The core of political activity is activity. Democracy: theory and political practice. Methodology and procedure for performing work

Political activity is a form of social being of politics. Politics in the proper sense of the word is a field of activity associated with the realization of the needs and interests of various groups of people, the core of which is the conquest, retention and use of state power.

Each sphere of society's life: economic, social, spiritual, etc., is characterized by a combination of its inherent forms and types of activities and social relations. It occupies a special place political activity, which is the main content of politics, political life. To define the content of political activity means to give an essential definition of politics. And, apparently, this should begin with the definition of the concept of "activity". In the scientific literature, activity in the broad sense of the word is understood as a specific form of active attitude to the surrounding world, the content of which is its expedient change and transformation in the interests of people. The activity of a person or a group of people appears as an ordered process consisting of a number of interrelated elements: object and subject, purpose of activity, means of activity, result of activity. The above provisions can be fully attributed to politics, which is one of the most common types of human activity.

Political activity, therefore, can be defined as the systematic conscious intervention of individuals and groups of people in the system of political relations in order to adapt it to their interests. In turn, political activity appears as a continuous series of specific political actions, which can be called certain actions, actions of intention or spontaneously undertaken by an individual or a group of people in order to cause certain political results, consequences.

The essence of political activity is revealed when characterizing its structural elements:

The subjects of political activity are the direct participants in political actions - social groups and their organizations;

The objects of political activity are the existing social and political structure, which the subjects of political activity seek to change and transform. The political structure is the unity of the social class structure of society, the totality of social relations and the constitutional mechanism of politics, that is, the political system;

The goal of political activity in the broad sense of the word is either to strengthen the existing type of political relations, or to partially transform or destroy them and create a different socio-political system. The discrepancy between the goals of various social actors gives rise to the sharpness of their political confrontation. Determining the goals of political activity is complex scientific task and at the same time art. Absolutely and relatively unrealizable goals are called political utopias. However, in politics, the possible is often achieved only because its participants strived for the impossible behind it. The French poet and publicist Lamartine called utopias "prematurely expressed truths."

The motive of political activity is what encourages people to be active, what they begin to act for (from the French motif - I move). Of paramount importance among the motives belongs to the interests of society as a whole: ensuring security, public order. Then come class interests and those social groups the scale of interests is closed by the interests of small social groups and individuals. In order for political action to take place, it is important for the social subject to realize his needs and interests. Theoretically expressed awareness of interests is called ideology.

Means of political action in dictionaries are defined as techniques, methods, objects, devices used to achieve goals. As for the methods, in politics as means (methods) one can consider any actions, actions performed individually or collectively and aimed at maintaining or changing the existing political reality. It is impossible to give a fairly complete list of means in politics, but some of them are: rallies, demonstrations, manifestations, elections, referendums, political speeches, manifestos, meetings, negotiations, consultations, decrees, reforms, uprisings, negotiations, putsches, revolutions, counter-revolutions, terror, war.

The results of political action are expressed in those changes in the socio-political structure that were the result of the actions taken, both on a general and local scale. Specifically, they can be expressed depending on the type of existing political actions - revolution, reform or coup - their results can be varying degrees of change in the system of organization of power: replacement of the subject of power (revolution); changes in the strength of power (reform); increase in the amount of power, personal changes in power (coup).

Depending on the changes that political actions cause, three main types of actions can be distinguished:

Revolutions, uprisings, counter-revolutions as political actions differ: in the sphere of relations of domination and subordination - by the change of the ruling social class; in the sphere of power - the change of the ruling group by means of violence against the former groups;

Reform and counter-reform as political actions do not lead to the destruction of the foundations of the existing power of the ruling groups, but fix only concessions on their part, they are carried out "from above" using legal means;

Political coups - a state or "palace" coup, putsch, conspiracy as political actions lead to change only within the existing government, primarily to personal changes in the center that makes political decisions.

All three of these types of political actions are important for the organization of political life, but even more significant are the actions carried out by the ruling elite, the entire system of social institutions controlled by it and, above all, the state and called domestic and foreign policy.

Another structuring of political activity is also possible, when such main blocks are distinguished in it as:

Professional political activity, which in turn is realized as a political functioning (the activity of the political bureaucracy, officials, apparatuses) and political leadership, is the core of the management of social processes in society. However, identifying political leadership with any kind of social management illegally. The main content of political leadership: the development, adoption and implementation of decisions that regulate the activities of political and civil society;

Political participation means various kinds individual and group non-professional activities related to politics. Forms of political participation can be very diverse in direction, significance, and effectiveness. Distinguish between active, proactive, passive, supportive participation. The most significant types of political participation can be: activities in political organizations, movements, parties; attending political meetings; electoral activity. The literature distinguishes: direct and indirect participation; autonomous and mobilized. The most important function of political participation is the formation of policy and control over its implementation, the formation and establishment of political culture, control over the behavior of political elites.

The political activity of people is inextricably linked with their behavior. There is no unambiguous understanding of the category "political behavior" in the literature; there are three points of view on this issue:

1. Behavior is the outward manifestation of political action;

2. Political behavior and political action are identical concepts;

3. Political behavior is a specific form of political activity.

The specifics of political behavior is as follows:

This is primarily a subject-subject relationship, while political activity is primarily a subject-object relationship;

Political behavior is a type of activity that is directed at the subject himself and expresses his state in the process of action.

G.P. The Eternal considers behavior as a kind of activity aimed at changing the state of the subject, and not at changing what is outside the subject.

The foregoing allows us to note that the concept of "behavior" refers to any political actions that characterize the state of the subject during the activity. Such an interpretation this concept corresponds to its definition from a psychological point of view. The specificity of political behavior, in contrast to activity, is manifested in specific varieties of its subjects. These are individuals, groups, masses, crowds. Accordingly, the types of behavior are distinguished: individual, group, mass. In addition, behavior can be classified: based on motives - conscious, unconscious, arbitrary, spontaneous; according to situational features - stable, unstable, crisis, unexpected; by means of manifestation - rebellion, protest, mass discontent; by duration - long-term, short-term; by direction - conscious, controlled, uncontrolled (impulsive, pathological).

Thus, despite the fact that political behavior is inseparable from political activity, its analysis does not duplicate the explanation of political activity, but allows revealing the state of subjects of various levels and modifications in various processes of this activity.

Literature

1. Melnik V.A. Political science: A textbook for universities. - Mn., 1996. - Ch. 9. - § 1.

2. Zerkin D.L. Fundamentals of political science: a course of lectures. - Rostov n / D., 1997. - S. 306-325.

3. Political science: a course of lectures / Ed. M.N. Marchenko. - M., 1999. - S. 301-316.

4. Demidov A.K. Political activity. - Saratov, 1987.

In political science, there are different approaches to understanding politics. One of them is to consider politics as one of the four main areas of society. The sphere of politics includes both political consciousness and political organizations (government, parliament, parties, etc.), and the tasks that various social groups seek to solve using power, and the political process, going through conflicts and cooperation, including measures to maintaining stability in society and reform. The second approach is based on the understanding of politics as a special type social relations between individuals, small groups and large communities, i.e., relations associated with power, the state, managing the affairs of society. Finally, the third approach is to consider politics as one of the types of activity, that is, the activity of its subjects - participants in political life. All three approaches give a multidimensional view of one object - politics. Historical development and the experience of many generations of thinkers involved in the study of politics and political activity is concentrated in modern science of science, in particular, in political science, sociology, political psychology and other branches of social science.

Politics is activity government agencies, political parties, social movements in the sphere of relations between large social groups, primarily classes, nations and states, aimed at integrating their efforts in order to strengthen political power or win it by specific methods.

Politics is a special kind of activity associated with the participation of social groups, parties, movements, individuals in the affairs of society and the state, their leadership or influence on this leadership. When considering politics as an activity, there is every reason to recognize it as both a science and the art of managing (the state, people), building relationships and realizing interests, as well as gaining, retaining, and using political power.

It follows that political activity is the main content of the political sphere of life. To define the content of the concept of political activity is to give an essential definition of politics.

