Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine

Tauride National University

them. V. Vernadsky

Test

By discipline

"Sociology"

Topic: “The role of the political system in the development of society”

Work completed

Student Babenko I.V.

Checked the work

Teacher ___________

_______________________

Simferopol, 2008

Plan

Introduction

2. The influence of society on the design of the political system

3. Functions of the political system in the life of society.

4. The need to legitimize political power

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

The subject of study in the test is sociology.

The object of study is the influence of the political system on the life of society.

The relevance of the study is obvious. Today's processes taking place in modern society, when people come out to the squares of Ukrainian cities and talk about the crisis of political power, about distrust in it, cannot leave anyone indifferent. Within the framework of a democratic state, the people are trying to express their disagreement with the construction of such a system of society, when the people work, and the results of their work are appropriated by the oligarchic elite.

The purpose of the work based on the studied methodological and periodic, educational literature characterize the object of study in the test.

To achieve this goal, it is planned to solve the following main tasks:

Define the composition and structure of the political system;

Reflect the influence of society on the construction of the political system;

Outline the functions of the political system in the life of society;

Point out the need to legitimize political power.

1. Content and structure of the concept “political system”

The political system includes the organization of political power, relations between the state and society, characterizes the course of political processes, including the institutionalization of power, the state of political activity, the level political creativity in society, character political participation, non-institutional political relations.

The political system of a society is one of the parts or subsystems of the overall social system. It interacts with other subsystems: social, economic, ideological, legal, cultural, forming its social environment, its public funds along with its natural circulation and natural resources (demographic, spatial-territorial), as well as the foreign policy environment. The main position of the political system in the structure of its external and internal environment is determined by the leading organizational and regulatory-control role of politics itself. The political system of society is determined by the class nature, social system, form of government (parliamentary, presidential), type of state (monarchy, republic), the nature of the political regime (democratic, totalitarian, despotic, etc.), socio-political relations (stable and unstable, moderate or acute conflict or consensus, etc.), political and legal status of the state (constitutional, with developed or undeveloped legal structures), the nature of political, ideological and cultural relations in society (relatively open or closed with or without parallel, shadow, marginal structures) , historical type of statehood, historical and national structure and traditions of the way of political life, etc.

The political system of society - the one that governs society - must be viable so as not to enter into long-term crisis states, with the stability of the functioning of all links and subsystems. The political system exists in political space society, which has territorial limits and is functional, determined by the scope of the political system itself and its components at different levels of political organization of society.

The political organization of society includes the distribution of elements of the political system, the definition of their functions and relations with society. The political system forms the so-called political society, that is, a set of people, social strata and groups endowed with political functions, forming political institutions, administrative apparatuses, authorities, political parties and movements, etc.

Of course, the political system of a society is a set of interacting spheres: institutional (political institutions), normative and regulatory (political regime), information and communication (political communications), etc. Political institutions are a type of social institutions. Each of the political institutions carries out a certain type of political activity and includes a social community, layer, group specializing in the implementation of political activities to manage society. Political norms regulate relations within the political system of society and between them, as well as between political and non-political political institutions. Material resources necessary to achieve the goals. In the political sphere, political institutions: the state, political parties, interest groups of a wide variety of social communities, layers that have certain goals and demands for political power (trade unions, youth and women's movements, creative unions and associations, ethnic and religious communities, various associations, etc. etc. Interest groups are voluntary associations, organizations created to express and represent the interests of the various segments of society included in them. Political institutions ensure the reproduction, stability and regulation of political activity, maintaining the identity of the political community even when its composition changes, strengthen social ties and intra-group cohesion, exercise control over political behavior, etc.

Political institutions are an important source of social and political changes, create a variety of channels of political activity, and form alternatives for social and political development. The leading institution of the political system, concentrating maximum political power, is the state. The state is the source of law and law, organizing the life of society and the activities of the state itself and its structures in the system of political and social relations. The state, the exponent of the interests and will of the economically dominant layer, protects its dominant position in society, protects the use of all resources: human, material, production in the interests of the development of society, etc.

The state of all times and types is characterized by a number of stable, general historical features and functions: mandatory formation ruling forces on one or another social and class basis, a process that in modern conditions tends to democratize due to political parties, social movements, electoral technologies of government, etc.); the presence of political organizations.

Political system, ramified power structures, expansion of political space beyond the borders of state territory; maintaining mutually beneficial relations with all states; maintaining internal peace and order, stability in society; regulation of social, class, national, economic relations, pursuit of welfare goals, etc.

In a political system, political parties, mass public organizations and movements, and interest groups are important. In democratic states, all political institutions are autonomous and successfully carry out their functions: they influence the formation of state and government structures, adjust political goals, and direct the political development of society. In authoritarian and totalitarian societies various associations and organizations are created to express and represent the interests of the people included in them. Political parties and mass public associations are strictly subordinated ruling elite, their natural functions are deformed.

A political regime is understood as a form of government that is characterized by greater mobility compared to relatively more conservative political institutions and depends on the balance of socio-political forces and political situation. The political regime determines the nature of the struggle for political leadership (free competition in elections, changes in leadership are carried out by co-optation, the presence of an opposition tamed and adapted to the regime, etc.).

All kinds of norms that determine the behavior of people in political life (their participation in the processes of putting forward demands, turning demands into decisions and implementing decisions, etc.) constitute the normative and regulatory sphere in the structure of the political system. Norms are the basic rules for citizen participation in all types of political process. Norms are divided into two types: norms-laws and norms-habits. The establishment of connections between the institutions of the political system and the coordination of their actions is carried out in the structure of the political system by the information and communication sphere and channels for transmitting information to the government (the procedure for hearing cases at open meetings of distribution commissions, confidential consultations with interested organizations, associations, etc.), and also the media (print, television, radio, etc.) A certain amount of knowledge and information, especially in the sphere of political life, is of great importance for citizens’ assessment of actions and events occurring in the political, economic and social sphere society. In different systems the position of the media is different: if in democratic societies The media are independent, but in totalitarian and authoritarian ones they are completely subordinated to the ruling elite.

