What institutions determine the political structure of the country. Political system and political institutions. Formation of political institutions
For a long time this section was called "State structure" or "Forms of state structure" in all domestic textbooks and manuals on state law. However, the term "state structure" is very ambiguous, and it was differently understood and understood both in everyday speech, ordinary, and in the speech of professional lawyers. Historians and sociologists have understood and understand the state structure as something that denotes a state system or a system of state bodies. The term "state structure" in the sense in which it is understood by state scholars, means the territorial and political structure of the state. Obviously, due to the fact that there is a different understanding of the same term, in recent years other, possibly more accurate, concepts have been used to illuminate this range of issues. For example, such a designation as "the territorial-political organization of the state" or "the territorial organization of public authority" is used. In any case, we are talking about the same thing. All these concepts denote the structuring of the state, its division into parts, the correlation of the power of these parts with the central power.
We have chosen a certain middle term - territorial-political structure- and we believe that, on the one hand, this is part of the tradition, on the other hand, it is a more accurate concept that adequately reflects the essence of the material that will be presented below.
So, summing up, how can you determine the territorial and political structure of the state. What is behind this concept? Territorial political structure - it is the territorial and political structure of the state, i.e. a certain procedure for dividing the territory into parts, their legal status and the relationship of the central authorities with the authorities of the constituent parts, i.e. state or administrative legal units.
It is generally accepted that there are two main forms of the territorial and political structure of states - unitary state and federal state ... In addition, there are other state-legal formations that are included in this part of constitutional law: confederate state and autonomy.
Most of the world's constitutions regulate the issues of the territorial organization of the state. In some constitutions, the form of the territorial-political structure is clearly named and it is fixed there that the state is, say, a federation, while others state that they have a unitary state. Some constitutions do not directly indicate the structure of their state, but this becomes clear from the content of other articles or from the analysis of state legal practice.
Some constitutions refer their country to one form of government, while another really exists (Switzerland), and some countries cannot be attributed to any form at all and they are called hybrid forms. One way or another, this kind of problem is an indispensable part of the constitution and constitutional law. The constitutions can fix the issues of the correlation between central and regional power, the competence of various parts of the state, the correlation of their powers, the procedure for considering controversial issues, etc. can be fixed.
Institute of Territorial and Political Structure includes the following group of legal subinstitutions:
a) norms that secure a specific form of the territorial-political structure, i.e. federation, unitary state or autonomous units;
b) the norms establishing the competence of the structural parts of the state;
c) the norms establishing the definition of the state territory, state-legal space;
d) norms that consolidate the relationship between the central government and dependent territories, which are not directly part of the state, but are connected with it by certain legal ties.
A number of constitutions contain a list of all subjects of the federation. Some list the autonomous units that make up the country, some only designate the types of constituent parts of the state that may have unequal status, i.e. more or less scope of competence (state, autonomy, administrative unit), this designation is accompanied by a list of issues related to the competence of these state and legal units.
Most constitutions emphasize the indivisible character of the state and prohibit any encroachment on the integrity of the state. These issues also relate to the institution of the territorial-political structure. It should be noted that not only the form of government depends on a number of conditions that exist in a given country, but also the form of the territorial and political structure in each particular country depends on historical, social, national, geographical conditions, as well as on established traditions. Often, the existence of some form of division of the state or the existence of some autonomous unit cannot be explained from the point of view of the theory of state law - this is the specificity of a particular state, which exists as something given, and attempts to theoretically substantiate such phenomena do not carry a substantive beginning.
We also note that in most states there is no direct connection between the territorial-political structure and the national-ethnic composition of the country's population. Unitary states can be multinational, federal ones can be both multinational and single-national. Such factors are not directly related, as was once believed in Soviet literature.
Speaking about Political Institutions in modern Russia, I would like to start with the definition itself.
What are Political Institutions?
Political institutions are, in particular, the state and its structures, the electoral system, political parties, public opinion, and the media. Any political institution consists of a structure (organization) and an idea that these structures serve.
The state is the most significant system of a political institution.
The main institutions of the political system of modern Russian society are: presidency; institute parliamentarism represented in Russia by the Federal Assembly; institute of executive authorities represented by the government; institutions judicial authorities; institute citizenship; institute of universal suffrage; institute of political parties and public organizations; institute local government... Political institutions, in turn, include relevant organizations, institutions that solve specific tasks within the framework of institutional relations.
Likewise, Political institutions are subdivided into institutions of power and institutions of participation. The former include the institutions that exercise state power at various hierarchical levels, the latter include the institutions of participation, the structures of civil society. The totality of political institutions constitutes the political system of society, which is a certain integrity, organic interaction of subjects of politics, other elements of political reality.
Another important political institution is civil society, within which the activities of non-state political institutions are carried out.
Summing up, I would like to start with the fact that the search for a formalized model of political power capable of reproducing and maintaining an ideal society originates in ancient philosophy. Plato, Aristotle and other ancient Greek philosophers tried to answer the question of which political institutions are able to provide the best type of society and personality. Comparative analysis of legislation (constitutions), typology of political regimes, identification of various forms of government, possible combinations of political institutions, terminological identification of political phenomena and facts - these are the range of studies of political philosophy of that period. However, it should be admitted that the institutional analysis (using modern terminology), for all authors, was of a rather limited and descriptive nature and did not pretend to build a strict normative-conceptual apparatus. And yet it must be admitted that the beginning of institutional research was laid in the era of antiquity.
Smoothly moving to political institutions in modern Russia, we note
The transformation of the political system of Russia can be subdivided into three main periods associated with priorities in the development of the country:
2. Transition from oligarchic to state capitalism, strengthening of statehood (1998-2004).
3. Formation of political institutions designed to ensure Russia's claims to the status of a "great power" and the implementation of the idea of sovereign democracy (since 2005).
Those states that, following their historical ambitions, seek to act independently or have a dissenting opinion on certain issues, are still forced to adjust their behavior, proceeding from both their priorities and the consolidated international influence.
The vertical of power pushes democracy aside, but as a result of an increase in the standard of living of Russian citizens who are shaping civil society, there will increasingly be a need to influence political processes, which, ultimately, can become a guarantee of the formation of democratic political institutions.
And modern Russia is striving for this.
Completed by student 422 academic gr. Plakhin Alexander
7. Political system and political institutions
Entering into political power relations or getting involved in political struggle, people create special political structures - institutions, organizations, relations (parliament, government, parties ...), which arise as a result of the objective process of complicating political life. Political structures are stable and can be reproduced in the actions of many generations (parliament in England has existed since the 13th century).
1. The concept of a political system. Political institutions are the basic structural elements of a political system, therefore it can be defined as an ordered set of political institutions and organizations, their interconnectedness, interdependence. The main norms defining the forms of mutual dependence of institutions and organizations in the political system of the Russian Federation are formulated in the Constitution. The political system is not just a set of institutions, but their integral interaction. The political system of modern Russian society is a set of interconnected, interdependent, currently operating specific political institutions and political organizations. The political system has, along with (1) institutional level, (2) systemically normative... This level sets the normative space that determines the algorithm of action for the institutional subsystem. It defines the functional purpose of political institutions, mutual rights and obligations. Its purpose is to maintain the institutional unity of the political system. The third level of the political system is embodied in (3) constitutional law... The political system is an integral, organizationally formalized and constitutionally regulated set of state and public organizations designed to attract citizens to the exercise of state power. Each society has its own political system. Its specificity is determined both by the set of political institutions and the system-normative level, i.e. developing between institutions, relations and connections (differences in the powers and functions of institutions). The process of forming a political system is influenced by many factors: traditions of political life; value orientations, beliefs, stereotypes dominating in the mass consciousness; ideological views of the ruling group; socio-economic interests of the main classes; the severity of the political struggle; social tension; the nature of the country's economic development and much more. That is why the political system of each society has its own unique look. The political system of modern Russian society is represented by the main political institutions determined by the Constitution (presidency, parliamentarism, executive and judicial power, citizenship, universal suffrage, political parties and public organizations, local government, etc.). Each political institution, in turn, includes the corresponding organizations and institutions that solve specific problems. The political system of Russia is characterized by a redistribution of power in favor of the president (a semi-presidential republic), it is still young and is going through a period of its formation and strengthening.
2. The concept of a political institution. Political Institute is a stable type of social interaction that regulates a certain segment of relations of political power in society. In order for political relations to acquire a stable character, it is necessary: 1) that in society there are clear norms, rules governing people's behavior interacting. For example, if we are talking about the institution of parliamentarism, then it should be a set of norms prescribing certain models of behavior for parliament members, obliging the latter to take part in legislative activities, communicate with voters, publicly defend their position, etc. Changing the personal composition of the parliament during the next elections does not lead to a change in these norms, no matter who the deputy is, no matter what views he adheres to, he will follow the basic norms and confirm his status. As long as the institution of parliamentarism exists, there will always be people in society who perform the functions of legislators; 2) stability of institutional interaction is necessary support with sanctions that apply to those who try to violate the accepted rules and regulations. These sanctions can be "soft", i.e. exist in the form of public censure, remarks, and may become "harsh" when coercion is applied against the offender; 3) that people interacting, considered institutional norms as significant, necessary, natural... In this case, adherence to institutional norms becomes routine for them. People have the ability to assimilate in the course of training, communication with each other, the norms of political power interaction. They learn about possible sanctions in case of non-compliance with the rules and strive to structure their behavior in such a way as to avoid collision with force. Regularly reproduced norms are becoming so commonplace that people do not even think about their alternatives, i.e. norms are accustomed and become a sign of normal life. So, political institutions are stable types of political relations, the reproduction of which is ensured thanks to: a) the norms governing the nature of interaction; b) sanctions that prevent deviation from normative patterns of behavior; c) adjusting the established institutional order. The listed properties are usually called the attributes of the institution. It is they who make political institutions objective, self-reproducing social formations that do not depend on the will and desire of individual individuals, prompting people to orient themselves in their behavior to prescribed patterns of behavior, to certain norms and rules.
3. Types of political institutions. In modern society, the following political institutions can be distinguished: Institute for Parliamentarism regulates relations in modern society regarding the creation of a representative body of state power, the implementation of its legislative function. The institution of parliamentarism is a stable relationship in which people inevitably enter, acquiring the appropriate status. The institution of parliamentarism is aimed at: a) the creation of basic legal norms - laws that are binding on all citizens of the respective country; b) representing the interests of various social groups in the state. The normative regulation of the institution of parliamentarism concerns, first of all, issues of the competence of parliament, the procedure for its formation, the powers of deputies, the nature of their interaction with voters and the population in general. Institute of Parliamentarism is represented in Russia The Federal Assembly, which is the representative and legislative body of government. The Federal Assembly consists of two chambers - the Federation Council and the State Duma. The main function of the State Duma is legislative activity. Laws adopted by the State Duma are submitted within five days for consideration to the Federation Council, which may reject the law proposed by the State Duma. In this case, a conciliation commission can be created to overcome the disagreements that have arisen. In case of disagreement with the decision of the Federation Council, the State Duma may adopt a law if, upon a second vote, at least two-thirds of the total number of deputies vote for it. Institutions of the executive represent a complex system of interaction between the bodies, officials in charge of the current management of public affairs and the population of the country. The main subject making the most responsible decisions within this type of political power relations is either the head of state and government (Egypt), or only the head of state, the president (USA), or only the government (Italy). The institution of executive power, represented by the government, implements a unified financial, credit and monetary policy in the country, as well as a unified state policy in the field of culture, education, health care, social security, ecology, manages federal property, implements measures to ensure state security, public order, rights and freedoms of citizens. Presidency Institute (the head of state) ensures the sustainable reproduction in society of relations that allow the leader of the state to speak on behalf of the people, to be the supreme arbiter in disputes, to guarantee the integrity of the country, the inviolability of the constitutional rights of citizens. Civil Service Institute regulates the professional activities of people belonging to a special status group. In Russia, this regulation is carried out on the basis of the law "On the Fundamentals of the Civil Service of the Russian Federation", which determines the legal status of civil servants, the procedure for passing civil service, types of incentives and responsibilities of employees, grounds for termination of service, etc. Judicial Institutions regulate the relations that develop about the need to resolve various conflicts in society. Unlike the legislative and executive authorities, the court (with the exception of judicial precedent) does not create regulations and does not engage in administrative and administrative activities. However, the adoption of a judicial decision becomes possible only in the field of political power, which ensures the strict subordination of specific people to this decision. The institutions of the judiciary in the Russian Federation are a system of constitutional, civil, administrative and criminal proceedings. Courts of general jurisdiction consider cases related to violation of laws by citizens, arbitration courts are considering economic disputes. constitutional Court determines the compliance of the adopted normative acts with the Constitution. According to the constitution (Art. 118.) "Justice in the Russian Federation is administered only by the court", "The creation of extraordinary courts is not allowed"; (Art. 119) "Judges can be citizens of the Russian Federation who have reached 25 years of age, have a higher legal education and work experience in the legal profession for at least five years"; (Article 120) "Judges are independent and are subject only to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and federal law." Judges are irreplaceable and inviolable. The proceedings in all courts are open. Institute of Citizenship defines the mutual obligations of the state and the citizen in relation to each other. A citizen is obliged to abide by the constitution and laws, pay taxes, in a number of countries there is also universal conscription. The state, in turn, is called upon to protect the rights of a citizen, including the right to life, security, property, etc. Within the framework of this institution, the procedure for acquiring citizenship, the conditions for its loss, the citizenship of children when the parents' citizenship changes, etc. are also regulated. Electoral Law Institute regulates the procedure for holding elections to legislative bodies of various levels, as well as elections of presidents in those countries where it is provided for by the constitution. Institute of Political Parties ensures the orderliness of relations that develop during the creation of political organizations and in relations between them. The more stable the institutional relations in society, the higher the predictability of the political behavior of individuals. Political institutions structure the field of political power relations, they make the interactions of people quite definite and stable. Political institutions include relevant organizations, institutions that solve specific tasks within the framework of institutional relations. The type of institutions, the nature of the dependencies that develop between them allow us to say that the political system in Russia is being formed as a democratic, pluralistic, legal one.
All political institutions can be roughly divided into three groups. The first group - proper-political - includes organizations whose direct purpose of existence is to exercise power or directly influence it (the state, political parties and social political movements).