Political activity is a kind of activity, directions for changing or maintaining existing political relations. Basically, political activity is the management and management of social relations with the help of institutions of power. Its essence is the management of people, human communities.

The specific content of political activity is: participation in the affairs of the state, determining the forms, tasks and directions of the state, the distribution of power, control over its activities, as well as other impact on political institutions. Each of the moments noted generalizes diverse types of activity: for example, the direct performance of political functions by people within the framework of government institutions and political parties and indirect participation associated with the delegation of powers to certain institutions; professional and non-professional activities; leading and executive activities aimed at strengthening a given political system or, on the contrary, at its destruction; institutionalized or non-institutionalized activities (for example, extremism), etc.

Political activity is also manifested in various forms of participation of the broad masses of the people in the political life of society. In the course of political activity, its participants enter into specific relationships with each other. It can be cooperation, union, mutual support, and confrontation, conflict, struggle. The essence of political activity is revealed in the specifics of its object and structural elements: the subject, goals, means, conditions, knowledge, motivation and norms, and finally, the activity process itself.

The subjects of politics are, firstly, large social communities, which include social groups and strata, classes, nations, estates, etc.; secondly, political organizations and associations (states, parties, mass movements); thirdly, political elites are relatively small groups concentrating power in their hands; fourth, personalities, and above all political leaders.

AT modern Russia the most influential subjects of political activity are political parties and movements (especially in the person of their leaders), all kinds of power structures and bodies, public associations, population (at the time of referendums and election campaigns).

The object of policy is the subject to which the activity of the acting subject is directed and in which the change results. Most often, both the object and the subject of political activity are people, that is, participants in political activity. In political activity, the object-subject relationship is an organic unity: after all, a person is the main subject and object of politics; social groups, organizations, movements also act both as objects of political activity and as its subjects. In addition, the objects of political activity can be social phenomena, processes, situations, facts. From the consideration of the objects of political activity, we can conclude that politics affects the whole society, on all aspects of its life. From this follows the conclusion about the great importance of political activity in the development of society.

Political activity, like any other, involves the definition of its goals. They are divided into long-term (they are called strategic) and current goals. Goals can be relevant, priority and irrelevant, real and unrealistic. How relevant, on the one hand, and how realistic, on the other hand, this or that goal can be answered only through a complete and accurate analysis of the main trends in social development, urgent social needs, the alignment of political forces, and the interests of various social groups.

Of particular importance is the question of the availability of funds with which to achieve the intended goals. The attitude: the end justifies the means is characteristic of dictatorial regimes and their political carriers. Demanding that the means correspond to the democratic, humane goals of politics is the norm of truly popular forces and political structures expressing their interests. However, many scholars note that a politician often has to choose: either to prevent the danger of taking harsh measures that do not quite correspond to “absolute morality”, or by inaction to allow damage to society. The moral limit that cannot be crossed is today reflected in human rights documents, in international humanitarian law.

An essential feature of political activity is its rationality. Rational actions are conscious, planned, with a clear understanding of the goals and necessary means. Rationality in politics is specific: it includes ideology. The ideological component permeates every political action, as long as it is oriented towards certain values ​​and interests. Moreover, it is a criterion sign of its orientation.

The rational moment, of course, is decisive in the subjective semantic content of political action, expressing the attitude of the subject to the institutions of power. However, political action is not limited to rationality. It leaves room for the irrational as a deviation from purposefulness. Irrational - these are actions motivated mainly by the emotional states of people, for example, their irritation, hatred, fear, impressions of ongoing events. In real political life, rational and irrational principles combine and interact. Political actions are spontaneous and organized. A spontaneous rally and a carefully prepared party conference are examples of such actions.

Recently, the importance of such methods of political activity as persuasion, the study of public opinion, a constructive dialogue between various political forces, control over compliance with legal regulations, predicting the consequences of certain political actions. All this requires a high political culture, moral self-control, and political will from the subjects of politics.

Political activity is differentiated into theoretical and practical. Being relatively independent, they are interdependent. Political theory acquires effectiveness and efficiency when it is based on practical experience and coincides with the needs and interests of those groups represented by the subject of politics.

Political activity is heterogeneous; several distinct states can be distinguished in its structure. It is advisable to start their analysis with a type of activity whose political significance is undoubtedly very great, but the meaning of which lies precisely in the rejection and denial of politics. They are political alienation.

Political alienation is a state of relations between a person and political power, which is characterized by a concentration of human efforts on solving the problems of personal life when they are separated and opposed to political life. Politics is considered in the sphere of alienation as a kind of activity that does not concern real problems, human interests, and contact with political power is considered extremely undesirable. Here a purely forced contact is established with the authorities, the state through a system of duties, taxes, taxes, etc. For the ruling groups, political alienation is expressed in the transformation public service into the service sector only of private, narrow group interests, power is usurped by individuals, replaced by the struggle of cliques representing corporate interests. Serving the interests of social integrity turns into a means of maintaining only individual life. A striking manifestation of political alienation is the phenomenon of bureaucracy.

The next type of political activity is political passivity.

Political passivity is a type of political activity in which the subject, and it can be either an individual or a social group, does not realize its own interests, but is under the political influence of another social group. Passivity in politics is not inactive; it is a specific form of activity and a form of politics when a social group realizes not its own, but political interests alien to it. A type of political passivity is conformism, which is expressed in the acceptance by a social group of the values ​​of the political system as its own, although they do not correspond to its vital interests. The means of forming conformist political attitudes is a specific technique of influencing the consciousness and behavior of people - manipulation, which involves "the transformation of people into controlled objects, the deformation of their inner world, thoughts, feelings and actions, and thereby the destruction of their personalities through influences that distort ideas about real interests and needs, and imperceptibly, with the seeming preservation of free will, they subordinate people to a will that is alien to them. The manipulation system focuses primarily on the subconscious sphere of the human psyche, and its methods and means modern societies become more and more sophisticated, actively use the achievements of psychology and sociology.

The criterion for the political activity of an individual or a social group is the desire and ability, influencing political power or directly using it, to realize their interests.

The nature of political activity varies significantly depending on the specifics of the problems that cause it, the time of occurrence of the tasks it is aimed at, and the composition of participants.

AT modern conditions political activity has the following characteristic features:

• - the growing desire of citizens to act outside the traditional forms of political activity and participation, instead of rigidly formalized political parties, preference is given to political movements without a clearly defined organized structure;
• - association is increasingly being made not around any party, but around a problem, about its solution;
• - the number of citizens interested in politics is growing, but at the same time the number of parties is falling;
• - More and more people are inclined towards independent politicization, they do not associate their participation in politics with belonging to one or another active political force, structure, but strive to act independently.

The initial stage of pronounced vigorous activity, when the political subject makes a clear choice of the trend of action, is a political position.

A mature form of political activity is a political movement, that is, such a purposeful and long-term social action of a certain social group, which has as its goal the transformation of the political system or its conscious protection.

Thus, the concept of "political activity" reflects the whole variety of people's actions in the field of politics, and the concept of "political activity" - the leading creative, transformative form of political activity, expresses the essence of politics - the implementation by a social group of its own interests. Political participation is a characteristic of the degree of involvement of the subject in politically active action, and the concept of "political behavior" allows you to reveal the mechanism, the structure of political activity.

Lecture 12

test questions and work protection

Methodology and procedure for performing work

Equipment and materials

For execution laboratory work The following equipment and materials are required:

Personal computer containing microprocessor model Intel 804486 or higher;

Hard magnetic disk with a capacity of 1 GB or more;

Operating system families Windows versions not lower than 98;

Excel spreadsheet processor.

1. Turn on the computer.

2. Download the EXCEL program.

3. Create three payrolls for departments respectively: department1, department2, department3 on three sheets in one book of the following form:

The table should have 10 entries.

On the next sheet, create a pivot table:

Consolidated statement of issuance wages employees of LLC "Computer World"

4.Save the book in your folder, choose a name arbitrarily.

