the political process, the balance of power in society, affecting countries’ compliance with international obligations etc.

It is important for society and the state to understand ways to prevent the use of such technologies in the struggle for power and to develop appropriate political antidotes. However, today it is becoming clear that in modern (and not only Russian) society it is almost impossible to fight some techniques of this kind. For example, given the spread modern means communications, purely technically it is not possible to prevent electronic espionage and other similar methods of activity.

Also close to the types of technologies considered obvious and shadow ways to achieve power-political and state-administrative goals. The first of these types, expressed, for example, in the forms of dialogue between the authorities and the public, personifying public character power, in fact plays the role of a kind of business card political regime and the existing system of government. However, this kind of techniques, techniques of management and power often have a purely demonstrative, “exhibition” character, focused on communicating with public opinion and creating an image of active and effective power. At the same time, their practical connection with the real process of developing government decisions may be very weak, or even absent altogether.

Shadow technologies of management and power, being from a practical point of view sometimes the most important and determining the process of using power and distributing state resources, at the same time are distinguished by a very low level of technology, representing rather unique (spontaneous, situational) rather than standardized and adapted methods and techniques of activity .

The term “technology” (from the Greek “techne” - art, skill, skill; “logos” - concept, knowledge) came into politics from production. This term denotes the directed influence of a person on material objects in order to change their properties, impart qualities, necessary for people. Technological knowledge oriented a person not to explain current events and phenomena, but to justify ways and methods of achieving set goals.

The term “political technologies” is one of the newest in political science. The relevance of these technologies has increased significantly with the appearance of the “political man” in the historical arena as a result of the development of democratic processes, his transformation into an active participant political changes in society.

Political technologies– a set of techniques, methods, methods, procedures used by political subjects to achieve political goals, to solve political management problems.

The main object of influence in the political technological process there are always people. They are the ones who create parties, hold rallies and strikes, vote for candidates, reproduce or destroy political and economic systems. The achievement of political goals depends on people. Respectively, political technologies- these are ways, methods of influencing people in order to change them political behavior.

Political technologies, based on a theoretical analysis of the interaction of political subjects, contain methodological guidelines and guidelines effective solution political problems and achieving certain political goals.

The processes of democratization in the twentieth century led to a decrease in the proportion of violence and forceful solutions to problems in the sphere of political governance. The shift in emphasis in ways to achieve political goals occurred due to the fact that values ​​and principles were established in society rule of law, ideological and political pluralism, restricting the actions of senior government officials by law, proclaiming the inviolability of individual rights and freedoms, etc. Thus, political technologies are such ways of influencing people in order to change their political behavior, which exclude the use of direct coercion and physical violence.

The essence of political technologies can only be revealed through a system of identifying and using potential social system– “human resource” in accordance with the goals and meaning of human existence. This is realized through a set of methods, procedures, operations, methods of influence, all modern possibilities of creative activity of both management subjects and political institutions in general.

The goal of political technologies is to optimize the fulfillment by political subjects of their tasks and responsibilities through rational means, the sequence of actions, and the development of an appropriate algorithm of behavior.

Forms of political technologies

In general, political technologies act in two forms:

• 1) as a structural element of any system, a technologically designed software product;
• 2) as an activity related to the implementation of the intended goal.

The functioning of new political technologies is always associated with the need to optimize political management, quickly and efficiently replicate special techniques and procedures. Of particular importance for these technologies is the presence of conditions for their implementation: elements of the structure of the political process, structural features and patterns of their functioning; the ability to formalize real phenomena and present them in the form of indicators, operations and procedures.

Types of political technologies

The whole variety of political technological techniques can be reduced to three types:

• 1) techniques that ensure a targeted change in the rules of interaction between participants in the political process, including by changing the normative, institutional order. By adopting new laws and changing the rules of the game, it is possible to change the behavior of people in society. True, besides the state, other political subjects do not have the right to set rules, so we can say that this actively used technique in the public administration system has its own limiting framework in those political processes where the main active forces are non-governmental organizations and groups (institutions and civil society organizations) ;
• 2) techniques that ensure the introduction of new ideas, values, and the formation of new attitudes and beliefs into the mass consciousness.
• 3) techniques that allow you to manipulate people’s behavior.

Manipulation (from the French manipulation), literally translated, is hidden hand movements that activate a device. In politics, manipulation is understood as a special type of influence when the manipulator induces a person to take actions that he did not intend to carry out in the first place. this moment. Manipulation differs from forceful influence in that there is no direct instruction or order of what to do, nor the subsequent open coercion or threat of sanctions. During manipulative influence, a person does not feel external coercion; it seems to him that he himself makes a decision and chooses the form of his behavior.