The second group - improperly political - includes organizations operating in non-political spheres of life (trade unions, religious, cooperative, corporate organizations, etc.). They do not set themselves independent political tasks, do not participate in the struggle for power. But their goals cannot be achieved outside the political system, therefore such organizations are forced to participate in the political life of society, defending their corporate interests.
The third group includes organizations that have only an insignificant political aspect in their activities. They arise and function for the realization of the personal interests and inclinations of any stratum of people (interest clubs, sports societies, amateur groups). They acquire a political connotation as objects of influence from the state, parties, movements. 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:
The presence of the broadest social basis;
- the possession of a special apparatus of control and coercion, which extends its power to all members of society;
- using a wide range of means of influencing citizens;
- a monopoly on lawmaking, including in the field of the functioning of the entire political system;
- possession of huge material resources, allowing to ensure the implementation of their policy;
- performing an integrating role, functions of uniting society around the most significant, national, general civil problems.
Institutions of the political system
The subjects of the political system are the state, political parties, social and political movements, trade unions, creative associations, lobbying organizations, church associations, the media, etc.In order for this or that phenomenon or structure to be attributed to the structural elements of the political system of society, it is necessary that they be political at least to a minimum, i.e. they must:
A) express the political interests of a certain class or any other social community;
b) be a participant in political life and bearer of political relations;
c) have a direct or indirect relationship to state power - its conquest, organization or use, and not necessarily interacting with state bodies, but also opposing them;
d) be guided in their daily activities by political norms or rules that have developed in the depths of the political life of a particular country.
Given the degree of involvement in political life, the exercise of power, the following groups of political organizations are distinguished:
1. Political organizations - directly and directly exercising political power: the state and some public associations. The immediate goal of their creation and functioning is politics. It consists in the formation and implementation of the policy of a particular class, in the political education of various strata of society and in the implementation of the political interests of a particular social group in life.
2. Non-political public associations - develop and arise not for political reasons, the purpose of their functioning is not politics.
The central element in the political system is always the state. The state is often defined as a “politically organized society”. They say about him that it "expresses the political status of a people organized in territorial isolation" and acts "as an organization, a system of institutions that has supreme power over a certain territory."
Historically, the state can be considered the first political organization. Throughout the history of the development of society, the state is changing in its essence, form and content, but unlike other elements of the political system - political parties and public organizations (which may appear at certain stages in the development of the political system of society and, having completed the tasks assigned to them, disappear ) the state is inevitably preserved.
The place occupied by the state in the political and public life of any country is due to the following:
1. The state acts as an alternative to the fruitless struggle between various social groups, strata, classes with their conflicting interests.
2. The state can be viewed as an organizational form, as a union of people united for cohabitation.
3. Among the factors that led to the emergence of the state, an important place is occupied by the social stratification of society. The Marxist characterization of the essence of the state as a political organization of the economically ruling class is most clearly manifested when class tension arises in it, capable of blowing up society, leading it into a state of chaos. In ordinary normal periods, general social ties prevail in society, which are more constructive than class antagonisms.
4. The state became the first result of the political activity of people, organized in any way and representing the interests of certain social groups and strata. This led to his claims to the universality of coverage of political phenomena, and the signs of territoriality and public power made the state's real significance as a form of political community of various social and national formations, as well as various organizations and parties expressing their interests.
5. The state is the most important integrating factor, linking the political system and civil society into a single whole. By virtue of its social origin, the state takes care of common affairs.
6. The political system, due to the mobility of economic, social and other relations, the variability of the ideological and psychological spheres is in constant motion. When social emergencies arise (natural disasters occur, the form of government or political regime changes), a special role in resolving them is assigned to the state.
Political parties and movements in the political system of society.
In the modern world, political public associations are public associations, the charter of which, among the main goals, enshrines participation in the political life of society and in elections to state and local government bodies, participation in the organization and activities of these bodies. These are political parties, political movements and some public associations.
Political parties play a significant role in the life of modern Russian society - associations created for the participation of citizens of the Russian Federation in the political life of society through the formation and expression of their political will, participation in public and political actions, in elections and referendums, as well as in order to represent interests citizens in government and local government bodies.
Political parties are a special type of public associations. This approach is generally recognized both in foreign and domestic legal literature and legal practice.
Political parties are the spokesmen for the interests and goals of certain classes and social groups, take an active part in the functioning of political power or exert an indirect influence on it. A characteristic feature of the activities of parties is their desire to integrate various social forces around their ideals and programs, to exert an ideological influence on the population, on the formation of its political consciousness.
The parties operating in the modern world are very diverse, often opposite in their social essence and functions, ideals and program guidelines, internal structure and place in the political system, etc. For example, on the basis of various typological criteria, parties are distinguished conservative, liberal, reformist and revolutionary; representative and mobilizing; democratic and totalitarian; open and closed, avant-garde and parliamentary, etc.
The goals and objectives of a political party are set out in its charter and program.
The main goals of a political party are:
Formation of public opinion;
- political education and upbringing of citizens;
- Expression of views of citizens on any issues of public life, bringing these views to the attention of the general public and public authorities;
- nominating candidates for elections to legislative (representative) bodies of state power and representative bodies of local self-government, participation in elections to these bodies and in their work.
Political (social) movements should be distinguished from political parties. Political parties have state registration, a charter, a program that defines the principles of the political party, its goals and objectives, as well as methods for achieving goals and solving problems, membership and membership fees, a strictly defined procedure for entering and leaving the party, etc. A political movement is a non-membership mass public association pursuing political goals supported by members of the public movement. You can join a political movement at any time, be a member of this movement at any time at your discretion and leave it at any time at your own request (for example, the political movement "Women of Russia").
Non-partisan political associations in the political system of society.
Public associations can be created both for political, relatively political, and non-political purposes. Non-party associations participate in the development and implementation of state policy, delegate their representatives to a number of state bodies. Many issues of the life of society, its political system are resolved by state bodies taking into account their opinion or jointly with them.
Public associations build their relations with the state from the standpoint of cooperation, mutual assistance, coordination and leadership by the state of the activities of some public organizations, supervision, etc. At the same time, the internal independence of public organizations, their relative independence in solving issues on the basis of the principles of self-government and initiative is preserved. ...
It should be noted that public associations operate within the framework of the legal regime established by the state. First of all, this is expressed in the granting of the constitutional right to citizens to unite in public organizations, their use of broad political freedoms: speech, press, meetings, rallies, street marches and demonstrations. The rights and legitimate interests of public organizations are protected by state bodies (courts, prosecutors, etc.) that assist in the implementation of some of their decisions.
Inappropriately political organizations include those organizations that arise and develop not due to direct political, but due to economic and other similar reasons. The direct goal of their creation and functioning, in contrast to political organizations proper, is never politics. These institutions, which include trade union, cooperative and other organizations, carry out their main activities, respectively, in the production, social, cultural, commercial and other spheres of society. They do not set themselves the immediate tasks of actively influencing the government for political purposes. The political activity of these organizations does not form the basis of their functioning and acts; in this sense, if not secondary, then at least not decisive for them.
Non-political associations.
Among the numerous organizations that have only an insignificant political aspect in their content, there are associations that arise and function on the basis of purely personal inclinations and interests of a particular group of people to engage in certain activities.
Non-political public associations include:
Trade unions, religious, charitable organizations, national and cultural autonomies, public funds, public institutions, public initiative bodies;
- associations, the charters of which provide for membership in them only on professional, national, ethnic, racial or confessional grounds;
- associations created for the realization of amateur and other non-political interests.
They acquire a political connotation in their activities only as objects of influence on them by state and other political bodies and organizations by their nature, but by no means as subjects, carriers of political power and corresponding political relations.
Political institutions of society
The political institutions of society in the modern world are a certain set of organizations and institutions with their own subordination and structure, norms and rules that regulate political relations between people and organizations. This is a way of organizing the life of society, which allows you to embody certain political ideas due to a specific situation and requirements. As you can see, the concept is quite broad. Therefore, you should consider its features in more detail.The political institutions of society are divided into institutions of participation and power. The second includes organizations that exercise state power at different hierarchical levels, and the first includes civil public structures. The institutions of power and participation represent a political social system that has a certain integrity and organically interacts with the subjects of politics and other elements of political activity.
The mechanism of political influence is determined through the activities of various actors, one of which is political institutions. The state is the main governing body that exercises full power through the means and methods it uses. It is the state that embraces the entire society and its individual members through its activities, is fully capable of expressing the interests of different social groups and classes, forms the administrative apparatus and regulates various spheres of life. Law and order occupy a special place in the exercise of power by the state. And the rule of law ensures the legitimacy of the policy pursued, which is facilitated by the institutions of power.
Another basic institution of the political system is civil society itself, within whose framework the activities of parties and other organizations are carried out. During the modern period, both the state and society were formed in Europe and the United States of America, which happened under the influence of modernization changes. Since that time, the main political institutions of society have been operating. The state here acts as a direct power, possessing an absolute monopoly for coercion and even violence in a certain territory. And civil society is a kind of antithesis.
The founder of institutionalism, professor of law from France Maurice Oriou, viewed society as a collection of a huge number of different institutions. He wrote that social and civil mechanisms are organizations that include not only people, but also an ideal, an idea, a principle. The political institutions of society extract energy from their members precisely thanks to the above elements. If initially a certain circle of people unites together and creates an organization, then by the time when everyone entering it is imbued with ideas and awareness of unity with each other, it may well be called an institution. It is the directional idea that is the hallmark of such a phenomenon.
Institutionalists identified the following political institutions of society: corporate (which include the state, trade associations and societies, trade unions, the church) and the so-called proprietary (legal norms). These both types are characterized as a kind of ideal models of social relations. These political social institutions differ in the following: the former are incorporated into social collectives, while the latter can be used in any associations and do not have their own organization.
The focus was on corporate institutions. They have many common features characteristic of autonomous associations: a guiding idea, a set of regulations and hierarchies of power. The task of the state is to control and direct the economic and social life of society, while remaining a neutral nationwide mediating force to maintain the balance integrated into a single system. Today Russia's policy follows precisely this progressive direction.
The political institutions of society are the vehicle through which power is exercised. They characterize the interaction of associations of the state and citizens, determine the effectiveness of the system of political organization of society. The political system is a combination of all these factors. Its functional characteristic is the political regime. What it is? This is a set of characteristic political relations for certain types of state, the means and methods used, the established and well-established relations between society and state power, the existing forms of ideologies, class and social relations. There are three main regimes, depending on the degree of social freedoms of the individual and the relationship between society and the state: authoritarian, democratic and totalitarian.
The main institutions of the political system of society and their interconnection are best traced by the example of democracy, which is a certain form of organization of public and political life, which is characterized by the possibility of the population choosing various alternatives of social development. Usually, all political institutions are included in the democratic process, since it is this regime that requires maximum social and political activity from all segments of the population, and it is open to any options for social change. Democracy as such does not require a radical change of the ruling political parties for this, but such a possibility undoubtedly exists. Political parties, social movements and socio-political organizations in this regime are distinguished by a huge number and variety, therefore democratic societies are always characterized by uncertainty, since political and social goals, in their essence and origin, are constantly variable. They always turn out to be extremely controversial, generate resistance and conflicts, and are subject to permanent changes.
This term can be found virtually everywhere in political science. But what does it mean? The rule of law is the most important democratic institution. In it, the actions of the authorities are always limited by moral, legal and political frameworks. The political institutions of society in a state governed by the rule of law are focused on human interests, create equal conditions for all citizens, regardless of nationality, social status, status, religion, skin color, and so on. Constitutionalism within the framework of such a state occupies a special place and is a stabilizing factor that provides a certain predictability of the policy pursued by the authorities. It is the priority of the principle of law, and not of such a factor as force, that is the starting point for constitutionality. We can say that the main institution of the political system of a legal state is the law itself, which acts here as the only and main instrument and regulates various aspects of social life.
Political institutions of society often experience a problem in interacting with public opinion, this is especially true during the period of transformation and changes in the system of the vertical of power. At this time, the question of the need to recognize new and old institutions arises sharply, and this rarely increases the role of the very opinion of society regarding the expediency and necessity of the existence of these institutions in general. Many political parties and social movements do not cope with these problems.
There are two directions in this issue. First, new institutions do not immediately gain recognition and support of public opinion. Secondly, without carrying out large-scale campaigns to explain their activities in the media, without a key factor of support from already established and influential political elites and forces, new institutions cannot make their way. For post-authoritarian countries in their striving for democratization, the problem of the effectiveness of such phenomena as the political institutions of society is also relevant. This creates a vicious circle. New political democratic forces cannot immediately become effective, since there is no necessary support from the masses and elites, and they cannot receive support and recognition of legitimacy, since in the eyes of the broad masses they are ineffective and unable to help solve the problems facing society. This is exactly what Russia's policy is "sinning" with at this stage.
Analyzing the legal political institutions of society, it becomes clear that they become really effective as a result of a very long process of adaptation and development in accordance with the traditions of society. For example, it is worth talking about the high democracy of Western countries only starting from the twentieth century. The development and establishment of new social and political institutions occurs in three main stages. The first is the formation and formation, the second is its legitimization and recognition by society, the third is adaptation and the subsequent increase in efficiency. It is the second phase that takes the longest time, and the probability of a rollback to the first phase is high. As the historical experience of "democratic construction" shows, the key problem is giving a social orientation and meeting the interests of the general public.
The sovereignty of the entire people is embodied in the state through a certain representative body that expresses the collective will of all voters. It is the parliament that is the most important democratic institution within the rule of law, without which democracy is inconceivable in general. Characteristic features of parliament: collegial decision-making and elective composition. The deputies who are elected to its composition are direct representatives of the will of the people and are guided by state and public interests.
Parliament performs a lot of important functions, but the main ones can be called:
Legislative, since only parliament has the power to pass laws that are binding and universal;
- controlling, which is expressed in monitoring the government and regulating its actions (approval of members, listening to reports, etc.).
Political social institution
All political processes are carried out through political institutions. The main function is to regulate a very wide range of political relations between social groups and national communities, as well as between states. The most important political institutions of society include the institutions of political power, law and ideology. They manifest themselves in the activities of state, legislative and executive authorities - parliament, government, local authorities, law enforcement agencies, as well as in the activities of political parties and the media, primarily the press, radio and television.Non-main political institutions include, for example, the institution of forensic examination, passport registration, legal proceedings, legal profession, jury, judicial control, presidency, etc. Each of these political institutions has its own specific functions, directions of ensuring the activities of one or another link of the political system. Ultimately, the system of political institutions is designed to ensure the normal functioning and development of the entire political life of society, and thus the implementation of the political interests of all its social groups and national communities, this requires flexible activity of the political institutions themselves, their ability to ensure the combination of political interests of all members of society, to solve political problems based on compromises between different political forces and, when necessary, show firmness and determination in upholding the fundamental interests of the whole society.