1. Form of the report - written.

2. Describe the performance of work when performing laboratory work.

3. Demonstrate this work on a PC.

4. Answer security questions.

1.Tell us about the method of transferring data from one table to another?

2. What is the difference between the method of copying data using the Edit, Copy commands from the method considered in this laboratory work?

3. How to multiply values ​​across the entire pivot table?

4. How to use the function wizard to use the formula for calculating the average value?

5 What other options does the Function Wizard provide?

1) Political activity.

2) Political leadership.

3) Typology of leaders.

1) Political activity. The functioning of the political system is the process of action of its subjects: state institutions, parties, public organizations, elites, leaders and all citizens. The state, for example, as M. Weber noted, is a complex of specific joint actions of people.

The concept of activity covers the whole variety of forms of active attitude of people to the world around them - natural and social, including its expedient change in accordance with human needs. Each sphere of society's life (economic, social, spiritual, etc.) is characterized by the totality of its inherent forms and activities, as well as social relations.

A special place is occupied by political activity, which is the main content of the political sphere of life. Political activity is a set of organized actions of subjects both within the political system and outside it, subordinated to the implementation of common social interests and goals. Basically, political activity is the management and management of social relations with the help of institutions of power. Its essence is the management of people, human communities.

The specific content of political activity is: participation in the affairs of the state, determining the forms, tasks and directions of the state, the distribution of power, control over its activities, as well as other impact on political institutions. Each of the moments noted generalizes diverse types of activity: the direct performance of political functions by people within the framework of government institutions and political parties and indirect participation associated with the delegation of powers to certain institutions; professional and non-professional activities; leading and executive activities aimed at strengthening this political system or, on the contrary, at its destruction; institutionalized or non-institutionalized activities (for example, extremism); systemic or non-systemic, etc. M. Weber, speaking about the composition of political activity, emphasized, first of all, the activity of maintaining order in the country, i.e., "existing relations of domination."

If we talk about the institutions that make up the political system, then the activity of each of them has natural features and, above all, different means of achieving them. Each political and social institution in its essence represents a certain system of activities.

The essence of political activity is revealed in the specifics of its object and structural elements: the subject, goals, means, conditions, knowledge, motivation, and, finally, the very process of activity.

The direct object of political activity is political values, institutions, the political system as a whole and the social groups, parties, elites, and leaders behind them.

The sphere of political activity does not include society as a whole, not social class relations in all possible aspects, but only the relations of society, social groups, classes, strata, elites to the institutions of political power and the latter to society.

The action of an individual acquires political meaning insofar as it is included in the system of social relations and is an element of group activity. There is another point of view on the content of political activity. According to M. Weber, political action (like any social action) can be understood only on the basis of the behavior of individuals.

Unlike other subjects of social action, the subject of political activity is characterized, first of all, by the fact that it always acts as an organized (in one form or another) social force. The political forces acting in a given situation, in a given political process, are always one way or another organized social groups, classes, strata, national communities, and finally, international associations (state unions, movements, etc.). Political action in any case is the action of groups of people (and not separate, disparate individuals), united by a certain common goal and guided by general rules"games". The highest form of organization of political activity are political institutions, including the state and political parties.

2) Political leadership. The unequal position of participants in political life in the political hierarchy is due to their varying degrees of proximity to power and the ability to make strategic decisions, as well as the ability to influence social change. Even within the elite, some of its representatives differ from others in their priority in their influence on society. A person who has a permanent and decisive impact on society, state, organization, is called a political leader. The tasks of leaders include the development of agreed development goals, the distribution of functions and roles among the participants in social interactions, the streamlining of the behavior of integral elements of the system in order to increase the efficiency of the functioning of society as a whole. Thus, the actual significance of the problem of leadership is connected with the search for effective forms of leadership and management of social processes.

Theories of leadership. Community leadership is social function, due to the ability of a person to consciously set generally significant goals and determine ways to achieve them within the framework of political institutions created for this. Specific forms and ways of exercising leadership depend on the cultural maturity of the society, the level of autonomy of various interest groups, and the awareness of the need for collective action to maintain progress. social system generally.

One can understand the phenomenon of leadership and its evolution by analyzing its components: 1) the character of the leader; 2) his political convictions; 3) motivation of political activity; 4) properties of his supporters and all political subjects interacting with him; 5) the specific historical situation when the leader came to power; 6) technology of leadership implementation. A holistic and multifaceted picture of the manifestation of leadership develops as society evolves, the complexity of social relationships that actualize the specific functions of a leader.

In primitive In societies, the functions of a leader are weak and are reduced mainly to ensuring the physical survival of community members. The leaders themselves appear as heroes endowed with special physical qualities and moral virtues. Thus, Plato portrayed the leader as a person who has an innate propensity for knowledge, distinguished by a resolute rejection of lies, a love of truth. According to his ideas, modesty, nobility, justice, generosity, spiritual perfection are inherent in the leader.

The ethical and mythological tradition in the analysis of political leadership retained its influence in the Middle Ages, introducing into it the idea that leaders were chosen by God, in contrast to mere mortals.

N. Machiavelli transferred the problem of political leadership from the realm of the imaginary and proper to the plane real life. In the works "The Sovereign" and "Reflections on the First Decade of Titus Livius" he defined the nature, functions and technology of leadership. The character of the leader N. Machiavelli derived from the interaction of the ruler and subjects. A wise leader combines the qualities of a lion (strength and honesty) and the qualities of a fox (mystification and skillful pretense). Therefore, he has both innate and acquired qualities. By nature, a person is given less than he receives, living in society. He is straightforward, cunning or talented by birth, but ambition, greed, vanity, cowardice are formed in the process of socialization of the individual.

Dissatisfaction is the stimulus for active activity. The fact is that people always want more, but they can not always achieve this. The gap between the desired and the actual gives rise to a dangerous tension that can break a person, make him greedy, envious and insidious, since the desire to receive exceeds our strength, and opportunities are always lacking. As a result, there is dissatisfaction with what a person already owns. N. Machiavelli called this state of dissatisfaction. It is she who contributes to the transformation of the desired into reality.

The role of a leader in society is determined by the functions that he is called upon to perform. Among essential functions N. Machiavelli singled out the provision of public order and stability in society; integration of heterogeneous interests and mobilization of the population for the solution of generally significant tasks. In general, N. Machiavelli's theory of leadership is built on four provisions (variables): 1) the leader's power is rooted in the support of his supporters; 2) subordinates must know what they can expect from their leader, and understand what he expects from them; 3) the leader must have the will to survive; 4) the ruler is always a model of wisdom and justice for his supporters.

In the future, researchers of leadership focused on certain components of this multifaceted phenomenon: either on the traits and origins of a leader; either on the social context of his leadership, that is, the social conditions of coming to power and exercising leadership; either on the nature of the relationship between the leader and his supporters; or the results of the interaction between the leader and his followers in certain situations. The emphasis in the analysis of leadership on a particular variable led to an ambiguous interpretation of this phenomenon and initiated the emergence of a number of theories that explored the nature of leadership. Among the most common and generally accepted theories of leadership are trait theory, situational analysis theory, situational personality theory, integrative leadership theory.

AT trait theories (C. Beard, E. Bogardus, Y. Jennings etc.), a leader is seen as a combination of certain psychological traits, the presence of which contributes to his promotion to leading positions and gives him the ability to make power decisions in relation to other people.

Trait theory arose in the early 20th century. influenced by the studies of the English anthropologist F. Galton, who explained the nature of leadership from the standpoint of heredity. The main idea of ​​this approach is the assertion that if a leader has special qualities that distinguish him from supporters, then these qualities can be distinguished. These qualities are inherited.

Senior officials are perceived as exceptional in terms of the dominant political culture and mentality, the population ascribes certain virtues to them. The psychological interpretation of leadership also focuses on the motivation of the leader's behavior. A manifestation of extreme psychologism in understanding the nature of leadership is the concept of psychoanalysis 3. Freud, who interpreted political leadership as a sphere of manifestation of repressed libido - an unconscious attraction of a sexual nature.