2. The influence of society on the design of the political system

In a society of a political system, each person performs a certain socio-political role and implements policies. Political institutions exercise power, acting in close connection with other social institutions, observing established laws and norms. Individuals, social communities, political and social institutions are the main components of constructing a political system. Sustainable types of political activity, participation in elections to political authorities, lobbying, party activities, etc. Types of political activity also determine the presence of sustainable political roles, carried out socially according to the laws established in society and dictated by the needs of the dominant social strata and groups.

The set of political roles has the properties of a system: each element is functional and solves its own specific problems. Any political role has meaning and the possibility of implementation only in a single political space, because they are independent and influence each other. Each element of a political system is unique and does not replicate the properties of the entire system. Having certain advantages, the role-based idea of ​​the political system makes it possible to quite clearly define the types and patterns political behavior, the place and role of the individual in the political process, his ideas, preferences, goals and orientations, highlight his actively transformative beginning. The system of political institutions covers the entire field of political life. Power is exercised by the state, and the struggle for power is organized by political parties and movements, the participation of the masses in the formation government agencies regulated by the institution of elections, etc.

The opinions of sociologists on the design and structure of the political system do not coincide. Some consider it identical to the state and consider it as complex interaction government bodies and institutions. Others expand the boundaries of the political system at the expense of political parties and other political and mass associations participating in the process of forming institutions of political power. Still others include in the political system various opposition political parties and movements, removed from direct participation in the formation of power structures, etc. But the approaches are based on a narrow understanding of the political institution, on the identification of the political institution with the political organization of society, which, as a rule, is formalized both structurally and functionally.

Besides political associations many types of political activity that are stable in nature remain unformalized and represent an obligatory attribute of the political life of any society (rallies, demonstrations, protests, etc.). Participants in mass protests of the population are not bound by formal statutory relations and may never come together again in such a composition. But any slogan, any rally inevitably repeats certain norms and rules: a designated place for demonstrators, participation in the rally of people who share the goals and sympathize with the political views of the organizers, agreement with the put forward slogans, support for speakers, rejection of other views, etc. If someone breaks the rules, then various sanctions are applied to them: disapproving glances, criticism, hooting and even expulsion from the meeting, etc.

A rally is a specific informal type of political institution. Political institutions also include election campaigns, political demonstrations, pickets, compromises, etc. Of course, the political system includes the entire set of political institutions - formalized and informal, operating on an inconsistent basis, recreating a holistic picture of the political life of society.

The institutional approach to determining the essence of a political system is a fairly holistic view of the political sphere, revealing the differences in political systems in different countries. The presence of the institution of monarchy indicates a monarchical form of government, concentration executive power in the hands of the elected president - presidential republic etc. To determine the form of a political system, it is important not only the presence of certain institutions, but also the nature of their relationship. The preservation of the institution of monarchy in England does not indicate a monarchical form of government, because here there is executive, legislative and judiciary belong to the elected Prime Minister and Parliament. A parliamentary republic is distinguished simply by the presence of parliament as an institution of legislative power, its establishment of control over the executive branch, in particular, and the right to remove and confirm the government.

The problem of interaction and independence of political institutions is one of the most important in the analysis of political systems, due to the fact that the system is always something large, different from a simple set of its components. The system is distinguished by specific connections, relationships and interconnections between functioning elements. This difference allows us to consider the political system as communicative.

The interdependence of the elements of a political system is functional, capable of regulating and managing social processes, subject to the interconnected activities of its structures, each of which performs its own function. The political system that operates more effectively is one where the division of functions is clearly visible. If any political or social institution begins to engage in unusual functions, expand the scope of activity, or interfere with the functions of other institutions, then failures and disruption of the rhythm and efficiency of the system’s activities are inevitable. The assignment of the right to conduct public policy within the political system by one political party leads to the establishment of its dictatorship.

Dictatorship is unlimited political, economic and ideological power exercised by a strictly limited group of people led by a leader whose name or the socio-political idea used by him defines one or another type of dictatorial rule (absolutism, monarchy, Bonapartism, totalitarianism, authoritarianism, etc.). P.). The essence of dictatorship is the usurpation of political power, the spread of domination to all spheres of society. The ability of the political system to restore equilibrium is suppressed and it is forced to modify the structure and adapt to internal tension. After 1917 in Russia, the Bolshevik Party monopolized power through strengthening the role of punitive authorities and weakening the representative power of the Soviets. Any attempts to change the system of relationships based on subordination were suppressed. The bodies of representative and executive power were transformed into obedient executors of the will of the political party. However, the strength and vitality of such a political system is illusory. And it is enough for the symptoms of a crisis in the ruling political party to appear, and the entire system of power begins to fall apart.

Democracy is one of the forms of government of the political and social organization of society and the state. Democracy as a way of exercising power presupposes the legal equality of the main political institutions, based on a clear division of their functions. The institution of general elections makes it possible to determine the composition of representative bodies, and no other political institution can protest or change the results obtained. The activities of a political party are limited to representing the interests of social communities, a layer, carrying out election campaigns, coordination of the activities of parliamentarians elected from parties, etc. Attempts to impose the point of view of a political party on the non-party masses are suppressed. The state is built on the principle of division of functions between legislative, executive and judicial bodies. The democratic political system is quite stable, not resorting to violence or suppression of other institutions. Parliamentary and government crises are overcome not by assigning their functions to any other institutions, but by updating their personnel and restoring the lost ability to act independently. Institutional equality makes it possible to avoid the dependence of the entire political system on any one government agency or political party.

In political socialization and attracting people to participate in political life, in the formation by social communities, layers and individuals of demands that correspond to their real interests and transferring them to the center of the Political struggle or into the sphere of political decision-making; lobbying interests, that is, bringing into a uniform set of private demands placed on government structures; in political communications. Secondly, the functions of the political system include the development of norms and laws, the application of norms, monitoring compliance with norms, etc.

3. Functions of the political system in the life of society

The function of political socialization and attracting people to participate in the political life of society is characteristic of all modern political systems. It promotes a widespread spirit of participation in politics among all people of society. If in democratic countries, where the function of socialization and attracting people to participate in political life is implemented by non-governmental, non-state structures, although even there the influence of state structures on the process of socialization is obvious, and in totalitarian and authoritarian societies the function of socialization and politicization is actually the prerogative of the state, therefore it bodies and participants in political socialization (schools, associations, media, etc.) are controlled by the state and cultivate the “spirit of violence.”