If this happens, it means that political institutions are coping with their function. If the political institutions of a given society are imperfect, then they cannot solve the problems of its development in accordance with the existing social realities, they are unable to manage the ongoing political processes.
Destructive processes damage the interests of large masses of people. In addition, destructive processes (destructive) can lead not only to the loss of the viability of the institution, but in general to the destruction of the existing statehood and thereby to irreversible deformations both in the political, and in the socio-economic and spiritual life of society.
The state as a political institution
The state is the main institution of power in the political system of a particular society, a set of institutions and organizations that have supreme power in a certain territory. The predecessors of the state were various forms of social self-regulation and self-organization of people - traditions, norms, customs, clan and tribal formations characteristic of the primitive communal system.Different theories give different explanations for the reasons for the emergence of the state: in theological - the will of God; in the contractual - the power of reason, the desire to organize social life; in the materialistic - socio-economic factors; in the theory of conquest - military-political factors, etc.
State signs:
Public power, materialized in the governing bodies and extending over the entire territory of the country, for all citizens (government, bureaucratic apparatus, army, police, etc.);
monopoly right to issue laws and legal acts binding on the entire population;
the system of taxes, taxes, loans necessary for the material support of state policy;
territory - the space that the jurisdiction of the state extends to;
sovereignty, that is, the supremacy of state power within the country and independence in international relations;
the monopoly on coercion and the relevant authorities for its implementation (army, police, security services, courts).
The functions of the state are the main directions of activity in solving the problems facing it. They can be classified according to different criteria: depending on the duration - into permanent and temporary; depending on the meaning - into major and minor, minor; depending on the scope of implementation - into internal and external.
Traditionally, the functions of the state are divided into internal and external. Internal include: functions of protecting the existing political system, economic and social system, human rights; economic and organizational function; cultural and educational function; ecological function. External functions - defense of the country, protection of its interests in the international arena, participation in the international division of labor.
Depending on the nature of the structure and provision of human rights in the development of the state, two global stages are distinguished - traditional and constitutional.
Traditional states arose and existed mainly on the basis of customs. Power over subjects in them was not institutionally limited, and citizens were not equal. Traditional states are primarily monarchies.
The constitutional stage is associated with the emergence of the first constitutions that were the result of the French Revolution and the United States' War of Independence. This stage in the development of the state is characterized by the legal delineation of its powers and the presence of institutional guarantees of human rights.
The completeness of the process of forming a constitutional state is characterized by the concept of a legal state.
The modern model of the rule of law is characterized by:
The universality of the right, equally extending to the authorities and the citizen;
the rule of law;
observance of the rights and freedoms of the individual in accordance with the standards enshrined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
mutual responsibility of the state and the individual;
separation of powers and their interaction through a system of "checks and balances";
obedience to the law of citizens;
action in society of democratic principles, the most important of which is “everything that is not prohibited is allowed”.
The modern rule-of-law state is social, that is, it seeks to provide every citizen with decent living conditions, social security, complicity in government, and, ideally, equality of life chances and opportunities for personal self-realization.
In the functioning of modern states, several trends interact - statist and de-etatist, integration and disintegration. The statist tendency manifests itself in an increase in the role of the state as a regulatory and integrative instrument of society, a de-etatist tendency in the activation of civil society, strengthening its control over the state, expanding the influence of political parties and interest groups on the state. The trend of integration is manifested in the creation of economic, political and military associations (NATO, EU, ASEAN, etc.), the trend of disintegration - in the disintegration of a number of states (USSR, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia).
The possibilities of states in pursuing an independent policy are limited by the processes of globalization - the intensification of interaction between members of the world community, the progressive permeability of interstate borders, the formation of a single and universal society, etc. The growing gap between de jure sovereignty and sovereignty de facto forces states to delegate their powers not only to supranational structures, but also "down" - to regional and municipal structures.
States are traditionally classified according to two criteria - forms of government and forms of territorial structure. The form of government is understood as the organization of the supreme state power, the system of relations between its bodies with each other and the population. The form of state structure reflects the territorial structure of the state, the nature of the relationship between central, regional and local authorities.
Forms of government are divided into monarchies and republics according to the method of organizing power and its formal source. In a monarchical form of government, the source of power is one person and power is inherited. In the republic, the highest authorities are formed on an elective basis.
Monarchies are of two types - absolute and limited, constitutional. In absolute monarchies, the only bearer of the sovereignty of the state is the monarch and there are no representative institutions (Saudi Arabia, Brunei). In constitutional monarchies, along with the monarch, other supreme state bodies act as bearers of sovereignty, limiting his power (Great Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Spain, Japan).
Republics are divided into three types - parliamentary, presidential and mixed (semi-presidential), depending on who forms the government, to whom it is accountable and controlled. In presidential republics (USA, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia, Syria, etc.), this role is played by the president, in parliamentary (Germany, Italy, India, Turkey, Israel, etc.) - by parliament, in mixed (France, Finland, Poland, Bulgaria, Austria, etc.) - jointly the president and parliament.
Russia is also close to the presidential-parliamentary type of republics. According to the Constitution, the President is elected by the population through a two-round majority system, has the right to issue legislative acts, appoint the Prime Minister (with the consent of the State Duma) and cabinet members. At his discretion, he can dismiss the government and, under certain circumstances, has the right to dissolve the State Duma (Articles 111 and 117 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The Duma can demand the resignation of the government from the President.
Systems of power with the institution of the president, similar to the Russian one, function in Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan and Armenia.
The main forms of the national-territorial structure are unitary, federal and confederal.
A unitary state is distinguished by a single constitution, a single system of supreme authorities and legislation, and a single citizenship. From the point of view of the internal structure, unitary states are centralized (mainly small countries - Greece, Denmark, Ireland, Iceland, Portugal, Sweden, etc.) and decentralized, with a wide autonomy of regions within the framework of powers delegated to them by the central authorities ( Italy, Spain, France).
A federation is a stable union of state entities, independent within the competences distributed between them and the center, with their own authorities, often constitutions (along with the union) and dual citizenship. The federations now include Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Russia, USA, Germany, Switzerland. The federation is characterized by the interaction of two opposite tendencies - towards centralization and decentralization.
A confederation is a union of states for the implementation of specific joint goals, most often in the field of military, foreign policy, transport and communications, and the monetary system. This form of state unification is fragile and either transforms into a federation (as in the case of the United States and Switzerland), or disintegrates, as happened, for example, with the United Arab Republic, which included Egypt and Syria, and Senegambia — the unification of Senegal and the Gambia.
Elements of the confederation are present in the union of European states - the European Union (EU). It has supranational bodies with significant powers (Council of the European Union, European Parliament), politics is coordinated, there is a common economic space and currency.
In addition to the main forms of the national-territorial structure, there are also specific ones. These are, first of all, the associations of states around the former metropolises (British Commonwealth of Nations, Francophonie), based on a common language, cultural elements and the presence of a supranational apparatus, and an associated state association - the CIS.
Major political institutions
The term "state" began to be used in political science from about the second half of the 16th century. Until that time, concepts such as "polis", "principality", "kingdom", "kingdom", "republic", "empire" and others were used to designate the state. N. Machiavelli. He interpreted it broadly - as any supreme power over a person.In everyday consciousness, the state is often identified with a certain ethnic group (Belarusian state, French state, etc.), with the administrative apparatus, with justice.
Most modern authors define that the state is the main institution of the political system and political organization of society, created to organize the life of society as a whole and carry out the policy of the ruling classes, other social groups and strata of the population.
The main structural elements of the state are the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, the protection of public order and state security, the armed forces and partly the media.
The following features are common to the state:
1. The separation of public authority from society, its discrepancy with the organization of the entire population, the emergence of a layer of professional managers, which distinguishes the state from a tribal organization based on the principles of self-government.
2. Sovereignty, that is, the supreme power in a certain territory. In modern society, there are many authorities: family, industrial, party, etc. But the supreme power, the decisions of which are binding on all citizens, organizations and institutions, belongs to the state.
3. The territory that delineates the boundaries of the state. The laws and powers of the state apply to people living in a certain territory. It itself is built not on a consanguineous or religious basis, but on the basis of a territorial and, usually, ethnic community of people.
4. Monopoly on the legal use of force, physical coercion. The range of state coercion extends from the restriction of freedom to the physical destruction of a person (death penalty). To perform the functions of coercion, the state has special means (weapons, prisons, etc.), as well as bodies - the army, police, security services, courts, prosecutors.
5. The most important feature of the state is its monopoly on the issuance of laws and regulations that are binding on the entire population. Legislative activity in a democratic state is carried out by the legislative body (parliament). The state implements the requirements of legal norms with the help of its special bodies (courts, administration).
6. The right to collect taxes and fees from the population. Taxes are necessary for the maintenance of numerous employees and for the material support of state policy: defense, economic, social, etc.
7. Mandatory membership in the state. Unlike, for example, a political party, in which it is voluntary, a person receives state citizenship from the moment of birth.
When characterizing the state, the distinctive features are supplemented by its attributes - the coat of arms, flag and anthem.
Signs and attributes make it possible not only to distinguish the state from other social organizations, but also to see in it a necessary form of the existence and development of societies in modern civilization.
The main theories of the emergence of the state today are:
A) theological - the state arose by the will of God;
b) patriarchal (the author is an English scientist of the 18th century Robert Filmer) - the state arose as a result of the mechanical combination of clans into tribes, and tribes into large wholeness, up to state formations;
c) the theory of social, contract (G. Grotius, T. Hobbes, J.-J. Rousseau, N. Radishchev) - the state is the result of an agreement between a sovereign ruler and his subjects;
d) theory of conquest (L. Gumplovich, F. Oppenheimer, K. Kautsky, E. Dühring) - the state was an organization of winners over the vanquished;
e) Marxist-Leninist theory - the state arose as a result of the division of society into classes as an expression of the interests of the economically ruling class; an organic part of this theory is the idea of the withering away of the state.
There are theories explaining the origin of the state and other factors, for example, the need for joint construction of irrigation facilities, the influence of other states, etc. It is impossible to single out any one that determines the cause of the emergence of the state. It is clear that these processes were influenced by a variety of conditions and factors of both external and internal order.
Functions of the state. The social purpose of the state is determined by the functions it performs. It is generally accepted to divide functions into internal and external ones.
The main internal functions are:
Regulation of social life; conflict resolution, search for ways of compromise and consensus in society;
- protection of public order;
- development of a legal framework for the functioning of the social system;
- determination of the strategy of economic development;
- protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens;
- providing social guarantees to its citizens;
- creating conditions for the development of science, culture, education;
- activities to protect the environment.
External functions are aimed at ensuring the security, integrity and sovereignty of the state, protecting national interests in the international arena, developing mutually beneficial cooperation between countries, solving global problems of human civilization, etc.
Forms of government and government
The state has a complex structure - usually three groups of state institutions are distinguished: state authorities and administrations, state apparatus (public administration), and the punitive mechanism of the state.
The structure and powers of these institutions depend on the form of the state, and the functional side is largely determined by the existing political regime. The concept of "form of state" is revealed through the categories "form of government" and "form of state structure".
"Form of government" is the organization of the supreme power, characterized by its formal sources, it determines the structure of state bodies (institutional design) and the principles of their relationship. The two main forms of government are monarchy and republic and their varieties.
Monarchy (classical) is characterized by the fact that the power of the head of state - the monarch is inherited and is not considered a derivative of any other power, body or voters. It is inevitably sacralized, for this is a condition for legitimizing the power of the monarch. There are several varieties of the monarchical form of government: absolute monarchy - characterized by the omnipotence of the head of state and the absence of a constitutional order; constitutional monarchy - involves limiting the powers of the head of state by more or less developed features of the constitutional system. Depending on the degree of limitation of the power of the head of state, they distinguish: dualistic and parliamentary constitutional monarchies.
Dualistic monarchy - the powers of the monarch are limited in the sphere of legislation, but broad in the sphere of executive power. In addition, he retains control over the representative power, since he is endowed with the right of a full veto on parliamentary decisions and the right to early dissolution (Saudi Arabia and a number of small Arab states).
Parliamentary monarchy - the power of the monarch does not extend to the sphere of legislation and is significantly limited in governance. The laws are passed by the parliament, the monarch does not actually exercise the right of "veto" (in a number of countries and formally). The government is formed on the basis of a parliamentary majority and is accountable to parliament. The actual government of the country is exercised by the government. Any act of the monarch requires the approval of the head of government or the relevant minister (Belgium, Great Britain, Denmark, Spain, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden).
Republic - two main forms of republican government are known: presidential and parliamentary republics.
A presidential republic is characterized by the special role of the president; he is both the head of state and the head of government. The post of prime minister is absent, the government is formed by extra-parliamentary means, the president appoints its members either independently of parliament, or with the consent of the senate (for example, the United States). Ministers are accountable to the president. Parliament has no right to express a vote of no confidence to the government, and censure of ministers by parliament does not entail their automatic resignation. The head of state is elected independently of parliament: either by an electoral college, elected by the population (USA), or by direct vote of citizens (France, etc.). Such an election procedure enables the president and his government to act without regard to parliament. The president is vested with a suspensive veto of laws passed by parliament. The most important distinguishing feature of a presidential republic is the rigid separation of powers. All branches of government have significant independence in relation to each other, but there is a developed system of checks and balances that maintains a relative balance of power.
Parliamentary republic: its most important distinguishing feature is the formation of a government on a parliamentary basis and its formal responsibility to parliament. The head of state occupies a modest place in the system of government bodies. The parliament, along with the issuance of laws and the voting of the budget, has the right to control the activities of the government. The government appoints the head of state, but not at his own discretion, but from among the representatives of the party with the majority of seats in parliament (its lower house). A vote of no confidence in the government by parliament entails either the resignation of the government, or the dissolution of parliament and the holding of early parliamentary elections, or both. Thus, the government is the main governing body of the country, and the head of government is actually the first person in the power structure, pushing the head of state into the background (Greece, Italy, Germany).
A mixed, presidential-parliamentary form of government, with even greater domination by the president, is characteristic of a number of Latin American countries (Peru, Ecuador), it is also enshrined in the constitution in Russia and new constitutions in a number of CIS countries.