An analysis of the destructive type of political behavior with features of masochism and sadism was given by the American psychologist E. Fromm in his work “Necrophiles and Adolf Hitler”. Using the method of psychobiography, E. Fromm traced, starting from early childhood, the process of formation of the destructive political leadership of the leader of Nazi Germany.

However, the isolation of the phenomenon of leadership from the totality of psychological traits of a person or from his motivations and motives (conscious and unconscious) is not able to answer practical questions related to the characteristics of specific leaders.

The theory tried to overcome the psychological interpretation of leadership situational analysis , according to which the leader appears as a result of a confluence of circumstances of place, time, and others. In the life of a group, in various situations, separate individuals stand out who are superior to others in at least one quality. And since it is this quality that is in demand by the prevailing conditions, the person who possesses it becomes a leader. Situational Theory of Leadership considers the leader as a function of a certain situation, emphasizing the relativity of the traits inherent in the leader, and suggesting that qualitatively different circumstances may require qualitatively different leaders.

Attempts to avoid extremes in the interpretation of the phenomenon of leadership (either from the standpoint of the theory of traits, or within the framework of the theory of situational analysis) objectively required expanding the boundaries of the analysis of the factors that form leading positions and determine the content of power influence. These attempts led to the emergence of personality-situational theory. Her Supporters personality-situational theory (G. Gert and S. Mills) tried to overcome the shortcomings of the above theories. Among the variables of leadership, allowing to know its nature, they singled out four factors: 1) the traits and motives of the leader as a person; 2) the images of the leader and the motives that exist in the minds of his followers, prompting them to follow him; 3) characteristics of the leader's role; 4) legal and institutional conditions of its activity.

American political scientist Margaret J. Hermann expanded the number of variables that, in her opinion, allow to reveal the essence of leadership more deeply, including: 1) the main political beliefs of the leader; 2) the political style of the leader; 3) the motives that guide the leader; 4) the leader's reaction to pressure and stress; 5) the circumstances due to which the leader found himself in the position of leader for the first time; 6) previous political experience of the leader; 7) the political climate in which the leader began his political career.

Thus, political science has moved from one-sided psychologism in the analysis of leadership to a more holistic study of this phenomenon using sociological approaches.

The sociological interpretation of the nature of leadership focuses more on the analysis of the interaction between the leader and his followers. It allows you to identify the technology of effective leadership, to understand the logic of the political behavior of the leader.

Within the framework of the integrative approach, motivational concepts of leadership and theories that focus on the specifics of political styles have recently dominated. The latter direction makes it possible to reveal the predictability of the actions of a political leader and their possible effectiveness.

Despite the differences in the interpretation of leadership, in understanding its nature, it is seen as a permanent, priority influence of an individual on society or a group. This influence depends on a number of variables: on the psychological personality traits, on the nature of the relationship between the leader and his supporters, on the motivation of leadership behavior and the behavior of his supporters.

3) Typology of leaders and their functions. The manifestations of leadership are quite diverse. Attempts to classify and typify them are caused by the desire to predict the likely behavior of leaders on the basis of certain signs.

The typology of leadership based on the personal qualities of the leader and the specific situation in which he performs his functions was proposed by the German sociologist M. Weber in his work “Charismatic Domination”. As a classification feature, he put forward the concept of "authority", which he defines as "the probability that orders will meet obedience from a certain group of people." The ability to give orders and expect their execution is based on various resources of power. Accordingly, M. Weber identified three types of domination - traditional, rational-legal, charismatic.

Traditional Leadership relies on customs and traditions, the power of habit, which are rooted in the distant past. The habit of obedience is based on the belief in the sanctity of the tradition of transferring power by inheritance: the leader acquires the right to rule due to his origin. This is the type of authority that was once used by the leader of the tribe, the head of the clan, the monarch.

Charismatic Leadership is based on the belief in God's chosen personality, in the exceptional qualities of this person. Charismatic power, noted M. Weber, "is characterized by the personal devotion of subjects to a person and their faith only in his personality, which is distinguished by outstanding qualities, heroism or other distinctive properties that turn him into a leader." Charismatic leadership is inherent in transitional societies that are undergoing modernization, therefore charismatic domination can create conditions either for traditional power (for example, for a return to the institution of a monarchy), or for a rational-legal one. The peculiarity of charismatic power is that it is devoid of any objective grounds (for example, it does not rely on law, tradition), but exists due to the exclusively personal qualities of a charismatic leader, faith in him.

Rational legal leadership represents bureaucracy. The power of authority is recognized by virtue of "legality", by virtue of faith in the legitimacy legal status and "competence" based on rationally established laws. Power is based on a single set of legal norms accepted by the whole society. The competence of each holder of power is determined by the constitution and legal norms.

One of the most modern and widespread typologies of leaders is M. Hermann's system, which classifies leaders based on their image. M. Hermann identifies four images of leaders based on four variables: the character of the leader; properties of his supporters; ways of interconnection between the leader and his supporters; specific situation in which leadership is exercised.

The first collective image of a leader is standard-bearer leader . He is distinguished by his own view of reality, the presence of an image of the desired future and knowledge of the means to achieve it. Such a leader determines the nature of what is happening, the pace and methods of transformation. The flag-bearing leaders include M. Gandhi, V.I. Lenin, Martin L. King and others.

The second collective image of the leader - servant leader. He achieves recognition through the expression of the interests of his adherents. The leader acts on their behalf, he is the agent of the group. In practice, the leader-servant is guided by what is expected of him, what his constituents believe and need (L.I. Brezhneva, K.U. Chernenko).

The third image leader-dealer. Its essential feature lies in the ability to convince. He achieves recognition from his supporters by knowing their needs, by the desire to satisfy them. Through the ability to persuade the leader-merchant involves adherents in the implementation of their plans. R. Reagan can be considered an example of this type of leader.

The fourth image firefighter leader. It is distinguished by a quick response to the urgent demands of the time, formulated by its supporters. He is able to operate effectively extreme conditions make decisions quickly, respond appropriately to the situation. Most leaders in modern societies can be attributed to this type.

The selection of four collective images of leaders is rather conditional, since such types are rarely found in their pure form. Most often, the leadership of one person at various stages of her political career combines certain properties of each of the listed ideal types.

Recently, classifications of leaders according to the style of behavior have dominated. Five political styles can be distinguished according to the degree of dominance of certain qualities: paranoid, demonstrative, compulsive, depressive and schizoid , although in history there are leaders who combine several styles.

Paranoid political style. It corresponds to the type of leader, which can be designated by the term "master". Such a person is characterized by suspicion, distrust of others, hypersensitivity to hidden threats and motives, a constant thirst for power, control over other people. His behavior and actions are often unpredictable. A paranoid-style politician does not accept a point of view other than his own, rejects any information that does not confirm his theories, attitudes and beliefs (I.V. Stalin, Ivan the Terrible).

Demonstrative political style characteristic of the type of leader who can be called an "artist", since he always "plays for the audience." He is distinguished by a love of demonstrations, he is seized by a passionate desire to please, to constantly attract attention to himself. In many ways, his behavior, political actions depend on whether others like him, whether he is loved by the crowd or not. As a result, he is quite “controllable”, predictable, and may lose his vigilance after hearing enough flatterers. However, he can lose his composure when faced with criticism (A.F. Kerensky, L.D. Trotsky, V.V. Zhirinovsky).

Compulsive political style usually characteristic of a leader whose collective image can be described by the term "excellent student". It is characterized by an almost obsessive desire to do everything in the best way, regardless of the possibilities. The style of his behavior is characterized by tension, lack of lightness, flexibility, maneuver. He is constantly preoccupied, petty, too punctual, dogmatically approaches all instructions, rules, which often causes conflicts in power structures. The “excellent student” feels especially uncomfortable in extreme conditions, when it is necessary to make decisions quickly and use non-standard methods. (L.I. Brezhnev).