The spread of the “spirit of violence” in the political life of all people in democratic societies transforms the individual from a subject into a citizen. But the process of politicization and transformation of a subject into a citizen in countries with totalitarian, authoritarian regimes is absent.

The function of political interests - in countries with a democratic regime, where there is official respect for public opinion and adherence to the doctrine of freedom of association, association of interests, etc., are considered as connecting links between the citizen and the state. People often express interests that are not adequate to the interests and goals of a political party. Interests are formed, their articulation occurs, emerging from the control of the government and the state, political parties. And if the political party system is able to form the real interests of social communities, layers and various groups, then it is capable of transforming demands into alternatives to state policy.

Political communications is the process of transmitting information and beliefs. Political scientist Karl Deutsch defines the political system as a specific communicative system, reveals not only the process of formation and introduction into consciousness political information, but also shows the social consequences of introducing new information into the political system.

Directing and implementing policy typically requires a vertical flow of information from the people to the government and from the government to the people. A horizontal flow of information between levels and authorities is also necessary.

Spontaneous actions to seize power in the process of communication are clothed in a certain form of relationships between people, respect for power is formed, and statehood is created. Typically, the rulemaking process involves a number of steps: developing policies and selecting general goals, developing solutions and specific rules to achieve the goals. This function is performed by legislative, executive and judicial bodies. State policy does not end with the adoption of laws. In the decision-making process, the function of “applying norms” plays an important role, which is performed not only by executive bodies and administrative structures, but often also by legislative and legal structures. Monitoring compliance with laws and actions in order to determine the fact of a violation of the law and impose appropriate punishment on the violator, etc. is also important.

The functioning of the political system is determined by three levels: the capabilities of the political system; conversion process and maintaining the model of the political system and adaptation (process of socialization and recruitment). The nature and content of the capabilities of the political system are different and cover various aspects of its functioning.

The ability of a political system to draw human and material resources (people's talents, support, funds, finances, etc.) for certain purposes creates an extractive (auxiliary) opportunity. Ability to control behavior individuals and social communities, layers and groups in society, to regulate the activities of government structures and political parties in society creates a regulatory opportunity.

The ability to create, place and distribute material and intangible values ​​in society is determined by distribution opportunity. The ability of the political system to respond to the demands of the “output” of the corresponding policy and to respond to the diverse demands emanating from various social communities and groups creates a realizing opportunity. The symbolizing opportunity is closely related to the need for legitimacy and support, with the ability of the political system to develop popular beliefs, views, myths, creating intelligible, symbolizing slogans, to manipulate them in order to maintain the necessary legitimacy to achieve goals.

The second level of functioning of the political system reflects what is happening in it itself, that is, we mean the conversion process of transformation. Conversion processes (or functions) are a way of converting input factors into output ones. The consensual process of one political system can be analyzed and compared with the process of another system according to Gabriel Almond’s scheme, which provides six main functions: the formation of demands (articulation of interests); formation of norms of behavior of people in political and public life; regulation of norms; monitoring and regulating the norms of people's behavior; communication.

The third level of functioning of the political system determines the functions of people maintaining the model and adaptation, first of all. the process of socialization and recruitment of people's talents, the involvement of new social strata and groups in political life, the political system is being improved and improved.

4. The need to legitimize political power

Legitimation is a procedure for public recognition of any action of political power, actor, event or fact; in politics - its recognitions, explanations and justifications.

The legitimacy of a political phenomenon does not mean its legally formalized legality, and therefore legitimation should not be confused with legalization, and legitimacy with legality, that is, with legality.

Legitimation does not have legal functions and is not a legal process. Legitimation approves politics and power, explains and justifies political decisions, the creation of political structures, their change, renewal, etc. Legitimation is designed to ensure obedience, consent, political participation, without coercion, and if it is not achieved, the justification of such coercion, the use force and all other means at the disposal of power.

IN political history Often there is obedience of the masses, which is difficult to explain by any psychological circumstances. People themselves contribute to the rise to power of cruel rulers, demand strong power, encourage state intervention in all spheres of public life, and on the contrary, there are many cases of rejection by the masses democratic forms organization of political life, distrust in democratic institutions, in leaders who defend the liberal principles of individual freedom. One example in the history of the fall of the Weimar Republic in Germany is the rise to power of Hitler.

There are many examples in history when peoples are forced to submit to power, despising it in their souls, and deviating from it at the slightest opportunity. In such cases, the ruling social forces inevitably resort to pressure and the use of force. Fear becomes the main form of manifestation of people's attitude towards power. American sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset considers the understanding of the problem of legitimation of politics depending on the effectiveness of the political system; he argues that the stability of any political system depended entirely on its legitimacy and effectiveness. Legality, from the point of view of Seymour Lipset, has an evaluative nature, which is associated with the ability of the system to form and maintain among the masses the belief that the functioning of existing political institutions is the most rational. Efficiency is predominantly “instrumental” and means satisfaction with the processes of managing a social system.

One of the signs of legitimacy is the emotional and trusting attitude of people towards the authorities, based on faith in a special purpose, in its ability to solve problems and goals that are vital for society and every person, in the need to use and apply a variety of, including violent, methods to achieve goals. Behavior based on legitimacy is different from simple social behavior, which is based on custom or a combination of interests. The legitimacy of a policy owes its essence to a number of circumstances that objectively accompany human society in its socially heterogeneous state.

The emotional attitude of people towards power is diverse and reflects the individual uniqueness of each person. However, the legitimacy of politics is determined by the general trends in the state of relations between the government and the population. Such tendencies are recognized: the predominance of fear, hopeless humility and faith in the expediency of the existing political regime, conviction in its necessity. The most important indicator of legitimacy is the predominance of the second tendency - belief in the expediency of the political regime. Psychological foundations Beliefs in the appropriateness of the policy and the regime implementing it are also ambiguous.