Its most important features:
The presence of a popularly elected president;
- the president appoints and dismisses members of the government;
- members of the government must enjoy the confidence of parliament;
- the president has the right to dissolve parliament.
The form of state structure is the territorial and political organization of the state, including the political and legal status of its constituent parts and the principles of relations between central and regional state bodies. There are two main forms of government: unitary and federal.
A unitary state is a single state, which is subdivided into administrative-territorial units that do not have political independence. A federal state is a union state, consisting of several state formations, each of which has its own competence and has its own system of legislative, executive and judicial bodies.
Previously, there was also such a close to federal form of government as a confederation. The difference between a confederation and a federation lies in the fact that a federation assumes the existence of a center authorized to make decisions on behalf of all members of the union and exercising power over them. Confederation, on the other hand, is more or less flexibly organized, without any constitutional form, a federation of independent states. Each of its members united with others in an alliance, into the competence of which a limited number of issues were transferred (for example, defense and external representation). Confederations were: Switzerland from 1291 to 1848, USA in 1776-1797, German Union in 1815-1867. Today there are no confederations, although this word is used in the official name of the Swiss and Canadian states.
Political public institution
Politics as a social institution is a set of certain organizations (authorities and administrations, political parties, social movements) that regulate the political behavior of people in accordance with accepted norms, laws, and rules.Each of the political institutions carries out a certain type of political activity and includes a social community, stratum, group, specializing in the implementation of political activities to manage society.
These institutions are characterized by:
1) political norms governing relations within a political institution and between them, and between political and non-political institutions of society;
2) the material resources necessary to achieve the goals.
Political institutions ensure the reproduction, stability and regulation of political activity, the preservation of the identity of the political community even with a change in composition, strengthen social ties and intragroup cohesion, and exercise control over political behavior.
The focus of politics is on power and governance in society.
The main bearer of political power is the state, which, relying on law and law, exercises compulsory regulation and control over social processes in order to ensure the normal and stable functioning of society.
The universal structure of state power is:
1) legislative bodies (parliaments, councils, congresses, etc.);
2) executive bodies (government, ministries, state committees, law enforcement agencies, etc.);
3) judicial authorities;
4) the army and state security agencies;
5) state information system, etc.
The sociological nature of the activities of the state and other political organizations is associated with the functioning of society as a whole.
Politics should contribute to solving social problems, at the same time, politicians tend to use state power and representative bodies to satisfy certain pressure groups.
The state as the core of the sociological system provides:
1) social integration of society;
2) safety of life of people and society as a whole;
3) distribution of resources and social benefits;
4) cultural and educational activities;
5) social control over deviant behavior.
The basis of politics is the power associated with the use of force, coercion in relation to all members of society, organizations, movements.
Subordination to the authorities is based on:
1) traditions and customs (traditional domination, for example, the power of the slave owner over the slave);
2) devotion to a person endowed with a certain supreme power (charismatic power of leaders, for example, Moses, Buddha);
3) a conscious conviction in the correctness of formal rules and the need to comply with them (this type of subordination is typical for most modern states).
The complexity of sociopolitical activity is associated with differences in social status, interests, positions of people and political forces.
They influence the differences in the types of political power. N. Smelzer cites the following types of states: democratic and non-democratic (totalitarian, authoritarian).
In democratic societies, all political institutions are autonomous (power is divided into independent branches - executive, legislative, judicial).
All political institutions influence the formation of state and power structures, shape the political direction of the development of society.
Democracies are associated with representative democracy, when the people transfer power to their representatives in elections for a certain period of time.
These states, mainly Western, are characterized by the following features:
1) individualism;
2) constitutional form of government;
3) general consent of those who are governed;
4) loyal opposition.
In totalitarian states, leaders strive to retain power, keeping the people under complete control, using a unified monoparty system, control over the economy, the media, the family, and terrorizing the opposition. In authoritarian states, approximately the same measures are carried out in milder forms, in the conditions of the existence of the private sector and other parties.
The sociopolitical subsystem of society is a spectrum of different vectors of power, management, and political activity.
In the integral system of society, they are in a state of constant struggle, but without the victory of any one line.
Crossing the border of measure in struggle leads to deviant forms of power in society:
1) totalitarian, which is dominated by the military-administrative method of management;
2) spontaneously market, where power is transferred to corporate groups that merge with the mafia and wage war with each other;
3) stagnant, when a relative and temporary balance of opposing forces and control methods is established.
In Soviet and Russian society, one can find a manifestation of all these deviations, but totalitarianism under Stalin and stagnation under Brezhnev were especially pronounced.
State political institutions
Political institutions are institutions or a system of institutions that organize and serve the process of exercising political power, ensuring its establishment and maintenance, as well as the transfer of political information and the exchange of activities between the government and other spheres of political life. These institutions are the state, political parties and politicized social movements.The most common functions of political institutions include:
Consolidation of society, social groups in order to realize their fundamental interests through political power;
the development of political programs expressing the aspirations of these social communities, and the organization of their implementation;
ordering and regulation of the actions of communities in accordance with political programs;
the integration of other social strata and groups in the field of social relations, expressing the interests and corresponding aspirations of the community that created the institution;
protection and development of the system of social relations, values corresponding to the interests of the communities represented;
ensuring the optimal development and orientation of the political process towards the implementation of the priorities and advantages of the relevant social forces. Political institutions usually arise on the basis of certain non-institutionalized communities or groups and differ from previous structures by the creation of a permanent and paid administrative apparatus.
Each institution, as a subject of politics, implements political activity through the activities of its leaders, leaders of various levels and ordinary members, interacting with the public environment in order to satisfy specific and at the same time constantly changing individual and group socio-political interests over time.
The aggregate subjects play a decisive role in the political process, nevertheless, the primary subject of politics, its “atom”, is undoubtedly the individual, the personality. In domestic political practice, the individual was not always recognized as an independent and free subject of political action. The role of such subjects was, first of all, the masses of the people, political communities, associations.
A person, as a rule, could participate in political life as a member of official structures with a certain regulation of political functions. However, in fact, it is the needs of each individual person, his value orientations and goals that act as a “policy measure”, the driving force behind the socio-political activity of the masses, nations, ethnic groups and other communities, as well as organizations and institutions that express their interests.
The status of a subject of politics does not exist as originally inherent in any individual or social community. Political qualities are not initially given to a person. Every individual is a potential subject of politics, but not everyone becomes such in reality. To become a political subject, a person must find his essence and existence in politics. In other words, he must practically master the political experience, realize himself as a subject of political action, develop his position in the political process and consciously determine his attitude to the world of politics, the degree of participation in it.
A person's realization of his political essence is closely related to his individual characteristics and is refracted through the personality structure, in which social, psychological, biological and spiritual substructures can be distinguished as components.
A political system can be called an ordered set of norms, institutions, organizations, ideas, as well as relations and interactions between them, in the course of which political power is exercised.
The political system is a complex of state and non-state institutions performing political functions, that is, activities related to the functioning of state power.
The concept of a political system is more capacious than the concept of "public administration", since it covers all persons and all institutions involved in the political process, as well as informal and non-governmental factors and phenomena that affect the mechanism for identifying and posing problems, developing and implementing solutions in the field state-power relations. In its broadest interpretation, the concept of "political system" includes everything that is relevant to politics.
A political institution is a more complex element of the political system, which is a stable type of social interaction that regulates a certain area of the political sphere of society. The institution performs an important function (or several functions), significant for the whole society, while forming an ordered system of social roles and rules of interaction.
Examples of political institutions are parliamentarism, the institution of the civil service, the institutions of the executive branch, the institution of the head of state, the presidency, the monarchy, the judiciary, citizenship, suffrage, political parties, etc. The main institution in the political system is the state.
Political institutions are stable types of political relations, the reproduction of which is ensured due to the following:
A) the rules governing the nature of the interaction;
b) sanctions that prevent deviation from normative patterns of behavior;
c) getting used to the established institutional order.
The listed properties are usually called the attributes of the institution. It is they who make political institutions objective, self-reproducing social formations that do not depend on the will and desire of individual individuals, prompting people to orient themselves in their behavior to prescribed patterns of behavior, to certain norms and rules. At the same time, what was said means that it is possible to speak of the existence of this or that institution only if in the actions of people there is a reproduction of the models of behavior prescribed by this institution. Political institutions exist only in the actions of people, reproducing the corresponding type of relations, interactions. What political institutions can be distinguished in modern society?
The institution of parliamentarism, which performs the functions of regulating relations regarding the creation of basic legal norms - laws that are binding on all citizens of the country; representation of interests of various social groups in the state. The normative regulation of the institution of parliamentarism concerns, first of all, issues of the competence of parliament, the procedure for its formation, the powers of deputies, the nature of their interaction with voters and the population in general.
Institutions of executive power represent a complex system of interactions that develop between bodies and officials in charge of the day-to-day management of public affairs and the population of the country. The main subject making the most responsible decisions within this type of political power relations is either the head of state and government (Egypt), or only the head of state, the president (USA), or only the government (Italy).
The dispersal of the public affairs management system required the unification of the requirements for persons working in state institutions. Thus, the institution of civil service began to take shape in society, regulating the professional activities of people belonging to a special status group. In our country, this regulation is carried out on the basis of the Federal Law “On the Foundations of the Civil Service of the Russian Federation”. This law determines the legal status of civil servants, the procedure for passing civil service, types of incentives and responsibilities of employees, grounds for termination of service, etc.
The institution of the head of state has also acquired an independent significance in the system of executive power. It ensures the stable reproduction of relations in society that allow the leader of the state to speak on behalf of the entire people, to be the supreme arbiter in disputes, to guarantee the integrity of the country, the inviolability of the constitutional rights of citizens.
Institutions of judicial procedure regulate relations that develop in connection with the need to resolve various conflicts in society. Unlike the legislative and executive branches, the court (with the exception of judicial precedent) does not create regulations and does not engage in administrative and administrative activities. However, the adoption of a judicial decision becomes possible only in the field of political power, which ensures the strict subordination of specific people to this decision.
Among the political institutions of modern society, a special place is occupied by those that regulate the position of an ordinary person in the system of political power relations. This is primarily the institution of citizenship, which determines the mutual obligations of the state and the citizen in relation to each other. The normative documents indicate that a citizen is obliged to comply with the constitution and laws, pay taxes, in a number of countries there is also universal military service. The state, in turn, is called upon to protect the rights of a citizen, including the right to life, security, property, etc. Within the framework of this institution, the procedure for acquiring citizenship, the conditions for its loss, the citizenship of children when the parents' citizenship changes, etc. are also regulated.
An important place in the creation of an orderly system of relations of influence on the subjects of political power is occupied by the institution of electoral law, which regulates the procedure for holding elections to legislative bodies of various levels, as well as presidential elections in those countries where this is provided for by the constitution. The institution of political parties ensures the orderliness of relations that develop during the creation of political organizations and in relations between them. In society, there are some general ideas about what a political party is, how it should act, how it differs from other organizations and associations. And the behavior of party activists and rank-and-file members begins to be built on the basis of precisely these ideas, which form the normative space of this political institution. We have listed only the most significant political institutions of modern society. Each country develops its own combination of these institutions, and the specific forms of the latter are directly influenced by the socio-cultural environment. The institution of parliamentarism in the United States, India, Russia and South Korea, with similar principles of functioning of the legislative assembly, will have its own special national flavor. Political institutions structure the field of political power relations; they make the interactions of people quite definite and stable. The more stable the institutional relations in society, the higher the predictability of the political behavior of individuals.
Development of political institutions
To identify the origins of political science, many researchers turned to the history of ancient thought. So, such outstanding philosophers as Plato, Aristotle, Cicero showed keen interest in the world of political. They created fundamental treatises: "Politics", "State", "Laws", "Republic", "Sovereign", popular among modern political scientists.The American political philosopher L. Strauss tried to substantiate the idea that ancient thinkers raised political science to the level of an independent discipline and thus "became the founders of political science in the exact and final sense of the word."
Political science, as an independent science, became possible as a result of the isolation of the political sphere from the integral human society, the separation of the political world from the economic, social and spiritual subsystems, which coincided in time with the New and Newest periods of history, or rather with the periods of formation of capitalist society. It is important to emphasize that the world of the political in the proper sense of the word is a historical phenomenon, its formation and separation from the integral human society occurred at a certain stage of historical development and are closely related to the processes of formation and isolation of civil society. The history of political science is, in fact.
The process of constant renewal and enrichment of its theoretical, methodological and methodological arsenal. Political science is inconceivable without the tradition within which it develops. Tradition in this case means forms of organization of science, systems of theories and ideas, methods of argumentation, methodologies, techniques, etc.
In the history of the West, the formation of political knowledge was distinguished by a high degree of development. This is especially true for the periods of modern and modern times. In general, the formation of political knowledge was closely associated with the processes of formation and change of specific political systems, regimes, relations. Political knowledge played an important role in this, which to one degree or another was then reflected in the development of political practice.
This relationship is well traced in the history of Western countries in the periods of modern and contemporary times, in the formation and development of their state system. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine the formation and establishment of the modern Western state-political system without the ideas of Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Montesquieu, etc.
There are three major stages in the history of the formation and development of political science.
The first period is prehistory from antiquity to modern times. Its main importance lies in the accumulation and transmission from generation to generation of political and political-philosophical knowledge. This period is represented by Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, F. Aquinas and other thinkers of antiquity and the Middle Ages.
The second period is from the beginning of modern times to the middle of the 19th century. - characterized by the formation of the most important ideas about the political world, about politics, political activity, the state, power, political institutions in the modern sense and, accordingly, the source of their scientific analysis.
In the third period, covering the 1880-1890s. and the first decades of the twentieth century, political science has already finally formed and established itself as an independent discipline with its own subject of research, methodology, methods, taking its rightful place in the research and curricula of universities and research institutes.
The role of political institutions
Political institutions in modern times is understood as a set of institutions, organizations with a certain structure and subordination, reproduced over time by a set of norms and rules that regulate political relations, both between organizations and between people. Thus, political institutions represent "a triune integrity - organization, norms, relations."Political institutions are subdivided into institutions of power and institutions of participation. The former include the institutions that exercise state power at various hierarchical levels, the latter include the institutions of participation, the structures of civil society. The totality of political institutions constitutes the political system of society, which is a certain integrity, organic interaction of subjects of politics, other elements of political reality.