Depressive political style represents "comrade-in-arms". A leader of this type is not able to play a leading role and therefore tries to unite with those who can really "make politics". "Companion" often idealizes individuals and political movements, while he himself lags behind events. It does not have a clear political course, sustainable approaches to solving emerging problems. Accepts political reality cautiously and pessimistically, revealing weakness and political lack of will (Nicholas II).

Schizoid political style closely associated with depression. It is represented by the leader - "loner". Self-isolation and self-withdrawal from participation in specific events are more pronounced. The "loner" does not want to join any particular movement and prefers the position of an outside observer. But political responsibility in this case is practically absent. The schizoid style of behavior is historically transient, less independent and ineffective. The “loner” leader, as he participates in political life and expands his powers, transforms his style, supplementing it with the features of a paranoid and demonstrative style. Such a change in the political style was characteristic of the political biography of V.I. Lenin (before the revolution of 1917 - "loner", and after it the features of "owner" and "artist" were added).

The indicated political styles, singled out as “ideal”, are quite rare, they act as trends. They are conditioned by the mentality and culture of society, which include stable ideas about the desired model of society and the role of the leader in it, about the preferred ways to solve emerging problems. Politics differ markedly due to the non-identity of the national cultures of different countries. The type of dominant culture also determines the nature of the political orientations characteristic of leaders.

Abstract on the topic: Democracy: theory and political practice

1. Ancient and medieval ideas about democracy

The term "democracy" (from the Greek demos - people and kratos - power), first encountered by the ancient Greek historian Herodotus, means "power of the people" or "democracy".

The first, most developed form of democratic government is considered to have developed in the ancient world - in ancient Greece and ancient Rome, in ancient city-states - direct democracy. It assumed a public - sometimes directly on city squares - discussion of the most important issues in the development of the state: the approval of laws, the declaration of war and the conclusion of peace, the appointment of senior officials, the passing of sentences. Participation in government was considered not only a right, but also a duty of a free citizen, whether he was a rich aristocrat or a poor man, was encouraged financially and was evaluated as the most worthy occupation of the free.

Let us single out the differences between the ancient understanding of democracy and the modern one:

1) the democratic state system did not guarantee the freedom of the individual, which was considered as part of the state (society - the state - the individual acted in an undivided form);

2) the existence of slavery and class division of free citizens was perceived as natural.

Many symbols of democracy came to us from the times of Ancient Greece and Rome (the ideas of the rule of law, equality of citizens before the law, equality of political rights have become an integral part of democratic traditions).

The greatest thinkers of antiquity saw dangerous tendencies to increase the power of the spontaneous crowd, which, in their opinion, did not have a high intellect (this power is defined by the term "ochlocracy"). They considered it reasonable in a democratic government to have a ruling elite and grant civil rights to various groups of the population in accordance with their property status and professional interests.

The further development of ancient democracy confirmed the correctness of their conclusions: democracy, in the conditions of an increase in the share of the lower class - fetes - increasingly turned into a "violence of the mob", and this process led first to an oligarchic tyrannical coup, and then to the complete elimination of ancient civilizations.

The medieval period in the history of the development of mankind is characterized by the establishment of the absolute power of monarchs, a rigid class division of society, the strengthening of the role of the church in state and public life, and the restriction of the rights and freedoms of the general population. Despotic forms of government permeated all levels of state and public life, completely subordinated the economic and cultural activities citizens, their personal life of the power of the suzerain - the supreme ruler, the feudal owner.

At the same time, the Middle Ages were marked by the appearance of the first representative institutions (1265 - Parliament in England; 1302 - States General in France; XVI century - Zemsky Sobors in the Muscovite State, etc.). Already in the period early medieval in the activities of these institutions, three most important elements of modern parliamentary democracies could be observed: the publicity of power, its representative nature, and the presence of a mechanism of checks and balances (the purpose of which is to prevent the concentration of all power in the hands of any one institution, class or estate).

The socio-economic and political-ideological situation also affected the views of the thinkers of the Middle Ages, their ideas about the state structure and the role of man in society.

Secular political thought was dominated by the ideas of local and estate democracy and self-government.

Firstly, the possibility of participation of representatives of various, especially the propertied, classes in parliamentary activity, which, although it was of an extremely limited, advisory nature, provided an opportunity to participate in the development and adoption of managerial decisions, in state activities.

Secondly, the content and functions of local forms of self-government were determined (for example, zemstvos in Russia, "free cities" such as Lübeck, Hamburg, Bremen, in Germany, or the veche form of government in Ancient Novgorod and Pskov). Such forms of democratic expression of will, although they were under the complete control of the monarch and the local aristocracy, at the same time provided the population with the opportunity to exercise certain civil rights, primarily the right to manage the affairs of their locality. The development of the guild organization of crafts and trade, the emergence of political and religious guilds - the prototypes of future political parties - served the same goals.

Another direction in understanding the problems of state structure and democracy in the Middle Ages was the search for the source and boundaries of the power of the monarch, his right to intrude into the spiritual life of his subjects. This analysis was carried out by theologians, who, justifying the need for socio-economic inequality of estates, the divine origin of absolute monarchy, the dominant position of Christian ideology, at the same time defended the equality of all people before God, the inadmissibility of humiliating them human dignity and the intervention of secular power in the field of spiritual life of a person, as well as the accountability of the power of the monarch to divine laws.

The largest representatives of the philosophical and theological thought of the Middle Ages, defending the position of "medieval democracy", were A. Augustine and F. Aquinas.

So, Aurelius Augustine (354-430), believing in the divine origin of earthly state power, at the same time defined it as a "great robber organization." Citizen in socially completely subordinate to this authority, but has the right to respect for his human dignity, for God remains the supreme judge over him.

Thomas Aquinas (1225 or 1226-1274) already at the end of the Middle Ages also substantiated the class structure of society and the need for a state that has a divine origin. Like ancient thinkers, he condemns democracy as a form of oppression of the rich by the poor, ultimately leading to tyranny. He considers the correct form of monarchy, which ensures the stability of the state; at the same time, man must have a set of human rights defined by eternal divine law.

Thus, the ancient and medieval ideas about power and democracy, which contributed to the formation modern concepts democracy can be summarized in the following terms:

• democracy - one of the forms of the political structure of society, based on the broad participation of various social groups in its management;
• the most important characteristic of democracy is the ability of every citizen to enjoy rights and freedoms, first of all, to be independent from other members of society, to have freedom of opinion, to participate in public and state life on an equal basis with other citizens; ownership right;
• democracy is inseparable from the obligation of the citizen and the system of government as a whole to obey the laws and not violate the rights of other people - members of society;
• democracy is incompatible with ochlocracy - the power of the masses, the crowd, which suppresses the individual, who dominates in solving state issues, which ultimately leads to tyranny and terror;
• the best form of democratic organization of society is its division into rulers and ruled, who transfer the government to the worthy and under their leadership perform productive functions; at the same time, they retain the right to control the powers that be and early termination of their powers, as well as the possibility local government;
• rulers should take care of the welfare of their subjects and the strengthening of the state, reasonably, relying on the law, organize the life of society, ensure the opportunity for every citizen to use his inalienable rights and freedoms.

2. Modern theories of democracy: democracy of classical liberalism, collectivist, pluralistic democracy

The crisis of absolutism, which came as a result of major socio-economic transformations in Europe: the accomplishment of the industrial revolution, the strengthening of trade and economic ties, the growth of cities, the destruction of the medieval system of government, changed ideas about the political structure of society, the role of man in society, his rights and freedoms, possible participation in political life. In the most complete and detailed form, they were formulated at the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries. in the concepts of democracy of classical liberalism by T. Hobbes, J. Locke and S. Montesquieu. The main ideas expressed by these thinkers can be summarized as follows.

At the pre-state stage, humanity was in a state of nature, a person lived according to natural laws, had a wide range of freedoms and used them at his own discretion. Thus, the initial state of human nature, its essence, is individual freedom. However, its use should not lead to a violation of the rights of other people, otherwise it can cause, according to Hobbes, a “war of all against all”, enmity of people, and disrupt the vital activity of the social organism. Even if the relationship between people in the state of nature, according to J. Locke, implies "mutual goodwill", at a certain stage of social development they require consolidation, settlement in the form of a contract, which is called "social".