Faith can be formed in the mind as a response to people’s ability to imitate, their desire to follow habitual types of behavior and established stereotypes of perception. The irrational type of faith manifests itself in blind adherence to the principles established in society. Trust in power is formed under the influence of habit, fear of change, and fear of the difficulties of adapting to the new political order. This is true, says Prof. Azer Efendiev, ensured the viability of many political regimes, supported their legitimism. Research in social and political anthropology shows that the so-called traditional societies with their structure, a regulated system of “relations, fairly rigid structures, and the despotism of rulers existed over long historical periods thanks, first of all, to one adherence to established stereotypes of behavior, faith in the inviolability and legitimacy of the power structure. This is an imitation faith that ensures the constant reproduction of previously established relations between rulers and the population. Faith was protected by social norms and law.

With the advent of the era of individualism, which requires a person to live by his own mind, faith began to acquire an increasingly rational character. The attitude towards power is no longer determined by the expectation of ensuring the usual way of life, but by the correlation of personal and group interests with the possibilities for their implementation by existing state-political structures. A “meaningful” attitude towards power, which presupposes the individual making decisions in accordance with state policy and his personal aspirations and goals, the intention to clearly fix the limits state power, the desire to influence responsible political decisions affecting his fate, etc., required the rational foundations of the game, becoming a conscious choice of the optimal power structure. Faith was formed as a result of the development of thought, the individual’s making a difficult decision that the appropriate type of power would effectively protect his interests.

The second sign is recognition by mass consciousness of the significance, value of power itself and the appropriate form of its construction. Power is not a necessary evil, but a reality that allows you to more rationally solve personal problems, ensure the necessary order in society, and protect people’s lives. A political regime is considered legitimate if its institutions are considered to have significant value. It is human nature to look at the world through the prism of one’s own value system, which is based on the interests of the individual, the collective, society, and the state. Everyone judges by the ability of the authorities to organize the life of society and thereby expresses their attitude towards the authorities and its institutions. The value system plays a huge role in the motivational structure and personality. A value system can also stimulate other actions of people who want to achieve the establishment of a fair order, understood in full accordance with existing orientations, and form either a trusting-supportive or a critical-negative attitude towards existing institutions. The legitimacy of a political regime is established only when the institutions of power and government leadership pursue policies that meet the needs of the population and are approved by the mass consciousness. The emergence of a crack between the socio-political orientations of the majority of the country's population and the practical affairs of administrative bodies can result in a serious crisis of power. At the heart of the crisis of power lies the loss ruling circles understanding the aspirations, requests, aspirations and expectations of many people, that is, a system of social orientations.

The third sign of legitimacy is the approval by the masses of the policies pursued by the political and government leadership, agreement with the main goals, methods and means of management. The sign of approval of a policy reveals the subjective attitude of people towards a particular government, politician. During a period of relative prosperous social economic development Usually there is an attitude of agreement and approval. But as the crisis in the economy grows and the living standards of the country's population fall, approval is replaced by discontent and the loss of legitimacy of the political regime. If, within the existing system, the masses find other leaders with whom they pin their hopes, then crisis phenomena do not mean that dissatisfaction with the political activities of leaders is equivalent to dissatisfaction with the political system.

Conclusion

In the process of working on the test topic, I made the following conclusions and generalizations.

The political system of society is an integral, ordered set of political institutions, political roles, relationships, processes, principles of political organization of society, subordinate to the code of political, social, legal, ideological, cultural norms, historical traditions and guidelines of the political regime.

The political system of society - the one that governs society - must be viable so as not to enter into long-term crisis states, with the stability of the functioning of all links and systems.

Individuals, social communities, political, social institutions, the function of political socialization and attracting people to participate in the political life of society is characteristic of all modern political systems. It promotes a widespread spirit of participation in politics among all people of society.

The legitimacy of a political regime is established only when the institutions of power and government leadership pursue policies that meet the needs of the population and are approved by the mass consciousness.

List of sources used

1. Volkov Yu.G., Mostovaya I.V., Sociology - M: Gardariki, 2001;

2. Grevtsov Yu.I., Sociology // Course of lectures, M: Legal Center, 2004

3. Filatova O.G., Sociology, M: Publishing House, 2003

4. Sociology: the science of society / Ed. Andrushchenko V.P., - X: Rubicon, 2007;

5. Lavrinenko V.N., Sociology, M: Unity-Dana, 2007.

The political system of a society is one of the parts or subsystems of the overall social system. It interacts with other subsystems: social, economic, ideological, legal, cultural, which form its social environment, its public means, along with its natural environment and natural resources (demographic, spatial-territorial), as well as the foreign policy environment. The main position of the political system in the structure of its external and internal environment is determined by the leading organizational and regulatory-control role of politics itself. The political system of society is determined by the class nature, social system, form of government (parliamentary, presidential), type of state (monarchy, republic), the nature of the political regime (democratic, totalitarian, despotic, etc.), socio-political relations (stable and unstable, moderate or acute conflict or consensus, etc.), political and legal status of the state (constitutional, with developed or undeveloped legal structures), the nature of political, ideological and cultural relations in society (relatively open or closed with or without parallel, shadow, marginal structures) , historical type of statehood, historical and national structure and traditions of the way of political life, etc.

In a society of a political system, each person performs a certain socio-political role and implements policies. Political institutions exercise power, acting in close connection with other social institutions, observing established laws and norms. Individuals, social communities, political and social institutions are the main components of constructing a political system. Sustainable types of political activity, participation in elections to political authorities, lobbying, party activities, etc. Types of political activity also determine the presence of sustainable political roles, carried out socially according to the laws established in society and dictated by the needs of the dominant social strata and groups.

The set of political roles has the properties of a system: each element is functional and solves its own specific problems. Any political role has meaning and the possibility of implementation only in a single political space, because they are independent and influence each other. Each element of a political system is unique and does not replicate the properties of the entire system. Having certain advantages, the role-based idea of ​​the political system makes it possible to quite clearly define the types and patterns of political behavior, the place and role of the individual in the political process, his ideas, preferences, goals and orientations, and highlight his actively transformative principle. The system of political institutions covers the entire field of political life. Power is exercised by the state, and the struggle for power is organized by political parties and movements, the participation of the masses in the formation of state bodies is regulated by the institution of elections, etc.