The mechanism of political power is determined by the nature of the activities of political institutions, the means and methods they use. The main institution of power is the state, which exercises the full completeness of public power. The state embraces by its activities all members of society, to the fullest extent expresses the interests of all classes and social groups, forms a ramified administrative apparatus that regulates various spheres of life. In the exercise of power by the state, a special place belongs to law and order. The law ensures the validity of the policy pursued.
Another important political institution is civil society, within which the activities of non-state political institutions are carried out. The state and civil society as political institutions are formed in Europe and the United States around the period of the New Age under the influence of the ongoing modernization changes. It was from this time that the main institution of power in society was formed, which had a monopoly on coercive violence in a certain territory - the state. At the same time, under the influence of this process, a kind of antithesis of the state - civil society is being formed.
French law professor Maurice Oriou, one of the founders of the theory of institutionalism, viewed society as a collection of a huge number of institutions. He believed that social mechanisms are organizations, or institutions that include people, as well as an idea, an ideal, a principle that serve as a kind of crucible that extracts the energy of these individuals. If initially one or another circle of persons, having united for joint actions, forms an organization, then from the moment when the individuals included in it are imbued with the consciousness of their unity, it already appears as an institution. The French lawyer considered the guiding idea to be the hallmark of the institute.
M. Oriu distinguished two types of institutions: corporate (state, trade unions, trade associations, associations, church) and property (legal norms). Both types were characterized by him as a kind of ideal model of social relations. The difference between them was seen in the fact that the former are incorporated into social collectives, while the latter do not have their own organization and can be applied within the framework of any associations.
The main attention in M. Oriu's theory was paid to corporate institutions. As autonomous entities, they have common features, namely: a certain guiding idea, the organization of power and a set of norms that regulate the internal order. The concepts of power, management, and law in his doctrine were extended to all corporate institutions. Thus, social formations were equated with each other and were depicted as phenomena of the same order.
Like other ideologues of neoliberalism, M. Oriu argued the need to recognize state intervention, which is political intervention in order to maintain order and does not pretend to turn the state into an economic community. The state, according to his concept, should become a public service of the liberal order. Its task is to direct and control the economic life of society, while remaining at the same time a nationwide institution, i.e. neutral intermediary force. No matter how different and even opposite the aspirations of social collectives were, society, in the sense of this concept, turned out to be integrated into a single system of economic and political equilibrium.
The question of the relationship between the state and other social institutions M. Oriu solved by the formula “first among equals”. The time has come, he wrote, "to consider the state not as sovereignty, but as an institution of institutions."
The nature of interaction between public associations of citizens and the state determines the effectiveness of the political system of society, through which political power is fully realized. The functional characteristic of the political system is the political regime, which is understood as "a set of political relations characteristic of a certain type of state, the means and methods used by the authorities, the established relations of state power and society, the dominant forms of ideology, social and class relationships, the state of political culture." Depending on the degree of social freedom of the individual and the nature of the relationship between the state and civil society, as a rule, three types of regimes are distinguished: totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic. American political scientist Juan Linz supplements the generally accepted classification with two more types of political regimes: post-totalitarian and sultanist.
Democracy is a form of organization of political life, reflecting the free and competitive choice of the population of one or another alternative to social development, the inclusion of all political institutions in the democratic process; provision of conditions for political activity for all members of the political community, regardless of their political preferences. Due to the complicity in power of all strata of the population, democracy is open simultaneously to all variants of social choice. Democracy does not require a mandatory change of the ruling parties, but the possibility of such a change must exist. In a democracy, the problem of interaction between the state and society is solved in favor of society, taking into account the various demands of citizens.
The democratic goals of the state require appropriate ways of exercising power, namely, a democratic regime, since democratic results are possible only with the use of democratic methods and techniques for exercising power.
In democratic societies, the foundations of the socio-political system are characterized by constant instability. Having sharply weakened the importance of norms - the legitimacy of which depends either on transcendental criteria (the Almighty) or on the natural order (cultural tradition) - democratic societies of the modern era, even in the conditions of insufficient development of democratic mechanisms in them, begin to feel the need to acquire their own sociopolitical identity. Democratization processes lead to the denial of personified definitions of means and ends of life. Actors in modern democracies are beginning to realize that old criteria based on ultimate certainty are crumbling. It becomes clear to them that nothing indisputable exists and that they are doomed to define their own way of life again and again.
Democratic societies are characterized by uncertainty, which consists in the fact that socio-political goals and means by their origin, by their essence, are not at all immutable. These goals and the technical means they choose are always controversial, generate conflicts and resistance, and therefore are subject to constant changes in time and space.
That is why, according to J. Keane, you can never fully accept the institutions that exist within fully democratic systems, and the decisions made within these systems - as if all disputes regarding power, justice or the law could be resolved once and for all with the help of some universal metalanguage. ... Fully democratic systems can never be perfect. They will be inherent in the consciousness of the need to make judgments on certain issues, tk. they will retain the understanding that they cannot know and control everything. Fully democratic systems will have a certain modesty in the matter of knowing the world. They will not be able to flatter themselves with statements about their ability to directly know the world as a whole, for in all spheres of life they will be involved in risky and often ambiguous activities of self-creation.
The most important democratic institution is the rule of law, in which the actions of the authorities are limited by legal, political and moral frameworks. The rule of law in its activities is guided by the interests of man and society, creates equal conditions for every citizen, regardless of his position in society. Within the framework of the rule of law, a special place belongs to constitutionalism, which is a stabilizing factor and ensures the predictability of the policy being pursued. The initial beginning of constitutionality is the recognition of the priority of the principle of law, and not of the factor of force. The law becomes the main instrument regulating various aspects of public life, defining the boundaries of power. The rule of law is a prerequisite for the normal functioning of every person and the whole society. The rule of law, the triumph of law in indissoluble unity with the priority of man is the most important thing in understanding the nature of the rule of law.
The rule of law is based on the principle of separation of powers, which in the modern interpretation has three accents: social, political and legal. From the social point of view, the division of powers is conditioned by the division of socially necessary labor for the implementation of power functions, its specialization and professionalization. The political meaning of the separation of powers lies in the demonopolization of power, its dispersion across various sectors and a rational organization. The legal aspect of the separation of powers is realized through the constitutional consolidation of the most important provisions of the idea itself, the constitutional delimitation of the branches of power.
Democracy, like the rule of law, is not possible without human freedom, the implementation of which is served by political institutions, provided that they are not only legal, but also legitimate. Freedom thrives only if society manages to create institutions that ensure its stability and long-term existence. According to Ralph Dahrendorf, “Institutions are the framework within which we make our choices, such as economic prosperity. Institutions guarantee that we respect our rights, hence social justice. If we want as many people as possible to have the best chances in life, we must achieve this through institutions, without ceasing to hone and improve these structures. "
It should be emphasized that blind copying of foreign experience in the organization and functioning of political institutions is unacceptable. The effectiveness of their activities in the conditions of well-established democratic norms and rules is not a guarantee of successful functioning in countries in the process of democratization. Of no small importance are national characteristics, practical experience and culture of each nation, established customs and historical traditions of the political life of society and government. The main criterion for the effectiveness of the activities of political institutions is the quality of life of a particular person - the ultimate goal of all state power.
The rule of law, directing its activities towards the realization of the interests of each person, his rights and freedoms, inevitably becomes social. A welfare state is a state that seeks to provide every citizen with decent living conditions, social security, complicity in the management of production, and, ideally, approximately the same life chances, opportunities for self-realization of an individual in society. The activity of such a state is aimed at the common good, the establishment of social justice in society. It smooths out property and other social inequality, helps the weak and disadvantaged, takes care of providing everyone with a job or other source of livelihood, maintaining peace in society, and creating a living environment favorable for a person.
The welfare state implements its goals and principles in the form of legal statehood, however, it goes much further along the path of humanizing society - it seeks to expand the rights of the individual and fill legal norms with a more just content. There is both unity and contradictions between the legal and social principles of state structure. Their unity lies in the fact that both of them are designed to ensure the welfare of the individual: the first is the physical safety of citizens in relation to the authorities and to each other, individual freedom and fundamental, mainly civil and political rights of the individual through the establishment of clear boundaries of state intervention and guarantees against despotism , the second - social security, material conditions of freedom and dignified existence of every person. The contradictions between them are manifested in the fact that the rule of law, according to its design, should not interfere in the distribution of social wealth, ensuring the material and cultural well-being of citizens, while the social state is directly involved in this, although it seeks not to undermine such foundations of the market economy as private property. , competition, enterprise, individual responsibility, etc., do not generate massive social dependency. Unlike Soviet-type socialism, which tried to establish the well-being of all through the equalizing distribution of benefits, the welfare state is focused on providing everyone with decent living conditions, primarily as a result of increased production efficiency, individual responsibility and activity. Today, democratic states strive to find a measure of the optimal combination of legal and social principles.
In modern democratic processes, the role of public opinion in the development of political institutions, which is carried out through the channels of their interaction and mutual influence, acquires great importance. Domestic scientists VV Lapkin and VI Pantin pay attention to the "transparency" of these channels, i.e. on the ability to adequately convey public opinion requests to political institutions without distorting them and not replacing them with narrow-group requests. Here we are talking about how objectively the media convey the moods and expectations of most people, how free elections are, whether political actions are followed by a quick reaction of the authorities, etc. Researchers note the close connection of this problem with another, with the problem of the legitimacy of the political institutions themselves. Legitimacy is a form of support, justification of the legitimacy of the use of power and the implementation of a specific form of government, either by the state as a whole, or by its individual structures and institutions. The legitimacy of this or that political institution is largely determined by the understanding by a significant part of the population of the need for this institution and awareness of its activities, which is impossible without the existence of channels of interaction between this institution and the general population.
The problem of dynamic interaction of public opinion and political institutions is actualized during periods of transformation and changes in the system of political institutions, since it is during such periods that the issue of recognition by the majority of the population of the legitimacy of both new and old, changing political institutions is especially acute, which increases the role of public opinion regarding the necessity and feasibility of these institutions. There are two trends in this problem: first, new political institutions do not immediately gain the support and recognition of public opinion; secondly, without large-scale explanatory campaigns in the media, without the support of influential political forces, new political institutions are unable to make their way.
For post-authoritarian countries in the process of democratization, the problem of the effectiveness of political institutions is urgent. At the same time, according to V. I. Pantin, a vicious circle arises: “new democratic political institutions cannot become sufficiently effective, since they do not enjoy the necessary support from mass and elite groups of society, and these institutions cannot receive support and legitimacy, since in the eyes of the majority of the population, they are not effective, capable of helping in solving the problems facing society. " Therefore, a well-known Russian political scientist considers democracy combined with efficiency to be the main issue in the transition period. This thesis is especially important for Russia and some other post-communist and post-authoritarian countries, where the opinion is widespread about the fundamental inefficiency of democratic institutions that do not correspond to the national traditions of the state. An analysis of the effective formation of democratic regimes suggests that democratic political institutions become truly effective only as a result of a long process of development and adaptation to the conditions and traditions of a given society, as evidenced by the experience of democratic construction in Western countries. So about a high degree of democracy in Western states should be spoken only from the second half of the twentieth century. Consequently, the current difficulties in the formation of democratic political institutions, both in Russia and in a number of other countries, are explained not by the problem of compatibility of democracy and its institutions with national traditions and norms, but by the fact that they can become effective only by gradually adapting to political realities. "To come to democracy," says American political scientist Dunkwart Rastow, "requires not copying constitutional laws or parliamentary practice of some already existing democracy, but the ability to honestly look at your specific conflicts and the ability to invent or borrow effective mechanisms for resolving them."
The establishment and development of new political institutions goes through three main phases. The first phase is the formation and establishment of this institution, the second phase is its legitimization, rooting in society and public consciousness, adaptation to traditions and norms, and the third is the growth of its effectiveness. The second phase, as a rule, is the longest and can be accompanied by rollbacks to authoritarianism, followed by new attempts to establish democratic institutions in a renewed form. As the experience of democratic construction shows, the key problem, on the solution of which the effectiveness of political institutions depends, is giving these institutions a social orientation in the interests of the general population. In those countries where it was possible to combine democratic institutions with strong social policies, these institutions acquired the necessary legitimacy and stability.
The most important democratic institution, without which democracy is inconceivable, is parliament. The sovereignty of the people is embodied in state sovereignty precisely through the representative body of power, which expresses the collective will of the voters. The characteristic features of the parliament are electivity and collegiality in decision-making. It is assumed that the deputies elected to the legislative body are representatives of the people and are guided, first of all, by public and state interests.
Among the main functions of the parliament, the following should be highlighted:
Legislative, the essence of which is that only parliament adopts laws that are universal and supreme over all other legal acts;
- control over the government, which can be expressed in various forms - approval of members of the government, hearing reports on the work of the government, passing a vote of no confidence in the government, etc.
The powers and functions of parliament differ depending on the national characteristics of the state, the form of government and territorial structure. In parliamentary republics, the government is formed by the political party or coalition of parties that won the parliamentary elections, and in essence (formally the head of state does this) approves the chairman of the government. In presidential republics, the president forms and heads the government. In this case, the constitution enshrines a system of checks and balances that prevent the usurpation of power by any authority. In mixed republics, the president forms the government taking into account the alignment of political forces based on the results of parliamentary elections.
Parliaments are unicameral and bicameral. In federal states, the upper chamber realizes the interests of the subjects of the federation, in unitary states, the second chamber is considered as a tribute to traditions and expresses the interests of administrative-territorial entities. The main meaning of parliamentary activity lies in the maximum representation of not only the interests of individual citizens, but also the interests of society as a whole (the interests of the subjects of the federation, territories, social groups).
The principle of forming the upper house of parliament is also different: it can be elected or formed in a different way. In most countries where there is a bicameral parliament, the lower house is more important than the upper one. In particular, the following tendency can be traced: strong chambers possessing real power are elected by universal direct suffrage, therefore, the “closer” a chamber is to the population, the broader and fuller its competence, and vice versa, the “further” the chamber is from voters, the less significant it is in practical matters.