The social contract involves an unspoken form of agreement between people on the transfer of the functions of regulating relations between them to the state, which is the guarantor of preventing anarchy and hostility between members of society, ensuring individual rights and freedoms of citizens.

Power should be divided into parliamentary, judicial and military (according to J. Locke) or into legislative, executive and judicial (according to C. Montesquieu). According to the creators of the concept of political pluralism, only the separation of powers prevents abuses on the part of rulers, restrains their ambitions, and prevents any form of despotism, thereby ensuring the freedom of citizens.

Thus, the liberal idea of ​​a social contract as the basis for the creation of a state and the concept of separation of powers as a condition for limiting the power of a sovereign (ruler) determined the principles and conditions for the relationship between a citizen and the state, the permissible boundaries for state intervention in the field of personal rights and freedoms of citizens:

• equality of all citizens in the exercise of their natural rights;
• autonomy of the individual in relation to the state and society, a person is the only source of power that has granted the state the right to manage the entire society and requires it to guarantee personal rights and freedoms;
• a person has the right to defend his position in relation to other members of society, to legally challenge the decisions of public authorities;
• separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial, a clear definition of their functions and powers, as well as limiting the scope of the state itself, which does not allow it to interfere in the private life of citizens and the economic sphere of society;
• a parliamentary form of representative democracy, which provides for the transfer by citizens, as a result of elections, of the functions of government to those persons who can protect the legitimate rights and freedoms of their voters.

The concept of liberalism first received its legal embodiment in the Bill of Rights (England, 1689) and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (France, 1789), which proclaimed the principles of freedom, property, personal security, the right to resist violence as inalienable natural rights of the individual.

The concept of liberal democracy is criticized primarily for the absolutization of individualism, the focus of a person on solving his personal problems, on achieving personal success, which can lead (and does lead) to his departure from public, political life, selfishness and isolation, unfriendliness towards other people, dulling the feeling of compassion. At the same time, the state, not having the right to interfere in the economic and financial sector limited in the ability to provide social support to the poor and "losers".

Finally, like any form of representative democracy, liberal democracy narrows the rights of voters, does not allow to actively influence politics, control the activities of state bodies, and the very choice of representative bodies of power can be random, formal and incompetent, determined by the mood, emotions of the voter at the time of voting.

One concept that opposes the individualist model of liberal democracy is the theory of collectivist democracy. It appeared in the era of the French Enlightenment, one of its creators is the famous philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), although many of his ideas are consonant with the theoretical constructions of liberalism. He, like many supporters of the liberal type of democracy, proceeds from the idea of ​​the natural state of people in the period before state development society and the conclusion by them of a social agreement on the creation of a state for the more favorable development of social relations, the strengthening of private property, the approval of the ideas of humanism and spirituality. However, he further disagrees with the position that society consists of individuals, and speaks of the need for the individual to transfer his natural rights to the state after its creation. In the state, a harmony of social interests arises, since the purpose of its creation is that it takes care of its citizens, fulfills the general will of the people, who are “always right”. The government receives only executive power, while legislative power must be exercised by the people themselves through direct discussion and adoption of laws during a plebiscite (referendum).

This concept of democracy removes a number of shortcomings of liberalism (absolute individualization, non-participation in political life, property inequality), however, the absolutization of the “general will” lays the theoretical basis for the practice of suppressing the individual, invading the state into the privacy of a citizen, depriving him of the right to express his own opinion, different from everyone's opinion.

These ideas are reflected in the Marxist theory of the state and democracy and in the practice of the functioning of the political system of socialism and socialist democracy.

On the one hand, under the conditions of socialist collectivist democracy, a citizen is actively involved in the political process, participates in mass political actions (demonstrations, meetings, elections), can control the activities of deputies at all levels, give them orders, participate in the activities of self-government bodies at the place of residence and work. . This increases the civic activity of a member of society, a sense of responsibility for its development, patriotism and collectivism. However, collectivist democracy implies strict control over the behavior of every citizen, forced inclusion of him in politics, political-ideological and moral-ethical subordination of a person to the will of the majority, prevention of pluralism of opinions and political opposition to the "leading and guiding force of society" - the communist (socialist) party. As a result, the citizen lost his individuality and could not exercise the political rights and freedoms written in the constitution.

On the other hand, this led to the omnipotence of the Communist Party itself, its apparatus, its substitution of state bodies, and the strengthening of authoritarian, despotic methods of government on the part of the party elite. Thus, collectivist democracy, formally opening up the possibility of direct, active participation of every citizen in political life, making it his duty, actually limited individual rights and freedom, leading to strict control of his spiritual and personal life, contributing to the emergence of anti-democratic, totalitarian regimes.

The limitations of both the liberal concept of democracy and its alternative - collectivist democracy - led to the creation and real implementation in many countries of the concept of pluralistic democracy, developed at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. Its creators are M. Weber, J. Schumpeter, G. Laski, S. Lipset and others.

Political pluralism (from lat. pluralis - plurality) means the inclusion in the political life of the country of many social movements and parties that have different political goals, ideological concepts and are fighting among themselves for power. The main forms of such a struggle are defending their electoral programs in front of voters, winning as many of their votes as possible in elections and thereby obtaining the maximum number of parliamentary seats or winning the presidential election. The main difference between pluralistic democracy and its liberal type is that during the election campaign and activities in parliament, political parties and movements represent the interests of specific social groups, through which the interests of the individual are realized. By joining a political party or supporting it in elections, a citizen can be more politically active, more persistently influence the activities of the parliament, defending his economic, political, cultural interests as common to a given group, social stratum.

The economic basis of pluralistic democracy is the diversity of forms of ownership, the social division of labor and the corresponding division of society into social groups that have different amounts and types of property and perform numerous professional, social and cultural roles in society. Hence the diversity of economic, socio-political and spiritual interests of the representatives of these groups, the competitiveness in their upholding.

The political basis of pluralistic democracy, its legal form are: a constitutionally fixed system of rights and obligations of citizens and associations formed by them, first of all - freedom of speech and conscience, ensuring equal participation in political life; the principle of separation of powers; parliamentary form of government; the establishment of the rule of law in all spheres of society.

The social basis of pluralistic democracy is to ensure the right of every member of society to participate in all forms of his life, whether it be work and leisure, family life, business, health protection, sports, culture and education. Of course, the degree of such participation is different for each person, which is defined as his individual characteristics, abilities, and social position, material and financial capabilities and other factors. However, the state in a pluralistic democracy guarantees the very possibility of equal access to social values, as well as a minimum of benefits that provide an opportunity for the manifestation of independent activity, an active principle.

The spiritual and ideological basis of pluralistic democracy are: the creation of an atmosphere of openness in society, the encouragement of diversity of opinions, the development of creativity, the inadmissibility of regulating the spiritual life of a person and imposing on him uniform worldview and political and ideological dogmas. Related to this is the study and consideration of the public opinion of the population in the work of administrative bodies, ensuring the free operation of the mass media.

The disadvantage of the concept of pluralistic democracy is that it comes from ideal model citizen as an active participant political process, whose activities support the group and the movement that potentially represents its interests. In fact, behind the political movements and parties is not the mass electorate, but only the most active part of it. The rest of the voters either evade the elections, or do not delve deeply into the content of the election programs and make their choice randomly. Therefore, the votes go to either two or three large political parties, whose programs are not very diverse, or small pre-election associations, that is, they will still be absorbed by larger and more authoritative parties and movements. In addition, it is impossible for ordinary voters to control the activities of parliamentarians.

Thus, an analysis of the three main modern concepts of democracy - liberal, collectivist and pluralistic - shows that for all their shortcomings and limitations, each of them proceeds from a fundamental principle: a citizen has the right to express his political will and defend his socio-economic and political interests.