The political system of society is a set of institutions, such as state bodies, political parties, movements, public organizations, ordered on the basis of law and other social norms, within the framework of which the political life of society takes place and political power is exercised.

The concept of "political system" shows how the regulation of political processes, the formation and functioning of political power occurs. This concept is used to characterize the relationship between state and society, between various social actors at the non-state level.

Thanks to the activities of political institutions and structures, and people fulfilling the political roles of “managers and the governed,” the political system has an impact on various aspects of the life of society. The political system regulates the production and distribution of goods between social communities based on the use of state power, participation in it, and the struggle for it.

According to the definition of the American political scientist G. Almond, the political system includes social and economic structures, historical traditions and values ​​of society, the cultural context of its development. "System" in political science means: relationships, actions and structures that influence the process of making and implementing political decisions.

Any social system is a holistic, ordered set of elements, the interaction of which gives rise to a new quality that is not inherent in its parts. The category “political system” allows us to understand the political interests of classes, social groups, nations, and to understand the relationship and interdependence of political phenomena reflecting these interests.

The most important element of the political system of society is the state. The statement made by F. Engels in his work “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State” remains true that the signs of any state are the presence of an apparatus of power, territory and taxes.

What is a state? According to Aristotle, the state arises from the consciousness of the common good and is created primarily in order to live happily. T. Hobbes, on the contrary, saw the discipline of fear as the basis of the state and called the state a person, individual or collective, that arose by virtue of an agreement between many people so that this person would provide them with peace and universal protection. B. Spinoza held similar views!" G. Hegel saw the beginning of the state in violence2, F. Engels and V.I. Lenin saw it as a tool, a machine for the exploitation and suppression of one class by another. M. Weber calls the state the relationship of domination of some people over others, based on legitimate (considered legal) violence.2

The class approach to the problem of the state was leading in Soviet social science. So, short dictionary in sociology offers a definition according to which the state is a set of interconnected institutions and organizations that manage society in the interests of certain classes, suppressing class opponents

Within the modern approach to the problem, the state is understood as “the main institution of the political system of society, organizing, directing and controlling the joint activities and relationships of people, social groups, classes and associations. The state represents the central institution of power in society and the concentrated implementation of policy by this power”4.

The state differs from other social institutions:

• * the obligatory presence of a social class basis for the ruling forces represented by social groups, political parties, social movements, etc.;
• * the presence of a special apparatus of power, represented by central and peripheral bodies:
• * monopoly on non-economic coercion;
• * presence of state territory;
• * the sovereign right to publish laws binding on citizens, to conduct domestic and foreign policy;
• * exclusive right to collect taxes, issue banknotes, conduct budget policy, etc.

The question of the origin of the state and its role in the life of society is of great theoretical, scientific and practical importance.

The materialist understanding of history traditionally sees the state as a superstructure over the economic base and connects its emergence with the results of the social division of labor, the emergence of private property and the split of society into classes. Investigating this issue, F. Engels wrote that in the conditions of the emergence of private property and the continuously accelerating accumulation of wealth, “there was a lack of an institution that would perpetuate not only the beginning division of society into classes, but also the right of the propertied class to exploit the have-nots and the domination of the former over the latter. And such an institution appeared. The state was invented"5

The concrete historical material now available to scientists allows us to deepen and clarify previous views on the emergence of the state. And here we are faced with the problem of the so-called “Asian mode of production”. This formulation belongs to K. Marx. Comparing the features of the development of productive forces in Europe and the East, K. Marx drew attention to the lack of eastern countries private property: direct producers represented by rural communities are opposed not by private owners, but by the state; strict centralized control by the state affected the peculiarities of the functioning of the social structure and political relations in these countries. Power, such as that of a viceroy, provided access to privileges, surplus product, and luxury. However, whoever lost her, by the will of the despot, most often lost not only his wealth, but also his life. The numerous merchants were in the same position, not interested in expanded reproduction and preferring to live off the profits they received. In other words, private property was only conditional and entrepreneurship in the economic sphere was not welcomed. The administrative apparatus controlled most economy, the overwhelming number of peasants remained state-owned.

The special role of the state in the East led to the weakness of the individual, his suppression by the collective and at the same time the increasing role of corporate structures such as clans, castes, sects, communities, rural communities, etc., which included both the poor and the rich. Their main goal was to protect their members from state despotism. Corporate ties, secured by traditions, smoothed out social antagonism, gave rise to relations of paternalism and gave stability to the existing social structure. Conservatism of corporate relations contributed to political stability even in cases of change of dynasties, for example, in medieval India.

The Soviet orientalist L. S. Vasiliev, in his work “Problems of the Genesis of the Chinese State,” specifically examined the problem of the formation of state power in the conditions of the Asian mode of production. Based on a painstaking analysis of extensive concrete historical material, he came to the conclusion that in in this case the state arises before classes as a result of the objective need to solve large-scale economic problems, in particular those related to irrigation, the construction of strategic roads, etc.6

Familiarity with the history of the emergence of the state greatly helps to clarify the issue of its functions. The Marxist approach to this problem is purely class-based: the main function of the state is to protect the interests of the ruling classes. All other functions, both external and internal, are subordinated to this main one. It follows, firstly, that the state can be a supra-class structure only as an exception, when the struggling classes achieve such a balance of power that state power receives a certain independence in relation to them.7 "Secondly, it is assumed that the transfer of political power into the hands of working class and poor peasantry will eventually lead to the withering away of the state

The modern state fulfills whole line various functions:

• * protection of the existing political system;
• * maintaining stability and order in society;
• * preventing and eliminating socially dangerous conflicts;
• * economic regulation;
• * carrying out domestic policy in all its aspects - social, cultural, scientific, educational, national, environmental, etc.
• * protecting the interests of the state in the international arena;
• * national defense, etc.

Of particular interest today is the question of the role of the state in regulating economic relations. In the absence of private property (Asian mode of production, administrative command system), this role is simple and understandable - direct directive leadership, and in developed forms - on the basis of detailed plans. A different, more complex picture emerges in conditions of developed market relations. On the one hand, the stronger the state intervention, even if it is indirect, for example, through economic legislation and taxes, the lower the level of entrepreneurial interest and the less desire to risk capital. On the other hand, state intervention in economic processes at the level of society as a whole is, of course, necessary to solve the problems of technical re-equipment of production, correct structural policy, financial recovery of the economy, etc. The performance by the state of other functions listed above is also of great importance .