The bicameral parliament performs another important task: it demonopolizes the legislative power, minimizes the danger of a parliamentary dictatorship. If the power of the parliament is not limited, it can become a destructive force, since decision-making based on the opinion of the majority is not a guarantee of constructiveness and democratic decision-making. The English philosopher Herbert Spencer warned against the "sins of legislators": less, it promotes the adoption of this law, does not deserve forgiveness if this law increases poverty and mortality, just as the pharmacist's apprentice should be punished if a medicine prescribed by him out of ignorance becomes the cause of the patient's death. "
In the Russian Federation, legislative power is exercised by the Federal Assembly. Thus, Article 94 of the Constitution of Russia says: "The Federal Assembly - the parliament of the Russian Federation - is the representative and legislative body of the Russian Federation." This definition characterizes the essence, legal nature and functions of this government body.
From the definition of the Federal Assembly as parliament, it follows that this body should act as a collective spokesman for the interests and will of the Russian people, which is the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the country. Based on the principle of separation of powers, the Russian parliament represents the legislative branch of state power in Russia.
The Federal Assembly consists of two chambers - the Federation Council and the State Duma. The Federation Council includes two representatives from each constituent entity of Russia: one from the representative and executive bodies of state power. The State Duma consists of 450 deputies, elected on the basis of a proportional electoral system. Each of the chambers has its own powers, which basically correspond to the prerogatives of foreign parliaments.
In particular, the jurisdiction of the Federation Council includes:
Approval of changes in the borders between the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
- approval of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation on the introduction of martial law and a state of emergency;
- resolving the issue of the possibility of using the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation;
- appointment of elections of the President of the Russian Federation;
- removal of the President from office;
- appointment of judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation;
- appointment and dismissal of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.
Among the powers of the State Duma, enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, one can single out:
Giving consent to the President of the Russian Federation for the appointment of the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation;
- resolving the issue of confidence in the Government of the Russian Federation;
- appointment and dismissal of the Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation;
- declaration of amnesty;
- bringing charges against the President of the Russian Federation for his removal from office.
From a political point of view, it is very important to give consent to the President of the Russian Federation for the appointment of the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, associated with certain conditions. In particular, the decision by the State Duma must be made no later than one week from the day the President submits a proposal on the candidacy of the Prime Minister. In addition, it is established that after a threefold rejection of the nominated candidates for the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, the President appoints the Chairman of the Government, dissolves the State Duma and calls new elections.
The State Duma may be dissolved by the President also in case of repeated expression of no confidence in the Government within three months and in case of a negative answer to the question of confidence in the Government.
Obviously, some functions and powers related to the relationship of the Federal Assembly with the President and the Government require clarification. So the dissolution of parliament can be provoked by a number of circumstances: an obviously inappropriate candidate for the post of Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation may be nominated, and the Constitution does not stipulate that each time the President should propose a new candidate for the Chairman of the Government. In connection with such uncertainties, the parliament turns into a dependent body, over which the threat of its early dissolution hangs. This influences the behavior and legal consciousness of the deputies, pushes them to populist activities. In a situation of political instability, this parliamentary model, even with the strengthened powers of the President, can be accompanied by frequent state crises, which allows us to speak of the strengthening of authoritarian tendencies in public administration.
The institution of executive power in the context of the constitutional principle of separation of powers is characterized by the largest volume of jurisdiction. This is the most efficient and effective structure of power, its characteristic feature is the presence of power elements - the army, police, security services, etc., whose activities are determined by law. Executive power is exercised by the government, which is a collegial body headed by the president, prime minister, chairman, chancellor, depending on the form of government. The real role of the government is determined by the relationship with other branches of government, with the head of state, with political parties represented in parliament.
People employed in the structure of the government, possessing a certain set of powers, act not as private individuals, but as official representatives of government, officials authorized on behalf of the state. These powers are assigned to the position, and not to a specific person. In a democratic state, these rights are balanced by an appropriate range of responsibilities, therefore, responsibility for the effective implementation of the opportunities inherent in the powers of senior officials - the president, prime minister, ministers, etc.
As the main functions of the government, one should highlight the implementation of laws adopted by parliament, and the implementation of an administrative function in the form of management using such means as the issuance of bylaws and the establishment of organizational work. Executive power can be monocratic, when it is concentrated in one person, who is both the head of state and the head of government, and dualistic, when, regardless of the head of state (monarch, president), who is not responsible to the legislative body, a government headed by prime minister and accountable to parliament.
For the democratic development of society, it is fundamentally important to establish control over the activities of the government, as a state institution capable of usurping power to a greater extent. For this, there are various mechanisms depending on the form of government and national characteristics of the country: the adoption of the budget by the parliament and control over the spending of finances by the representative body of power, the announcement of a vote of no confidence by the parliament, public control over the activities of the security forces, and others.
However, in order to conduct an effective state policy, a coordinated activity of parliament and government is necessary. To this end, the legislative branch adjusts and supports all the efforts of the executive branch to implement the tasks facing society, through the adopted laws, ensures the legitimation of domestic and foreign policy pursued by the government.
The executive power in the Russian Federation is exercised by the Government of the Russian Federation, which consists of the Chairman of the Government, Deputy Chairmen of the Government of the Russian Federation, federal ministers, heads of federal services and agencies.
The Government of the Russian Federation is a collegial body of executive power of the state and subjects of the Federation, which exercises state power throughout the Russian territory.
Among the powers of the Government of the Russian Federation are the following:
Development and submission to the State Duma of the federal budget and ensuring its implementation; submission to the State Duma of a report on the execution of the federal budget;
- ensuring the implementation of a unified financial, credit and monetary policy in the Russian Federation;
- ensuring the implementation in the Russian Federation of a unified state policy in the field of culture, science, education, health care, social security, ecology;
- management of federal property;
- implementation of measures to ensure the country's defense, state security, the implementation of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation;
- implementation of measures to ensure the rule of law, the rights and freedoms of citizens to protect property and public order, to combat crime;
- exercise of other powers assigned by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws.
In Russia, the federal government bears political responsibility to the Federal Assembly, primarily in terms of the development and execution of the federal budget. In Russia, lack of confidence in the Prime Minister essentially entails significant changes in the composition of the Government. Instead of resigning, members of the Government can ask the President to exercise his constitutional right to dissolve the State Duma and call new parliamentary elections.
In order to increase efficiency, a reorganization of the activities of the Russian government apparatus was carried out. The structure of the government was changed, which became three-tier. Ministries are called upon to formulate state policy in specific areas; Federal services - to implement the policy of the ministries and monitor the results; Federal agencies are called upon to provide government services. It is assumed that such a structure will increase the personal responsibility of the heads of various departments for the final result and lead to an improvement in the activities of the executive body, which will have a positive effect on the conduct of state policy.
The Russian thinker RI Sementkovsky wrote: “... if it is true that every nation has a government that it deserves, then it is no less true that every social class also enjoys the influence in the state that it deserves, or, generalizing this idea, we will say that the political forms of a given country are the less subject to criticism, the more fully citizens are able to satisfy the immediate demands of life, the more fully they fulfill their public duty. In any case, only this condition gives the political form a certain content, and at the same time stability. "
The third branch of state power is the judiciary, which is an institution whose main activity is the strict observance of laws, their protection from encroachments from both individuals and from the official structures of the state and society. It is in the judiciary that the democratic essence of the state is most vividly embodied.
The judiciary ensures strict observance of the Basic Law of the country - the Constitution, improvement of current legislation, protection of the legitimate interests of a person and society, the competence of the institutions of state power. In a democratic state, the court is independent, which ensures impartial, fair justice. The criterion of independence is the possibility for every citizen to win a case in court against any political institution, including the court itself.
Cases of violations of the law are considered only by the court, whose decisions accept the status of law and are subject to strict implementation. An important moral and ethical aspect of the functioning of the judiciary is to ensure the triumph of justice through the administration of justice, i.e. assertion of the priority of law, law, and, consequently, truth.
The democratic character of the third branch of government is realized through public control, a characteristic feature of which is public legal proceedings. The objectively critical view of the public is an effective form of democratic control. The court is obliged to proceed not from the principle of expediency, but from the strict priority of the law. A democratic court is characterized by the following rules generally accepted in legal practice: the presumption of innocence, the irreversibility of the law, doubts in favor of the accused, a voluntary admission of guilt needs proof, one witness is not a witness, you cannot be a judge in your own home. An important precondition for the rule of law is the right of citizens to judicial protection. Every citizen has the right to count on court assistance in protecting his rights, honor and dignity. Unlawful actions of the authorities can be appealed against in court.
The system of law enforcement institutions includes prosecutorial supervision, investigative bodies, the legal profession, and other structures that ensure law and order. But the central element of this system is still the court.
In the Russian Federation, the judiciary is exercised through constitutional, civil, administrative and criminal proceedings. The courts are independent and are subject only to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal law. Judges are irreplaceable and inviolable. The courts are financed only from the federal budget.
Judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation are appointed by the Federation Council on the proposal of the President of the Russian Federation. Judges of other federal courts are appointed by the President of the Russian Federation in the manner prescribed by federal law.
The judiciary is generally united and indivisible, but conditional justice can be divided into constitutional, general and arbitration. In accordance with this, there are also three higher judicial bodies of the Russian Federation: the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation.
The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation decides cases on the compliance with the Constitution of federal laws and other normative acts, normative acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, international treaties, treaties between the bodies of state power of Russia, and also gives an interpretation to the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is the highest judicial body for civil, criminal, administrative and other cases, jurisdictional courts of general jurisdiction; supervises their activities; gives clarifications on the issues of judicial practice.
The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation is the highest judicial body for resolving economic disputes and other cases considered by arbitration courts, and exercises judicial supervision over their activities.
Another important institution of state power is the institution of the presidency, which exists in various forms and is a democratic attribute of the political system. The United States of America became the first presidential republic in 1787. Subsequently, this institute was in demand in many countries of Europe, America, Asia and Africa. However, the presidential power is not a guarantor of democracy, since with imperfect balances it can cause a turn towards authoritarian rule.
As the most important requirements for modern political systems, a combination of democratic and effective government should be highlighted, the implementation of which can be ensured by the institution of the presidency, which determines its popularity. As the priorities of this institution, it is necessary to highlight such features of presidential power as efficiency, efficiency, balance in the development and implementation of domestic and foreign policies, personal responsibility for decision-making.
The position of the president is not the same in different countries. So in parliamentary republics, he acts as the head of state with representative functions that do not affect the real course of political events. In presidential and semi-presidential republics, the president acts as a key figure in real state power, with enormous opportunities to effectively pursue his political course. The following tendency can be singled out that affects the importance of the president in the structure of state power: the more representative the elections, the more democratic the path of a presidential candidate, the more independent and stronger he is in dealing with issues of real politics.
The president, as a leading figure in the system of state power, is not assessed unambiguously, which is mainly associated with the successes and political orientations of states in domestic and foreign policy. One should not either idealize the presidency or belittle its importance. The determining factor in the assessment is the material well-being of citizens and the social stability of public life in general.
The institution of presidential power in Russia has a relatively short history. The post of the popularly elected President of the RSFSR was established in accordance with the results of an all-Russian referendum. The first President of the RSFSR was elected through direct popular elections. The Constitution of the Russian Federation has made significant changes concerning both the status of the President and the procedure for his election, competence, procedure for removal from office. The Constitution proceeds from the leading position of the President in the system of state authorities. The president, as the head of state in Russia, is not included in the system of separation of powers, but rises above it, performing coordinating functions.
The President is the guarantor of the Constitution of Russia, human and civil rights and freedoms. He represents Russia inside the country and in the international arena, determines the main directions of the state's domestic and foreign policy. He is elected for four years by the citizens of Russia on the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot. A citizen of Russia who is at least 35 years old and has permanently resided in the country for at least 10 years can be elected President. One and the same person cannot be the President of Russia for more than two consecutive terms.
The President of Russia, in accordance with the Constitution, calls elections to the State Duma, dissolves the State Duma, calls a referendum, submits bills to the State Duma, signs and promulgates federal laws, appoints, with the consent of the State Duma, the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation and has the right to preside over meetings of the Government. He also has the right to make a decision on the resignation of the Government.
The President presents to the State Duma candidates for positions (appointment and dismissal): Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation; The Chairman of the Accounting Chamber and half of its auditors; Commissioner for Human Rights.
The President considers the decision of the State Duma on no confidence in the Government; agrees with the Federation Council on the appointment and dismissal of: the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation; judges of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Arbitration Court.
The President of Russia, exercising leadership in Russia's foreign policy, signs international treaties and certificates. He is the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Russia, introduces martial law on the territory of the country, and under certain circumstances, introduces a state of emergency, resolves issues of Russian citizenship and pardons.
The President of Russia has immunity. He may be removed from office by the Federation Council on the initiative of the State Duma. However, the detachment procedure is extremely complex.
A significant difference in the status of the President of the Russian Federation lies in his dominant position in relations with other branches of government. Democracy will not be able to become consolidated if political power is ineffective, since unfulfilled hopes for a rapid improvement in the quality of life can give rise to many ambiguities about the legitimacy of the chosen path. Therefore, the interaction of all branches of government should meet the main goal - the solution of social and economic problems of society, the creation of conditions for the realization of material and spiritual needs of a person. This is possible only if an effective policy of the authorities is carried out, harmoniously combining powers and responsibility before society and citizens.
Such a policy is promoted by the system of "checks and balances" established by the constitution, laws and which is a set of legal restrictions in relation to specific state power - legislative, executive, judicial.
So, in relation to the legislative branch, a rather tough legal procedure of the legislative process is used, which regulates its main stages, the procedure for its implementation: legislative initiative, discussion of a draft law, adoption of a law, its publication. In the system of counterbalances, the president is called upon to play an important role, who has the right to apply a suspensive veto in case of hasty decisions of the legislator, and to call early elections if necessary. The activities of the Constitutional Court can also be considered as legal, since it has the right to block all anti-constitutional acts. The legislator in his actions is limited by the time frame, the very principles of law, the constitution, other legal and democratic norms and institutions.
In relation to the executive branch, restrictions of departmental rule-making and delegated legislation are used. This can also include the certain terms of presidential power established in the law, a vote of no confidence in the government, impeachment, a ban on senior executives from being elected to legislative structures, and from engaging in commercial activities.
The judiciary has its own law-limiting means established in the constitution, procedural legislation, expressed in its guarantees, principles: the presumption of innocence, the right to defense, equality before the law and court, transparency and adversarial nature of the process, disqualification of a judge, etc.
The institutions of political participation include political parties, social and political movements, and interest groups. The direct or direct form of citizens' participation in resolving power issues is elections to representative structures of the state, to local self-government bodies, participation in referendums in resolving issues of national, regional and local importance.