Supporters of different concepts are unanimous in identifying common features of democracy:

• recognition of the people as a source of power (sovereign) in the state: people's sovereignty is expressed in the fact that it is the people who have the constituent, constitutional power in the state, that it is they who choose their representatives and can periodically replace them, has the right to directly participate in the development and adoption of laws through referendums ;
• equality of citizens: democracy implies at least equality of voting rights of citizens;
• subordination of the minority to the majority in making decisions and their implementation, respect for the rights and interests of the minority;
• election of key state bodies.

Any democratic states are built on the basis of these fundamental features. At the same time, modern democracies based on the values ​​of liberalism seek to observe additional principles: human rights, the priority of individual rights over the rights of the state, limiting the power of the majority over the minority, respect for the right of the minority to have their own opinion and defend it, the rule of law, etc. .

AT last years In political science, the theory of “waves of democratization” has become widespread, the creators of which believe that the establishment of modern institutions of democratic government took place in three stages, and at each of them this process affected different groups countries, and that a rebound followed the rise of democratization. S. Huntington in his book “The Third Wave. Democratization at the end of the 20th century. (1991) gives the following dating: the first rise - 1828-1926, the first decline - 1922-1942, the second rise - 1943-1962, the second decline - 1958-1975, the beginning of the third rise - 1974.

The concept of the "third wave of democratization" is based on the following main provisions:

• the transition to democracy in different countries means that there is much in common between different transition processes and forms of democratization and they should be considered as special cases of the world political movement;
• democracy is a value in itself, its establishment is not associated with pragmatic, instrumental goals;
• the plurality of possible forms of a democratic structure is recognized (recognition and support for the existence of diverse associations, autonomous from each other and from the state, pursuing unequal, sometimes conflicting goals);
• democratization at the end of the 20th century. the process of political changes in the world does not end, the history of democracy does not end - the concept of the "third wave" implies a sinusoidal nature of development democratic process, which can lead both to a rollback of some countries back, and to the "fourth wave", but already in the 21st century.

3. Electoral systems and elections

Elections are not only an essential feature, an attribute of democracy, but also its necessary condition. "Democracy can be defined as a regime in which rulers are appointed through free and fair elections," argue the authoritative French scholars P. Lalumière and A. Demichel. And the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948, states: “Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. The will of the people must be the basis of the authority of the government; this will must find expression in periodic and non-falsified elections, which must be held under universal and equal suffrage, by secret ballot, or by other equivalent forms ensuring freedom of suffrage.

Improving the electoral system is one of the most urgent tasks of the political development of the young Russian democracy.

What is an electoral system?

The electoral system is the procedure for organizing and holding elections to representative institutions or an individual leading representative (for example, the president of the country), enshrined in legal norms, as well as in the established practice of state and public organizations.

The electoral system is included as an integral part of the political system, but itself, like any system, is divided into structural components, of which two stand out as the most common:

• suffrage - theoretical and legal component;
• electoral procedure (or electoral process) is a practical and organizational component.

Suffrage is a set of legal norms governing the participation of citizens in elections, the organization and conduct of the latter, the relationship between voters and electoral bodies or officials, as well as the procedure for recalling elected representatives who did not justify the trust of voters.

The term "suffrage" can also be used in another, narrower sense, namely as the right of a citizen to participate in elections: either as an elector (active suffrage) or as an elector (passive suffrage).

The classification of elections is based on the principles of electoral law and several criteria: the object of elections (presidential, parliamentary, municipal - to local, usually city, self-government), terms (regular, extraordinary, additional), etc.

Of greatest interest is the classification of elections according to the principle of suffrage, which reflects the degree of legal, democratic development of a particular country, its electoral system. In this case, the classification takes the form of paired opposites:

• general - limited (qualification);
• equal - unequal;
• direct - indirect (multi-degree);
• with secret - with open voting.

Signs that characterize a high degree democratic electoral system, stand first. Most countries of the modern world have proclaimed in their constitutions or special electoral laws the rights of citizens to universal and equal elections by secret ballot. Let's look at these principles in more detail.

The universality of elections implies the right of all citizens who have reached the age established by law to participate in elections, and this right means both active and passive suffrage. However, both are limited in a number of countries by the so-called electoral qualifications: property (possession of property or income of a certain amount), residence qualification (residence in a given territory for at least a period specified by law), educational (for example, knowledge of the state language of the country), age and etc.

The qualifications of the passive suffrage are usually much more rigid than the qualifications of the active right. Thus, in Canada, only a person who owns immovable property can enter the Senate, in the UK, in order to obtain the right to be elected, an electoral deposit in the form of a rather large amount is required. The age limit for deputies of the upper house of parliament - where it is bicameral - is especially high: in the USA and Japan - 30 years, in France - 35, in Belgium and Spain - 40. At the same time, it should be noted that the process of democratization in the world does not bypass qualification restrictions. For example, since the 1970s the age limit for voters in most developed countries has been reduced to 18 years.

Elections are considered equal if a single norm of representation is provided - the number of voters represented by one candidate for an elective place. This principle is easily violated by the most different ways. For example, with the help of the so-called "electoral geometry" ("electoral geography"), i.e. such a cutting of the country's territory into electoral districts, that on the side of the dominant party, in whose interests such a cutting was made, there is the largest possible number of districts supporting this party by voters.

Regarding elections to collegiate bodies of power, the following pattern can be noted: elections to local bodies, unicameral parliaments and lower houses of bicameral parliaments are everywhere direct (in a number of countries, elections to the upper house, in particular to the US Senate, are like that); voting is secret, which is now typical for all civilized countries of the world.

A specific form of electoral activity of citizens is a referendum (from Latin referendum - what should be reported), sometimes called (usually when resolving territorial disputes) a plebiscite (from Latin plebs - common people and scitum - decision, decision). The first ever referendum was held in 1439 in Switzerland. A referendum is a popular vote, the object of which is some important state issue, on which it is necessary to find out the opinion of the entire population of the country. For example, this may be the question of the nationality of a particular territory (plebiscites of 1935 and 1957 on the Saar region of Germany, bordering France) or its independence (1995 referendum in Quebec, a French-speaking province of Canada), the question of the form of state government (referenda in 1946 in Italy and 1974 in Greece on the replacement of the monarchy by a republic), etc.

Like elections, referendums are different types depending on the subject of voting, method of holding and scope. A referendum is called constitutional if it is used to approve the constitution or amendments to it, or legislative if the subject of the referendum is a draft act of the current legislation.

It should be noted the dual political nature of referendums: on the one hand, a referendum is able (and ideally called upon) to most fully reveal the will of the people on a particular issue or set of issues, on the other hand, the organizers of a referendum can make it the subject of an unimportant issue in order to divert attention of the people from the really pressing problems. It also happens that the will of the people, expressed in a referendum, is ignored and trampled upon by those in power.

As already mentioned, the electoral procedure is the practical and organizational part of the electoral system.

It is necessary to distinguish between such often identified concepts as "election procedure" and "election campaign".

The electoral procedure is the state's activities for the organization and conduct of elections. The election campaign (election campaign) is the actions of the direct participants in the elections, the parties competing in the elections (parties, various public organizations, the candidates themselves).

In addition, the electoral procedure as a set of organizational rules can remain relatively unchanged for quite a long time, during which more than one election campaign will take place. The electoral procedure regulates and regulates the election campaign, like a policeman at a street intersection regulating the flow of cars.

The electoral procedure includes: appointment of elections; creation of electoral bodies responsible for their conduct; organization of electoral districts, districts, precincts; registration of candidates for deputies; some financial support for elections; maintaining order during their implementation; determination of voting results.

The election (pre-election) campaign provides for the nomination of candidates by opposing political forces, campaigning for them, etc.

The election campaign officially begins on the day the act of calling elections is proclaimed (usually this is the prerogative of the state) and continues until the date of the election. In fact, it takes its first steps long before the official start, as soon as it becomes known about the intention to hold elections.