It is important to solve such problems in the political life of society as government structure, form of government and political regime.

* The question of government structure is primarily related to the distribution of legislative power between the center and the periphery. If legislative functions belong entirely to the center, the state is considered unitary, but if territorial units have the right to adopt their own laws, the state is federal. The federation makes it possible to overcome the contradiction between the desire of the center for domination and the desire of territorial units for separatism.

The form of government is related to the nature of the exercise of state power, be it a monarchy or a republic. If a monarchy involves the concentration of all power in the hands of one person, representing ruling dynasty, and power, as a rule, is inherited, then republican rule means recognition of the sovereign right to power of the people and their elected representative bodies.

The question of which form of government is better, a republic or a monarchy, is largely rhetorical. Experience modern Europe shows that many developed and politically stable countries are monarchies. American researcher S. Lipset draws attention to the mediative, i.e. reconciling role of the monarchy in relation to all layers modern society.

In the same countries, he emphasizes, where as a result of the revolution the monarchy was overthrown and the orderly succession was disrupted, the republican regimes that replaced the monarchy were unable to gain legitimacy in the eyes of all important sections of the population until the fifth post-revolutionary generation or later.

In other words, the monarch plays the role of a moral arbiter and acts as a guarantor in the eyes of his subjects. national interests. At the same time, in a number of countries republican uniform public administration functions quite successfully.

A political regime is usually understood as a set of means and methods of exercising state power. We can distinguish such political regimes as totalitarianism, authoritarianism, liberalism and democracy. Of particular interest today are totalitarianism and democracy.

Totalitarianism (from Latin totalis) -- political system, the distinctive feature of which is control over all aspects of society - political, economic and spiritual. Even the thoughts of citizens do not go unnoticed, as evidenced by the appearance of the term “dissident.” Totalitarianism is like the despotism of the 20th century. There have been brutal regimes before, but totalitarianism is a relatively new phenomenon. This is explained by the fact that complete control over citizens became possible only with the advent of such means mass communication, like the press, radio and television. A totalitarian political regime puts the individual in a more powerless position than under the conditions of eastern despotism; he remains, as it were, alone with the state machine and submits to it.

The signs of a totalitarian regime are: a rigid pyramidal structure of power (we can say that society is governed as an organization in which there are no feedback connections), mass terror, a constant search for internal and external enemies, and the elimination of horizontal structures in society. And finally, dominance official ideology imposed by the ruling regime.

The psychological roots of totalitarianism were studied, in particular, by Z. Freud in his work “Mass Psychology and Analysis of the Human Self.” Totalitarianism does not simply rely on the consent of the masses to obey. He forms a special psychology, his own style of thinking, which is characterized by the cult of power, disrespect for human rights, the search for simple solutions, dichotomous thinking, etc.

The opposite of totalitarianism is democracy (from the Greek emos - people and cratos - power). In its origin, this is a purely European phenomenon. It originated in Ancient Greece expressed the interests of a fairly numerous system of freedom of owners. The attitude towards it in the history of social and philosophical thought was not unambiguous from the very beginning. Plato was disapproving of her, Aristotle was reserved. The development of market relations in modern times has put on the agenda the question of a state structure in which the rights of owners - the bourgeoisie - would be protected from the arbitrariness of the authorities. J. Locke and C. Montesquieu, developing the concept of human rights based on the theory of the social contract, came to the conclusion that compliance with laws is the most important guarantor of political freedom. In a state, as J. Locke believed, “the legislative power must of necessity be supreme, and all other powers in the person of any members or parts of society flow from it and are subordinate to it”2. Developing Locke's ideas, C. Montesquieu argued that the rule of law can only be ensured by the separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial, so that they “could mutually restrain each other.” On the contrary, their combination in the same hands gives rise to arbitrariness.

Without dwelling on the problem in detail democratic rights and freedoms, democratic procedures for the exercise of power, we note that the most important prerequisites and at the same time a consequence of a democratic political regime are civil society and the rule of law.

The idea of ​​civil society dates back to antiquity, in particular to Cicero, who became interested in the difference between the citizen himself and ordinary people. This problem was later developed by T. Hobbes, J. Locke, J.-J. Rousseau, G. Hegel and K. Marx. In the modern interpretation, civil society is “a society with developed economic, cultural, legal and political relations between its members, independent of the state, but interacting with it, a society of citizens of high social, economic, political, cultural and moral status, creating together with state developed legal relations."

In line with the ideas of M. Weber, civil society is a cognitive abstraction, an ideal type, very far from reality. But the idea itself is not without meaning. Its essence lies in the optimal combination of three main components: power, society and people. It is assumed that the state exercising power will be a legal one, whose activities are based on the rule of law. Society must also become different. It is characterized by developed horizontal connections, the presence of all kinds of unions and associations, mass movements, parties, and the desire to limit the power of the state through its decentralization and local self-government. And finally, very special requirements are placed on the citizen. Citizens are disciplined not because of fear, but because of consciousness, deep inner conviction, they conscientiously fulfill their duties and zealously protect their rights, and are uncompromising towards corruption, bribery, etc. In other words, these are people with a high legal consciousness, moral, political and legal culture.

There are no words, the picture turns out to be blissful, pleasing both the mind and the heart. But in many ways it is utopian, since, firstly, in this kind of society everyone should be owners and live in abundance. However, there is reason to doubt that a rich society without poor people is possible. At least throughout conscious history, humanity has not been able to curb the passion for profit of some, the desire for parasitism of others, and as a result, it has never been able to solve the problem of poverty. Secondly, it is not clear how exactly, how to turn all people into law-abiding citizens.

From the end of the 18th century. the idea of ​​democracy in its Western European understanding is criticized both “from the right” (E. Burke, A. Tocqueville, I. Srlonevich, etc.) and “from the left” (K. Marx, V.I. Lenin, L.D. Trotsky , “new left”, etc.).

In its attitude towards bourgeois democracy, Marxism proceeds from the primacy of workers' rights. If this democracy was accepted, it was only as a convenient form of struggle for power with the bourgeoisie, within the framework of capitalist society.