As the main goals of political participation, it is necessary to highlight the development, adoption and implementation of political and managerial decisions, the choice of political and state leaders, the formation of the political elite. Achievement of these goals is possible only when citizens realize the need to defend their interests, influence political power, and exercise control over its activities. Political conditions conducive to the realization of rights and freedoms are important factors for democratic participation; legal and material and economic foundations that form the human desire for a dignified life; accessibility of mass media, providing political communication between society and government.
Such prerequisites to the greatest extent are possessed by the rule of law, which is characterized by the presence of a civil society and in which a person acquires the appropriate opportunities for political participation.
Functions of political institutions
The essence of the political system is manifested in its functions. Functions are certain types of activities that satisfy the needs of the system for self-preservation and directed organization. The functions of the political system can be analyzed at the macro, media, and micro levels.At the macro level, the most general requirements are identified, which are subject to the functioning of the political system as a whole.
At the media level, the most characteristic areas of ensuring the legitimacy, stability and dynamism of the political system are highlighted.
At the micro level, the characteristic elements of political technology or political process are analyzed.
At the macro level, I highlight the following functions:
1. Program - that is, the definition of common collective goals and objectives of the development of society. The goals can be global in nature, and openly announced (Program of building communism), or can only be present in the statements of candidates for the elections.
2. Integration - ensuring connections, coordination between all elements of the political system in achieving some goals.
3. Adaptation is a function of adaptation to the environment, its capabilities and partial subordination of the environment to one's interests. That is, there is a provision of support for the broad strata of the population. Weakness of adaptation is a sign of a closed system, loss of legitimacy.
4. The function of self-preservation is reduced to the suppression and prevention of violent change of government, the system, the policy. This is achieved by ensuring sustainable loyalty of citizens to the authorities, their constant broad support for the existing system.
Macro functions are concretized in middle-level functions (media functions):
1. The function of socialization is aimed at including new young generations in the political life.
2. The function of recruiting is reduced to the constant reproduction of the mass, actively supporting the system. The presence in the country of the required number of officials, police officers, politicians, the activity of voters - all this is the result of recruiting.
3. The regulatory function - the policy of regulating prices, taxes, conflicts and much more - all these are forms of the regulatory function.
4. The mobilization function is the collection of financial, material, human resources, and the provision of support for the current policy.
5. Distribution (distribution) function is the distribution of resources, goods, services and statuses based on strategic or tactical considerations.
6. The function of reaction is manifested in the ability to react to impulses coming from individual groups, to respond to diverse demands, to suppress contradictions.
The microfunctions of the political system include: identifying and integrating interests, translating them into decisions or answering the question "what to do?", Making decisions, providing support.
All functions are interconnected and, as it were, complement each other. But in various political systems it is possible to absolutize some of the functions to the detriment of others, and hence the deformation of the entire political system.
Modern political institutions
The main institutions of the political system of modern Russian society are: the institution of the presidency; the Institute of Parliamentarism, represented in Russia by the Federal Assembly; the institution of executive power represented by the government; institutions of the judiciary; institute of citizenship; institute of universal suffrage; institute of political parties and public organizations; institute of local self-government. Political institutions, in turn, include relevant organizations, institutions that solve specific tasks within the framework of institutional relations.Likewise, Political institutions are subdivided into institutions of power and institutions of participation. The former include the institutions that exercise state power at various hierarchical levels, the latter include the institutions of participation, the structures of civil society. The totality of political institutions constitutes the political system of society, which is a certain integrity, organic interaction of subjects of politics, other elements of political reality.
Another important political institution is civil society, within which the activities of non-state political institutions are carried out.
Summing up, I would like to start with the fact that the search for a formalized model of political power capable of reproducing and maintaining an ideal society originates in ancient philosophy. Plato, Aristotle and other ancient Greek philosophers tried to answer the question of which political institutions are able to provide the best type of society and personality. Comparative analysis of legislation (constitutions), typology of political regimes, identification of various forms of government, possible combinations of political institutions, terminological identification of political phenomena and facts - this is the range of studies of political philosophy of that period. However, it should be admitted that the institutional analysis (using modern terminology), for all authors, was of a rather limited and descriptive nature and did not pretend to build a strict normative-conceptual apparatus. And yet it must be admitted that the beginning of institutional research was laid in the era of antiquity.
The transformation of the political system of Russia can be subdivided into three main periods associated with priorities in the development of the country:
1. The transition from the authoritarian Soviet regime of perestroika to a free society with a market economy and democratic methods of forming power.
2. Transition from oligarchic to state capitalism, strengthening of statehood.
3. Formation of political institutions designed to ensure Russia's claims to the status of a "great power" and the implementation of the idea of sovereign democracy.
Those states that, following their historical ambitions, seek to act independently or have a dissenting opinion on certain issues, are still forced to adjust their behavior, proceeding from both their priorities and the consolidated international influence.
The vertical of power pushes democracy aside, but as a result of an increase in the standard of living of Russian citizens who are shaping civil society, there will increasingly be a need to influence political processes, which, ultimately, can become a guarantee of the formation of democratic political institutions.
And modern Russia is striving for this.
A set of political institutions
Currently, the most generally accepted definition of it is the following: a political system is a set of political institutions, norms, values, ideas and relations that ensure the implementation of political power in society. In modern science, it is interpreted in a narrow and broad sense. In a narrow sense, this is the name of any artificially created formation, be it material as a state, party, trade union, or ideal as law, political culture, be it material, for example, as mass media or spiritual, say political ideas and values. All these formations are considered as integral structures that are in complex interaction with the environment and perform certain roles in it. They are political insofar as they are included in power relations and power activities.In a broad sense, the political system is viewed as a real mechanism for the organization and functioning of power in society. The main element of this mechanism, its social basis is made up of living, acting people, the social communities and interest groups they form, the political institutions they create. It is these subjects of politics that form the conditions and determine the nature of the political system. Their existence and activity are associated with its emergence, development and functioning.
The subjects of politics are not a mechanical sum of homogeneous and one-order quantities. They have different political powers and are in a state of permanent conflict, the subject of which is the power of the state and the power in the state, the ability to dispose of it or be independent from it. In political science, there are different views on the relationship and role of subjects of politics in the system of political-power relations. So, L.S. Sanisteban believes that in any political system there is an unequal distribution of power between the elite (relatively organized minorities exercising political power in society as a whole), the counter-elite (all those who oppose the elite and are actively fighting for their inclusion in her or for the creation of a new elite), bureaucracy (bureaucratic administration, professionally and constantly engaged in the conduct of state policy), and the masses (the vast majority of the population, alienated from power in everyday life). It follows from this that the political system is a process and result of the interaction of parties, associations, leaders, elites and the masses that perform different roles in the system of political relations. According to the Marxist-Leninist theory, the main subjects of politics are the masses - classes - parties - leaders, and the class struggle is the only driving force behind political change. However, today class confrontation (“class antagonism,” to use Marxist language) is not a real and effective factor in politics in every society. Ethnic, religious, territorial and other differences can be the basis for the political division of society and political struggle.
The political stratification of society becomes the cause of the multidirectional aspirations and wills of the subjects of politics, as a result of the interaction of which the political system is formed. D. Easton believed that the political system is designed to prevent conflicts arising from the authoritarian distribution of values inherent in politics. This effect is achieved by the fact that, unlike politics, whose decisions are always unambiguous, the political system is pluralistic. Not only group but also individual subjects of politics have different values, interests, positions. Their coordination in one form or another is carried out by the political system, the constituent parts of which are: political relations, political organization, legal and political norms, political consciousness.
Political relations are the interconnection and interaction of subjects of political life regarding the formation, organization and functioning of state power. Political relations are concentrated around the issues of the composition and structure of power bodies, the mechanisms of their formation, the goals of power, methods of ruling, etc. At the same time, citizens, by their position and actions, send impulses-demands to the power and impulses-support for it into the system. The subjects of power, in turn, in one way or another react to them, suppressing or satisfying the demands of citizens with their decisions, with real deeds or demagogic promises, stimulating support for their course from the masses. Political relations can be of a different nature: social partnership, interethnic harmony, civil peace, or, conversely, intense rivalry, hostility and confrontation, the extreme manifestations of which are rebellion, uprising, civil war.
Political actors, interacting over power, in an effort to increase the effectiveness of their own efforts, take measures to institutionalize their activities. The result of institutionalization is the formation of a political organization, which is a collection of various kinds of institutions, bodies, associations, corporations and other institutions specially created for the articulation, protection and implementation of the political interests of certain communities and groups. The political organization is made up of the state, political parties, mass public associations and movements, pressure groups, other structures of civil society that support the dominant political force, the media, and the church. At the same time, it stands out: institutions created for purely political purposes; organizations that are called upon to protect the economic, professional, environmental, cultural and other interests of various social groups, on the basis of an active dialogue with state authorities; associations in the activities of which interest in politics is manifested only sporadically.
The debatable issue is the inclusion in the political organization of entities created bypassing or in violation of the current norms of law and pursuing narrowly egoistic and sometimes openly antisocial goals. It is generally accepted that the political system is a constitutional (provided for by the Constitution and laws of the country) formation, all elements of which ensure the implementation of legal political power. At the same time, there is an opinion that those social institutions and formations that are focused on fighting the existing government, for example, organized crime, international terrorism, drug trafficking, should be included in the really operating political system of society. However, this opinion is controversial, since, in fact, their activities are related to anti-system factors, and in certain cases its results (government corruption, criminalization of politics, etc.) destabilize the functioning of the political system.
The specific institution of the political organization is constituted by the armed formations. This is the most common name for groups and units equipped with technical means of physical violence (weapons), under the command of a person responsible to the institutions or communities that created them and subject to the internal disciplinary system. Armed formations can belong to state, national, religious or other socio-political structures. They are classified into two most general types - legal and illegal. Legal armed formations are created by the state or non-state socio-political entities in accordance with the current national legislation and the requirements of international law. These include the regular army created by the state, others, including irregular troops, as well as paramilitaries (special rescue teams, fire brigades, militia and police, military construction detachments, etc.). In addition, sometimes non-state structures are created, but operating under the auspices of the state and in its interests (the Cossacks in pre-revolutionary Russia, the partisan movement during the Great Patriotic War, militia units in modern Dagestan, etc.).
Illegal armed formations are entities that are illegal in nature and can conduct military operations against official political power and state structures. As a rule, they are created by a class, nation, people that have risen to fight in defense of their interests. Illegal armed formations also include formations created by extremist movements and terrorist forces, mafia and criminal groups. These formations sometimes reach significant numbers, possess modern weapons, have large materiel and international ties.
Another component of the political system of society is legal and political norms. They are a set of various kinds of institutions that determine the order and rules for the functioning of the political system, the life of people in the political sphere. We are talking about written and unwritten requirements, a kind of "rules of the political game" that determine the permitted and permissible forms, methods of political activity and struggle. Of course, these rules are not absolute. History knows a lot of facts when both the authorities (the state) and the opposition use illegitimate and even illegal means of fighting their opponents. Legal and political norms include: norms of national legislation and international law, statutory norms of social and political associations, national morality, political traditions and ethics, religious canons and other rules and regulations governing political relations. In the system of state law, military law occupies a special place - a set of legal norms and rules established by the state that are generally binding for state institutions, public organizations, officials and citizens, regulating relations in the field of ensuring military security, defense and military development, as well as the life of the armed forces.
An integral part of the political system of society is political consciousness. This is a form of ideal reflection of the processes and phenomena of the surrounding world through the prism of real political-power relations in society, a way of understanding and explaining them in people's thinking. As such, it encompasses a set of ideas and feelings, views, assessments and attitudes, ideas and concepts that express the attitude of people to the implemented and desired policy, as well as determine the ability and readiness of a person to participate in managing the affairs of society and the state, his political behavior.
Military ideology is a part of public consciousness. It is a system of views and ideas that expresses the attitude of political actors towards war and other forms of armed violence, as well as towards the army as the main instrument for implementing military policy. This is a reflection and understanding by people of military-political life and a value attitude towards it. They are formed in the form of ordinary views and ideas, formed on the basis of everyday experience of a person, and scientifically grounded ideas and principles, which are the product of the theoretical activities of scientists, politicians, and publicists.
Political consciousness includes political ideals and values, political views and beliefs, theoretical and empirical knowledge - political ideology and political psychology, including the collective unconscious. These components of political consciousness are formed and manifested at the individual, group and mass levels. As a result, in the spiritual life of any society there is always a pluralism of opinions and positions. This is due to the fact that political facts are not neutral, they do not lend themselves well to a calm and objective presentation. Moreover, as K. Schmitt wrote, “all political concepts, ideas and words have a polemical meaning; they presuppose a specific opposite, are tied to a specific situation, the last consequence of which is the division of people into groups "friend-foe". In military ideology, this polemic is manifested in the coexistence and struggle of pacifist and militaristic attitudes.
In the scientific literature there is another approach to disclosing the structure of the political system of society.
In accordance with it, it is represented by the following subsystems:
- the communicative subsystem, which is a set of relations and forms of interactions that develop between nations, classes, social groups and individual individuals, political institutions and organizations regarding their participation in state power;
- institutional subsystem, including political institutions and institutions;
- the ideological subsystem, covering the theoretical (political ideology) and empirical (political psychology) levels of political consciousness;
- a normative (regulatory) subsystem that unites legislative acts, political rules and moral principles that determine and regulate the political life of society;
- a cultural subsystem acting as an integrating factor capable of stabilizing the political system as a whole with the help of cultural values, traditions and customs. As G. Almond believed, any political system has a certain pattern of orientations (cognitive, affective and evaluative) of the subject to political action, which he calls political culture;
- functional subsystem, as a set of roles and functions of political subjects, forms and directions, methods and means of their political activity.
In addition, value, information and other subsystems are sometimes distinguished, which, strictly speaking, are a detail of the already named subsystems.
The political system, along with the economic, social, spiritual-ideological, informational, etc., is one of the systems of society. It, in comparison with other systems, occupies a leading position in society, which is determined by its properties and functions.
Formation of political institutions
External influences on the formation and functioning of political institutions. The main source of external influence under Suriname was the Dutch metropolis. At the time of granting independence according to the “accelerated” scheme, copying the Western political model seemed to be the only way to provide the emerging statehood with an effective mechanism of functioning, since the local elite did not have an integral concept of the new statehood.Subsequently, the copied model underwent a significant transformation, faced with the realities of a society formed by ethnic groups - carriers of traditional political cultures. Many concepts and phenomena have acquired a content that is fundamentally different from the Dutch "model" (this situation is most clearly seen in the party system).