The American scientist R. Goodin formulated and described two fundamental models of manipulation – “rational” and “psychological”. The first of them is characterized by the use of lies, deception and secrecy. A common feature These methods are either complete or partial concealment of information that may affect decision-making, or its distortion. The second, “psychological” model is characterized by the use of unconscious reactions of the individual, which are “provoked” by specially modeled behavior. For example, in certain moment the candidate reinforces his speech with a memorable gesture. Subsequently, the gesture is repeated, causing positive experiences and reactions in the audience.

In the modern world, the theory and practice of political manipulation have received quite deep scientific development and practical applications. The general technology of global, nation-wide manipulation is usually based on the systematic introduction into mass consciousness socio-political myths– illusory ideas that affirm certain values ​​and norms that are perceived by the objects of manipulation, mainly on faith, without critical reflection (for example, the political myth of “American exceptionalism”).

Myth is a generalized idea of ​​reality, combining both moral and aesthetic principles, connecting reality with mysticism. That is, this idea is always largely illusory, but due to its ethical and artistic appeal, it has a great impact on mass consciousness.

According to domestic political scientist Sergei Kara-Murza: “Myths that carry an important irrational... component become part of tradition and play an important role in legitimizing the social system in ideocratic states.” However, myth has not lost its significance in modern society as an important form of social consciousness and representation of reality.

In situations of instability and uncertainty in society, classical political technologies do not bring the expected results. So, in modern Russia the largest number of votes is not collected by those political leaders who better understand social problems, and those that better understand the electorate take into account a multidimensional spectrum of interests, sentiments and expectations. Success comes to the wrong people political leaders who seek to understand the current situation political situation, but to those who promise a lot, demonstrating their efficiency and thriftiness, while playing at paternalism and “social concern”.

An advantage also goes to those politicians whose rhetoric is intertextual and whose language is metaphorical, with elements of clarity and self-evidence. Using concepts - images in the political lexicon, mixing myths and reality, present, past and future in the political text, targeting political relations, politicians achieve great success in their claims to power.

To root socio-political myths, manipulation technology involves the use of a rich arsenal of specific methods of influencing people's consciousness.Among the manipulation methods are:

• reducing the amount of information available to the average citizen;
• the use of propaganda (providing citizens with partially correct but biased information);
• use of secrecy (deliberately withholding information that could undermine official policies);
• information overload (the deliberate presentation of excessive information in order to deprive the average citizen of the opportunity to adequately assimilate and correctly evaluate it);
• labeling (to reject and compromise persons or ideas, listeners are given an unseemly definition without evidence, for example “imperialist”, “fascist”, etc.).

Along with the methods described above, a number of other methods are also used. Thus, “linguistic traps” are the imposition of the necessary assessments of events through their comparison with certain values. The opposite is considered to be another method of “linguistic deprivation”, which consists of excluding certain concepts and terms from the political lexicon (according to the principle: no term - no problem). Widely used in political practice and such a method of manipulating consciousness as a political nomination - a targeted choice of terms, concepts and expressions that can produce the desired impression. “We are slaves of words,” said K. Marx, and then F. Nietzsche literally repeated this.

The point of manipulation is to make it difficult for individuals to actually access reliable information, which forces them to rely on the official interpretation of it.

Manipulation is widely used not only in totalitarian and authoritarian states, where it is often the dominant type of political technology, but also in modern Western democracies, especially in party propaganda and during election campaigns. Today, not a single presidential or parliamentary election campaign in Western countries, as well as Russia and other countries, is complete without the use of manipulation techniques that create among the population ideas about a certain politician that are very far from reality.

The concept of political technologies

Any tasks that people set for themselves in politics, as a rule, are solved by them in a wide variety of ways. The methods of activity chosen by people, the way they achieve certain goals, inevitably change the content of political processes, their internal and external dependencies, the set of interacting actors and their other characteristics.

Moreover, depending on these methods of solving problems, not some individual parameters of phenomena may change, but also the very essence of specific political processes. For example, elections of deputies can take place on the basis of fair competition between candidates, rational challenging of their opponents’ programs, and an open appeal to voters with their vision of goals political development society, etc. And in this sense, the electoral process will be entirely consistent with its functional purpose. But where bribery or intimidation of voters is used on a massive scale, administrative pressure from the authorities is applied, the law is violated and the rights of citizens to freely express their preferences are violated, the election campaign can turn from the election of its representatives by society into the arbitrary formation of government bodies by those political circles that control economic, administrative, information and other important public resources. In other words, such “elections” do not generate political power in society, but reproduce authoritarian and dictatorial regimes of government.