Criticism from the “right” is based on different methodological principles and is constantly evolving. If the traditional right based its criticism on the thesis about the impossibility of replacing quality with quantity - a competent aristocratic minority with the votes of millions - ignorant, in their opinion, voters, then today the argument has become more complicated. Liberal (i.e., based on the concept of human rights) and egalitarian (based on the idea of ​​universal equality) are contrasted with the so-called organic democracy, which involves relying not on the individual or the masses, but on the people as a whole. According to the authors of this concept, it is this form of democracy that presupposes the “participation” of the people in their political fate. At the same time, it is emphasized that organic democracy requires homogeneity of society as the basis of “brotherhood”. Hence the conclusion is drawn that the liberal-democratic and totalitarian-egalitarian models of democracy prevailing in the West are not capable of transitioning to organic democracy. It is a different matter in the East, where the “collective unconscious” in the form of popular or national self-awareness is more developed than in the West, where individualistic rationalistic psychology predominates.

Why do people regardless of their social status have a keen interest in politics? Why, say, does an ordinary engineer or doctor, worker or rural worker care who works in the highest government body? Why do they sit for many hours in front of TV screens, watching parliamentary debates, discussing bills, participating in referendums, going to rallies?

IT IS USEFUL TO REPEAT QUESTIONS:

On political activity and political ideology.

You know that politics must be active in nature, connected with the issues of conquest, retention and exercise of state power, and the political interests of large social groups.

People's attention to politics has always varied, as has the degree and form of political participation. However, complete indifference to political problems This is an infrequent phenomenon, apparently because the development of society and, therefore, the life of every person, and sometimes her fate, largely depends on politics.

According to psychologists, participation in politics satisfies a person’s natural need for communication, but at a more high level. Such communication gives a powerful impetus to personal development.

POLITICAL LIFE AS A SYSTEM

Political life at first glance it seems like an endless chain of chaotic, rapidly changing and unforeseen phenomena and events. People tried to comprehend it, as you know, back in ancient times. However, only in the 20th century. came the understanding of politics as a single, complexly organized mechanism of the political system. Its structural elements (components) include: 1. Organizational (state, political parties, socio-political movements). 2. Normative (political, legal, moral standards and values, customs and traditions). 3. Cultural (political ideology, political culture). 4. Communicative (from Latin Communicatio - connection, communication) (forms of interaction, connections, communication within the political system, as well as between the political system and society).

In the process of interaction of all these structural elements, political power is exercised. Let us recall that political power is the process of developing, adopting and implementing political decisions (laws, doctrines, treaties, etc.). On their basis, influence is carried out on certain aspects of social life, that is, political administration. Its purpose is to ensure stability and development of society, to provide joint activities people have a consistent character. This is precisely the main purpose of the political system as an integral mechanism for the implementation of political power and political governance.

Each element of the political system has its own characteristics and makes a certain contribution to the overall goal. Let's take a closer look at their essence and role.

THE STATE IS THE MAIN INSTITUTION OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM

The concept of "state" is used in a broad and narrow sense. In the first meaning, the state is identified with society and is interpreted as a state-organized community - a union of people living in a given territory. In the second, it is, as it were, separated from society and considered as a political organization that differs from other, say, political parties in certain ways.

The main feature of the state is sovereignty, that is, supreme power within the country and independence in relations with other countries. Being sovereign, state power, firstly, extends to the entire population, to all non-governmental organizations. Secondly, it is endowed with the exclusive right to issue laws and other regulations that are binding on all, to administer justice, to establish and collect taxes and fees. Thirdly, the state of the masses has at its disposal special bodies and institutions, including coercion (army, police, prisons, etc.).

The presence of monopoly spinning wheels and powerful organizational, financial, and military levers of outpouring on society puts the state in a special position. It acts as the main institution of the political system.

The main directions of the state’s activities in guiding society are embodied in its functions (think about what socially significant functions of the past are inherent in the state at various stages of social development. How and why did they change?).

Today, the most significant functions of democratic states include: ensuring economic development, social protection, protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens, law and order, democracy (internal), as well as the defense of the country and mutually beneficial cooperation with other countries (external). Functions, as is known, characterize the internal economic, social, legal, etc.) and foreign policy of the state. Thus, the economic function is expressed in regulation economic processes through taxes, loans, creating incentives for economic growth, and the like; social function - in providing social guarantees youth, elderly people, disabled people, etc.

So, we're talking about not at all about gross government intervention in daily life people, not about the subordination of society to the state, has often happened in history different countries(give examples). On the contrary, these functions are unique obligations of the state to society and are reflected in the structure and activities of the state apparatus.

The state apparatus is a complex of state bodies and institutions through which state power and public administration are exercised.

Government bodies include: legislative (representative), executive, judicial. Everyone is endowed with competence (a set of rights and obligations), authority (the right to act on behalf of the state within the limits of their powers) and solves specific problems. So, legislatures(parliaments: The Verkhovna Rada in Ukraine, Congress in SSL. National Assembly in France) develop and adopt laws, the norms of which regulate social relations and consolidate public policy. For example, the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine established the foundations of economic policy focused on the development of a market economy. The following normative acts gave the general Political line a specific character. Executive bodies (governments) implement laws. The judiciary administers justice (court) and, together with the prosecutor's office, oversees the implementation of laws that are part of law enforcement agencies.

Let us emphasize that everyday practical work to transform the adoption of legislative decisions belongs to the executive (managerial) bodies. They usually accompany the organization of implementation of the law with administrative measures. For example, implementing the requirement of the Law of Ukraine “On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities”. The Government of Ukraine has established disadvantages for monopolists tax rates, restrictions on production have been introduced individual species products and the like. Executive bodies enshrine their orders in by-laws and monitor their implementation. In addition, relying on the notary, tax police, and state security services, they carry out a number of law enforcement functions: ensuring law and order, legality, public interests, and the rights and freedoms of citizens.

The executive branch, within the framework of its powers, carries out all types of activities of the state apparatus: making decisions, organizing their implementation, and monitoring their implementation. Therefore, administrative bodies are called the state apparatus in the narrow sense. At the same time, their administrative (executive and administrative) nature is emphasized.