The legacy of the Dutch rule is even the territorial and economic structure of the country, which largely influences the course of socio-political processes and conflicts in the country. In particular, the development of the coastal regions, where the majority of the population of Suriname still lives today, was carried out using technologies developed during the development of the coastal regions of the Netherlands. Conflicts and splits. The existing imbalances in territorial development can give rise to noticeable conflict situations, as has already happened in the past.
Since the majority of Suriname's population is concentrated in a limited space, residents of large areas suffer from underdeveloped infrastructure and other consequences of the generally weak state presence in their places of permanent residence. The lack of attention of the leadership to their problems creates conditions for an equally dismissive or even hostile attitude towards state institutions on the part of this category of citizens.
Despite the peace agreement concluded by the government with the "forest blacks" living on the semi - periphery between the relatively developed coastline and the undeveloped hinterland, and the Indians inhabiting the least developed regions of the country, these ethnic groups retain a very high potential for conflict, which may manifest itself in the event of increased activity of foreign companies in the rainforest zone.
The unwillingness of the authorities and foreign investors to compensate for the damage done to the ecosystem of Suriname in the form of paying deductions from profits to local residents can generate discontent among the population, including provoking violent actions against company personnel and government officials. At the same time, it is impossible to exclude the advancement of populist demands for autonomy and the involvement of various criminal structures in potential conflicts.
Institutions of Political Governance
Management is a systematic, purposeful impact of the subject of management activity on a managed object in order to streamline it, preserve and develop. But the control process is not limited only to the "influence" of the subject on the object, but also presupposes feedback or, in other words, the "response" of the controlled system to the influence of the controlling subject. Thus, there is an interaction between the subject and the object of control.Society (political system), like any system, is subject to the action of various regulators, including spontaneous ones. Management is the highest form of conscious regulation of the processes of functioning and development of the system.
The management structure consists of the following main elements:
The subject of management is an individual, group, organization, social (political) institution, which are carriers of managerial influence on an object.
The object of management is a social (political) system (society, social community, organization, individual, etc.), to which all types of managerial influence are directed.
Management resources are everything that can "force" a managed object to fulfill the instructions (instructions, orders) of the subject. It can be: material reward, physical coercion, charisma and power of the subject of management, moral and legal norms, traditions, ideas, and more.
The purpose of management is to maintain the stable functioning of the controlled object, its further development or transfer of the object to a new qualitative state (reforming).
Politics is just one of the types of management of social relations in society. In addition to political, there are other types of governance: administrative, legal, economic, sociocultural, etc. Political governance, due to the fact that it has a monopoly on political power in society, dominates over all other types of governance. Therefore, where all other types of management in solving emerging social problems and conflicts are ineffective, it becomes necessary to apply political methods based on the power of power. It is the attribute of power and the possibility of its application that distinguishes political governance from all its other types.
Political governance is one of the forms of interaction between subjects in connection with the development, adoption and implementation of political decisions. It is based on such key concepts as management, politics, state, power.
Each of them gives political governance its own specifics and limits of competence:
1) being one of the varieties of management, political management in solving functional problems "uses" many principles and methods of the general theory of management;
2) from the position of the state, political management is one of the types of government along with such types as administrative, economic, social and others;
3) from the point of view of politics, political management is not only the prerogative of the state, but is within the competence of the entire political system. In this sense, political administration in a democratic political system is much broader than public administration;
4) the concept of power in political management presupposes the relationship of domination and subordination arising between the subject and the object of government.
There are several approaches to defining the concept and essence of political governance.
The first approach assumes that antagonistic class contradictions are at the heart of political governance, and the essence of governance itself lies in the organized violence of the ruling class against the enslaved classes. This approach is called class or Marxist.
The second approach assumes only subject-object relations in the system of political control, when the main subject of politics (the ruling party, certain state bodies) develops and makes political decisions, and the executive and administrative structures execute the decisions.
With this approach, management has a political character only for the institutions of political power dominating in society and the state, and executive and administrative activity is only a means of realizing political will.
The third approach is based on the fact that in totalitarian and authoritarian political systems, political relations are absorbed by administrative ones and political governance is transformed into an administrative one, which presupposes the state's monopoly on power and control. In the history of Russia, administrative control often took the form of uncontested political coercion and direct physical violence.
The fourth approach assumes that subject-subject relations are the most characteristic for political governance, while subject-object relations are not excluded. This is a special sphere of interaction between the subjects of politics and management regarding the development, adoption and implementation of political decisions, when none of the positions is undoubtedly dominant, when there is a constant need for dialogue and search for compromises, when managerial decisions are aimed at resolving socially significant problems. "
Each of the above approaches to defining the concept and essence of political governance has theoretical justifications and practical examples in the history of various countries. But the fourth approach, which presupposes both subject-subject and subject-object political relations, corresponds to the greatest extent to modern ideas about political governance. For example, during elections of representatives to legislative and executive bodies of power, social groups (voters) function as subjects of political control. The cadre composition of the elected bodies of power and their policy largely depends on their political will (political choice).
After being elected, elective institutions function as subjects of political control, and, in particular, large and small social groups of society become the objects of their control. But this does not exclude the participation of civil society and its individual structures in the development and adoption of political decisions, both directly (elections, referendum, rallies, demonstrations, public opinion and others), and indirectly, through their representatives in state bodies and civil society institutions.
This approach to political governance is most typical for democratic countries, which have a rule of law and a developed civil society. In addition, political governance presupposes the existence of an effective regulatory and legal system (“rules of the game”) that does not allow any subject to take dominant positions and impose their will on others. After all, political governance must take into account all the diversity of public interests; possess civilized methods of settling emerging conflicts and the art of compromise and consensus.
The democratic system of political governance is a continuous process of mutual accounting and coordination of public interests at all stages of development, adoption and implementation of managerial decisions. This is a system of political relations in which the subjects and objects of control are in constant interdependence with each other, when direct and feedback, as it were, balance each other.
But if the country does not have a developed civil society and a rule of law, then a democratic version of political governance is, in principle, impossible.
States differ from each other not only in area, population, and the level of well-being of citizens. Their internal organization can also be very different. What are the main features of the country's political structure? What are their forms and regimes distinguish in the modern theory of the state? This will be discussed in this article.
What is a state?
The state is a voluminous multifaceted category, which is studied by a number of scientific disciplines: from geography to sociology. Unlike a specific territory or geographic country, this formation is difficult to empirical perception, being more abstract than a real object of study.
The phenomenon of the state, its political structure, form of government - these questions have troubled the minds of many philosophers and scientists in various historical epochs. So, such thinkers as Aristotle and Plato, Thomas Aquinas and Confucius, John Locke and Herbert Spencer were engaged in the study of all possible aspects of the state.
The ancient Greek philosopher Plato devoted one of his works (dialogues) to this problem under the same name "The State". In this work, you can find several interesting ideas that have not lost their relevance today. So, he said that wise philosophers should be at the head of the state, because only they are able to properly take care of citizens. Plato was also not very fond of the political system of the democratic type. He called democracy a just and at the same time unjust rule of the majority.
Signs and functions of the state
The state is a very complex social structure, the idea of which can be formed through the main features of this formation. There are seven of them:
- territory strictly delineated in geographic space;
- certain population;
- the presence of laws (norms of behavior);
- the presence of a system of law enforcement and court authorities monitoring the implementation of established laws;
- the presence of an army;
- functioning of the system of taxation of citizens;
- the presence of state sovereignty (independence).
Based on these characteristics, the state is obliged to perform several functions, namely:
- political;
- economic;
- social;
- defensive;
- law enforcement;
- cultural and educational and some others.
In this article, we will dwell in more detail on the first of these functions, having examined in detail the forms and regimes of the country's political structure. Which ones are the most popular today?
The political structure of the state and its main forms
Different scientists, philosophers and thinkers have differently assessed the role of the state. Sometimes these assessments were polar opposite to each other. Thus, Vladimir Lenin asserted that "the state is an apparatus of violence in the hands of the ruling class." But the famous Russian existentialist Nikolai Berdyaev was sure that it was the state that allowed earthly human life not to turn into a final hell.
Both statements are equally valid. The effectiveness of the education considered in this article largely depends on the specific form of the political structure of the state. Indeed, in some countries of the planet, we see how the rulers are really trying to work for their people. In other states, the apparatus of power only oppresses and uses its citizens.
The socio-political structure is a process and at the same time the result of the organization of power in a particular country. It includes both the type of state structure and the political regime.
The form of a political structure is a way of national as well as territorial organization of the state. It provides for the establishment of certain relationships between central and regional (local) authorities.
The political structure can take three main forms. It is a unitary state, federation, and also a confederation.
Unitary state: characteristics and signs
A unitary state is understood as a political structure of a country in which its individual administrative-territorial units do not have sovereignty. Among the main features of this form are the following:
- unified citizenship and lawmaking system;
- leadership of the country from a single center (capital);
- unified financial and tax system;
- united army;
- common state symbols are the flag, coat of arms and anthem.
In modern political science, several types of unitary states are distinguished. It:
- strictly centralized;
- decentralized.
Unitary states can have one (examples: Tajikistan, Ukraine) or several autonomies (examples: Moldova, Spain).
In a quantitative aspect, it is the unitary states that prevail in the modern world. This can be clearly seen on the map, where they are all marked in blue. As a rule, these are small countries with a predominance of one nation. Although there are exceptions among them. One of them is China, which has several autonomous regions of different levels.
characteristics and signs
A federation is a special political system in which certain parts of the state have a certain sovereignty, which is legally secured. The word itself has Latin roots and is translated as "union" or "union".
One of the distinguishing features of a federal state is the so-called double legislation. What does it mean? Laws can be created by both central authorities and regional authorities. At the same time, bills adopted at the level of individual subjects of the federation should not contradict general federal legislation.
In federations, as a rule, there is a single monetary unit, but the tax system can be two-channel. This means that a specific subject of the federation has the right to form its own regional budget and distribute its funds.
In the world, there are symmetrical and In the first, territorial entities have equal rights, but secondly, their legal status is not the same.
Federations on the modern political map of the planet are evenly distributed (there are 28 in total). Among them are almost all the largest countries in the world: Russia, USA, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, India.
Confederation: essence and historical examples
A confederation means an alliance of several states, created to achieve a goal: military, economic or other. The countries that make up the confederation, as a rule, retain their sovereignty both in domestic politics and in the global arena.
The main features of confederations are the absence of:
- common boundaries;
- a unified system of lawmaking;
- a unified financial system;
- a single constitution;
- uniform citizenship.
All decisions in the confederation are made by consensus. Moreover, each of its participants reserves the right to freely withdraw from such a union.
Confederations were widespread throughout the 18th-19th centuries in Europe. In the last century, there were still several classical confederations: this and also Senegambia. However, they existed for a fairly short time. Today, the features of a confederation can be observed on the example of the European Union or the organization of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States).
The main forms of the state legal regime
Those in power in each of the countries of the world can exercise their powers in different ways. The set of methods and means of exercising power is the state-legal regime. It acts as the most important element, a criterion for determining the essence of a particular state.
There are several types (forms) of the state legal regime. It can be democratic or non-democratic (authoritarian, totalitarian, fascist, etc.).
Distinguishing from the totalitarian can be very difficult. So, for example, the leadership of the Soviet Union positioned itself before the whole world as "an island of democratic rights and freedoms." And many peoples of the planet sincerely believed in this lie.
Authoritarianism and its signs
"Power of the founder" - this is how the term can be roughly translated from Latin. Under this political regime, absolutely all power is in the hands of one person (or a group of people).
- powerful centralization of power;
- command-planned way of governing the country;
- strict control of various aspects of public life by the state;
- the absence of the real for individual branches (legislative, executive, judicial);
Under this regime, they are electoral, they are directed against only the most active opponents of the authorities. Pluralism of thought, in general, is allowed, but only if it does not cause tangible harm to the system. These two features distinguish authoritarianism from totalitarianism.
Totalitarianism and its signs
Few people know that this term was coined by the dictator Mussolini in the 1920s. Totalitarianism means complete (total) control of the state in all spheres of public life. Despotism, tyranny, repression and mass denunciations are all typical features of this political regime.
Under totalitarianism, society as a whole and each individual are completely absorbed by the state. Pluralism of opinions is not allowed in any area of life. Another distinctive feature of totalitarianism is a rigid vertical of power.
In world history, examples of both "left" and "right" totalitarianism are known. The first was characteristic of the Soviet Union, the second - for fascist Germany or the dictatorial regime of B. Mussolini.
Democracy and its main features
Democracy is (literal translation from ancient Greek). Under such a regime, the people, or rather, its majority, act as the bearer of power in the state.
It should be noted that the outstanding thinker Plato did not like democracy. He considered it one of the worst forms of government. But the famous politician Winston Churchill once described it as follows: "Democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others that are known to history." So the British Prime Minister subtly emphasized the lack of alternative to this political regime.
The most important features of a democracy are:
- universal suffrage, as a result of which power is formed;
- recognition of the supreme power of the people at the legal level;
- absolute equality of rights for all citizens, regardless of gender, age or nationality;
- subordination of the minority to the majority;
- public control over the actions of the executive branch.
Political structure of Russia
Modern Russia is a federal state. This is a presidential-parliamentary republic in which the president is endowed with fairly broad powers. The main institutions of power in the country were formed in the early 1990s, immediately after the collapse of the USSR. At the beginning of this century, minor amendments were made to their functioning.
Russia has a complex administrative and territorial structure. The state includes 85 subjects of the federation, which are endowed with equal rights and powers. Each of them has its own legislative body, as well as its own regional government. In addition, Russia is divided into nine more federal districts.
The modern political structure of Russia has the features of both a territorial and a national federation. Formations of the national type in the Russian Federation are represented by republics. Territorial formations are regions, territories, autonomies, as well as cities of federal significance. Such a mixed nature of the political system requires a rather flexible and well-thought-out policy on the part of the authorities.
Finally…
The form of the political structure of the state refers to the way the country is governed. In modern theory of the state, it is customary to distinguish three such forms: a unitary state, a federation and a confederation. Each of them has its own characteristics and characteristics.
The political map of the planet of the XXI century is dominated by unitary states. There are much fewer federations, but there are, in fact, no confederations at all.
Search
We can notify you about new articles,