The electoral struggle is the main field of activity of a political party in a democratic society as opposed to a totalitarian one. Each party shows concern for the expansion of its electorate. The electorate (from lat. elector - voter) is a contingent of voters who vote for any party in elections. For example, the electorate of the Social Democratic parties is mainly made up of workers, intellectuals, office workers, and small proprietors; The electorate of the US Democratic Party, as a rule, includes the colored population of the country. The electorate is not a certain strictly defined social group, although some relative stability is inherent in it. From election to election, the electorate of a particular party changes both quantitatively and qualitatively. For example, after the Laborites ousted the Liberals from the two-party system of Great Britain, the electorate of the former was largely replenished at the expense of the electorate of the latter.

Taking into account the fact that in the states of the modern world, social differentiation continues (and in Russia is in full swing), accompanied by the emergence of more and more new political parties and social movements, each of which claims to be the spokesman for the interests of the entire people, the question of forming electoral blocs becomes very relevant. and unions, because not one of the parties is often able to achieve victory alone. Therefore, parties and public organizations during the election campaign often form political blocs and alliances, concluding agreements for joint actions in order to ensure victory for candidates from parties with close positions.

However, this kind of pre-election diplomacy is not enough to win the elections. A number of other factors are needed: financial resources, allowing to widely deploy pre-election campaign; authority, acceptability of the party in the eyes of voters; political novelty, challenging the old way; political and personal attractiveness of the candidates nominated by the party, i.e. their image (from the English image - image); reasonableness of the pre-election program (platform) of a party or political bloc.

The culmination of the election campaign is election day. In contrast to the noisy pre-election struggle, the voting procedure itself is a secret, and therefore we learn the most interesting about this procedure when the secret is either violated or has not yet been legalized. The latter is characteristic of societies with insufficiently developed culture.

It is known, for example, that when Napoleon Bonaparte decided to "legitimize" his dictatorship through a popular plebiscite, the vote was held openly, under the strict supervision of the authorities, and in the army - by regiments, and the soldiers voted in unison.

And nowadays there is similar examples. More recently, in Zaire, deputies to parliament were elected in city squares by exclamation of approval for candidates from a list read out by the mayor of the city, in Western Samoa, the oldest votes for all members of his extended family, and in Swaziland, voters "vote with their feet", passing through one of the gates, for which they are waiting for the candidates for the electoral college of deputies of parliament.

However, with the formation of civil society, the growth of its sense of justice and the improvement of legal institutions, such methods of voting acquire the features of an anachronism.

Some countries limit the number of candidates running in each constituency to avoid "election stampede". So, in the UK this number should not exceed five. In addition, each candidate pays a fairly large cash deposit, which will be withheld if the applicant does not win at least 5% of the total votes. A five percent barrier has been set in a number of countries (including Russia) for parties as well. In many countries, the day before the election, pre-election campaigning is prohibited so that the voter can calmly weigh who to vote for after all.

Thus, the majoritarian system contributes to the formation of a majority in government and puts up with a disproportion between the votes received and the mandates received.

The proportional system means that mandates are distributed strictly in proportion to the number of votes cast. This system is common in modern world more widely. In Latin America, for example, elections are held only by proportional system. It is used in Belgium, Sweden and many other countries. The proportional system has two varieties:

• proportional electoral system at the national level (voters vote for political parties throughout the country; constituencies are not allocated);
• proportional electoral system in multi-member constituencies (deputy mandates are distributed based on the influence of parties in constituencies).
3) the independence of deputies from their parties (such lack of freedom of parliamentarians can adversely affect the process of discussing and adopting important documents). Electoral systems have come a long way in their development. In the course of this process (in the post-war period), the formation of a mixed electoral system began, that is, a system that should incorporate the positive characteristics of both the majoritarian and proportional systems. Within the framework of a mixed system, a certain part of the mandates is distributed according to the majority principle, the other - proportionally. The experience of improving electoral systems shows that this system more democratic and effective in achieving political stability.

The electoral system in Russia has a relatively short history - about 90 years, counting from the law on elections to the first State Duma of December 11, 1905. The law that put the curial system at the forefront can hardly be called democratic, since it provided unequal representation to different layers population. Even worse was the law of 1907, which lasted until the very end of the pre-revolutionary Duma.

During the Soviet era, elections became purely formal. Only in 1989 did the situation begin to change radically. But even then, during the elections of people's deputies, some of the seats were reserved in advance for " public organizations" (with an indication of "to whom - how much), which, in essence, was a modification of the same curial system. This order was rejected a year later as anti-democratic.

On March 17, 1991, the first nationwide referendum in the history of the country took place, and on June 12 of the same year, the first presidential elections in the history of Russia took place.

The current electoral system in Russia is determined by the new Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993, and federal laws"About the Presidential Elections Russian Federation"and" On the election of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation "(1995).

The Constitution proclaims: “Citizens of the Russian Federation have the right to elect and be elected to bodies of state power and bodies of local self-government, as well as to participate in a referendum.”

Citizens of the Russian Federation receive active suffrage from the age of 18, passive - the right to be elected to the State Duma - from the age of 21 (for the presidency - from the age of 35, subject to a 10-year permanent residence on the territory of the Russian Federation). At the same time, participation in elections is declared to be voluntary, carried out on the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot.

450 deputies are elected to the State Duma, of which 225 - in single-member districts (1 district - 1 deputy) and 225 - in the federal electoral district in proportion to the number of votes cast for federal lists of candidates for deputies nominated by electoral associations and blocs. In the first case, a person is elected, in the second - a party, bloc of parties or other public association.

The Russian Federation has a mixed electoral system. In single-mandate constituencies, elections are carried out on the basis of a majoritarian system of relative majority.

In the federal district, the selection is carried out according to the proportional principle, but this proportionality applies only to those parties, blocs, etc., which have crossed the 5% barrier, i.e. received at least 5% of the votes from those participating in the elections. Those who do not reach this figure lose their votes, as well as the right to representation in the Duma.

The current Russian electoral system is based on the experience of a number of states, both those with rich legal traditions and those that have only recently begun to build a state of law. Of course, much of it is subject to verification and correction, perhaps very thorough, but the important thing is that the electoral mechanism in our country has been created and is working.

Political relations are defined as the interaction of social groups, individuals, social institutions regarding the structure and management of society. They arise from the moment when the age-old need for management and imperious regulation of social processes and relations begins to be implemented with the active participation of the state.

The process of realizing political interests is continuous. At the level of everyday awareness, this process takes place in the form of the development of political knowledge, assessments, orientations, which, in turn, determine practical activity, social activity and citizenship.

To realize their fundamental interests through state (political) power, certain social groups create their own political parties.

Society's fundamental political interest lies in the constant development of democracy, in the consolidation and expansion of genuine democracy, the self-government of the people. In the mechanism of action of democracy, taking into account, capturing, and expressing the objectively determined interests of social groups is of particular importance. Here, much depends on the methods of identifying, coordinating and subordinating these interests. In addition, it is necessary to systematically clarify the extent to which general political interests are perceived by citizens as their own, and to what extent they become a source of behavior for specific individuals and groups. The complication of interests, the increase in their versatility in modern conditions, implies the constant improvement of those superstructural structures with the help of which political interests are taken into account and implemented.

Political participation and political activity as a form of realization of political interests can, with good reason, be considered as criteria for the development of the political organization of society.

Citizen in a Democratic political system is distinguished by the manifestation of interest in politics, involvement in political discussions, participation in elections, the presence of certain knowledge in politics, competence, everything that is necessary to influence government activities. In general, these qualities can be summarized as activity, involvement, rationality. At the same time, these qualities are also inherent in a citizen in the system of a one-party dictatorship.

One form of participation is a system of representative democracy, in which representatives of the people exercise power on their behalf. Another form of participation of citizens in the system of power is through referendums, civil initiatives or the recall of deputies.

More on the topic Political relations and political practice.:

1. INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS STUDIES IN RUSSIA: YESTERDAY, TODAY, TOMORROW
2. §one. Development of theoretical foundations and features of the development of legal regulation of public relations in the context of the New Economic Policy