Currently, in all industrial developed countries the world's state administrative apparatus is a powerful and extensive system of ministries, departments, and management services state enterprises, specialized committees, commissions and the like. According to available data, it employs 8% of the population as civil servants. Among them there are officials (managers, bosses) who, due to their positions, are endowed with greater powers than ordinary employees.

Civil servants work on a permanent basis and professional basis. Unlike high-ranking officials (presidents, deputies, ministers), they do not depend on elections and government crises, and therefore form a stable backbone of the state apparatus. From the professional qualities of civil servants, their compliance with discipline, legal and ethical standards depends on both the development and implementation of political decisions, the effectiveness government controlled. Therefore, today in many countries of the world there is a rather strict competitive selection of people for public service.

Let us emphasize that the state, being the main institution of the political system, is designed to express and protect the interests not of a narrow circle of people (the political elite), but of generally significant social interests and needs of citizens.

The word “politics” comes from the Greek word Politika, which means “state affairs”, “the art of government”.

The political superstructure did not always exist. Among the reasons for its occurrence is the polarization of society, leading to the emergence of social contradictions and conflicts that need to be resolved, as well as the increased level of complexity and importance of managing society, which required the formation of special organs of power separated from the people. The most important prerequisite for politics was the emergence of political and state power. Primitive societies were non-political.

Modern science offers various definitions politicians. Among them are the following:

1. Politics is the relationship between states, classes, social groups, nations arising from the seizure, exercise and retention of political power in society, as well as relations between states in the international arena.

2. Politics is the activities of government bodies, political parties, public associations in the sphere of relations between social groups (classes, nations), states, aimed at integrating their efforts with the aim of strengthening political power or conquering it.

3. Politics is the sphere of activity of groups, parties, individuals, the state, associated with the implementation of generally significant interests with the help of political power.

The political system of a society is understood as a set of various political institutions, socio-political communities, forms of interactions and relationships between them, in which political power is exercised.

The functions of the political system of society are varied:

1) determination of goals, objectives, ways of development of society;

2) organization of the company’s activities to achieve its goals;

3) distribution of material and spiritual resources;

4) coordination of the diverse interests of the subjects of the political process;

5) development and implementation into society various standards behavior;

6) ensuring stability and security of society;

7) political socialization of the individual, introducing people to political life;

8) control over the implementation of political and other norms of behavior, suppression of attempts to violate them.

The basis for the classification of political systems is, as a rule, the political regime, the nature and method of interaction between government, the individual and society. According to this criterion, all political systems can be divided into totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic.

Political science identifies four main elements of the political system, also called subsystems:

1) institutional;

2) communicative;

3) regulatory;

4) cultural-ideological.

The institutional subsystem includes political organizations (institutions), among which the state occupies a special place. Among non-state organizations, political parties and socio-political movements play a major role in the political life of society.

All political institutions can be divided into three groups. The first group - strictly political - includes organizations whose immediate purpose of existence is the exercise of power or influence on it (the state, political parties and socio-political movements).

The second group - non-proprietary-political - includes organizations operating in the economic, social, cultural spheres of society (trade unions, religious and cooperative organizations, etc.). They do not set themselves independent political goals and do not participate in the struggle for power. But their goals cannot be achieved outside the political system, so similar organizations must participate in the political life of society, defending their corporate interests, ensuring that they are taken into account and implemented in politics.

Finally, the third group includes organizations that have only a minor political aspect in their activities. They arise and function to realize the personal interests and inclinations of some layer of people (interest clubs, sports societies). They acquire a political connotation as objects of influence from the state and other proper political institutions. They themselves are not active subjects of political relations.

The main institution of the political system of society is the state. Its special place in the political system is predetermined by the following factors:

1) the state has the broadest social basis and expresses the interests of the bulk of the population;

2) the state is the only political organization that has special apparatus control and coercion, extending its power to all members of society;

3) the state has a wide range of means of influencing its citizens, while the capabilities of political parties and other organizations are limited;

4) the state establishes the legal basis for the functioning of the entire political system, adopts laws defining the procedure for the creation and activities of other political organizations, establishes direct bans on the work of certain public organizations;

5) the state has enormous material resources to ensure the implementation of its policies;

6) the state plays an integrating (unifying) role within the political system, being the “core” of the entire political life of society, since it is around state power that the political struggle unfolds.

The communicative subsystem of the political system of society is a set of relationships and forms of interaction that develop between classes, social groups, nations, and individuals regarding their participation in the exercise of power, the development and implementation of policy. Political relations are the result of numerous and varied connections between political subjects in the process of political activity. People and political institutions are motivated to join them by their own political interests and needs.

There are primary and secondary (derived) political relations. The first include various shapes interactions between social groups (classes, nations, estates, etc.), as well as within them, the second - relations between states, parties, and other political institutions that reflect in their activities the interests of certain social strata or the entire society.

Political relations are built on the basis of certain rules (norms). Political norms and traditions that define and regulate the political life of society constitute the normative subsystem of the political system of society. The most important role is played by legal norms (constitutions, laws, other legal acts). The activities of parties and other public organizations are regulated by their statutory and program norms. In many countries (especially in England and its former colonies), along with written political norms, unwritten customs and traditions are of great importance.

Another group of political norms is represented by ethical and moral norms, which enshrine the ideas of the whole society or its individual layers about good and evil, truth, and justice. Modern society has come closer to realizing the need to return such moral guidelines as honor, conscience, and nobility to politics.

The cultural-ideological subsystem of a political system is a combination of different contents political ideas, views, ideas, feelings of participants in political life. Political consciousness subjects of the political process operate at two levels - theoretical (political ideology) and empirical (political psychology). To forms of manifestation political ideology include views, slogans, ideas, concepts, theories, and political psychology includes feelings, emotions, moods, prejudices, traditions. They have equal rights in the political life of society.

In the ideological subsystem, a special place is occupied by political culture, understood as a complex of typical for a given society, ingrained patterns (stereotypes) of behavior, value orientations, and political ideas. Political culture- this is the experience of political activity transmitted from generation to generation, which combines knowledge, beliefs and behavior patterns of individuals and social groups.