In a word, the essence and content of any political processes will directly depend on what methods of activity will be chosen by subjects to solve a particular political problem, and how certain structures and institutions of power will interact. Therefore, considering the latter through the prism of methods of activity allows us to talk about a special - technological level of policy analysis. The focus of policy research at this level is on certain methods, techniques, procedures and methods of activity of political subjects, with the help of which public administration is carried out, political decisions are made, interests are coordinated and conflicts are resolved, communications are established and other political processes are carried out.

In general, we can say that political technologies are a set of knowledge and methods of activity used by subjects aimed at the optimal and effective implementation of their specific goals in the sphere of political power. In relation to the conditions of market-type political competition, where the dependence of methods and techniques of activity on the place and time of their application significantly increases, the totality of political technologies constitutes the main content of political marketing.

Functionally, political technologies are inextricably linked with the interests of subjects, who actually set them goals for the use of power resources, stabilization or destabilization political relations in a particular state, organization of election campaigns, information support for decision-making, coordination of positions in the development of state programs, etc. Generally speaking, the most common cause the formation and application of political technologies is the human need for a more rational, economical and effective way of realizing specific goals in the political space. In general, such motivation coming from the subject has a very positive consequences for society and the state. For the rational, and therefore more predictable, nature of the activities and political behavior of individual and group actors creates additional prerequisites for the streamlining and institutionalization of political processes, makes it possible to apply economical and resource-saving methods of managing the state and society, strengthening control and manageability of political processes, and promoting more effective political socialization of citizens, and therefore, ultimately - to optimize the relationship between government and society, to reduce political risks in the development of the state.

But keeping in mind this generally very positive orientation of political technologies, it should be borne in mind that they extend not only to conventional (legal), but also to non-conventional processes of the use of political power and the corresponding types of distribution of state resources. Because of this, technology also involves the use of techniques and procedures that may contradict political norms and traditions of society and may even be prohibited by law. Therefore, in the space of power there can be not only constructive ones from the point of view political interests society methods of influencing the government, but also techniques that violate the norms of political ethics (black PR, disinformation, manipulation, provocations, etc.) and even methods of illegal struggle for state power (terror, conspiracies, etc.).

Political technologies– a set of certain methods and techniques political activity. The most common political technologies include political consulting, election technologies, lobbying, and public relations technologies.

Political consulting carried out by large think tanks, exploring political processes and phenomena of social life.

Lobbying(from the English lobby - corridor, vestibule) - a system of means and factors for exerting the necessary influence on politicians and civil servants making decisions at the federal or regional level, in order to ensure the interests of relevant groups. Authoritative political or statesmen, representing the interests of pressure groups, can function as lobbyists. Lobbying is not only behind-the-scenes actions, but also a system of argumentation, mechanisms for preparation, consultation, assistance in the adoption of relevant laws, and participation in other socially constructive acts.

The “lobbying” influence of a pressure group depends on a number of factors: the degree of commitment of its members to their goals, the authority of the group, the ability to attract financial resources, geographic location, etc. Various groups pressure take the necessary actions to appoint authoritative and influential people sympathizers with their goals into positions related to the implementation of programs important to the groups. Such groups can be effectively involved, for example, in the elections of deputies, providing them with the material resources necessary for this purpose, and after the elections maintaining the necessary contacts with them.

Electoral technologies – a set of ways to influence the masses in order to influence their voting behavior and encourage them to cast their votes for a particular candidate. Election technologies are aimed at regulating the behavior of voters, appealing to the beliefs and positions of citizens, and their orientation towards certain values. Identify trends in the development of mass sentiment, find optimal combinations of implementation political program Specialists in public relations, communications, and image makers are called upon.

Public relations(English public relations - relationships with the public, public relations) - activities aimed at creating among the public a stable positive image of a particular organization, a candidate, a favorable attitude towards them through professional processing public opinion. In the political sphere, this is the corresponding activity of government bodies, parties, movements, electoral blocs, etc., often including individual elements of political manipulation of mass consciousness. The main goal of public relations- sway public opinion in favor of a particular organization.

Functions of public relations:

– identification and analysis of general trends in public opinion;

– development of a strategy for interaction with the public based on public opinion research data;

– formation favorable attitude the population both to the organization itself and to its activities;

– informing the public about the specific activities of an organization or person.