Central political processes. Political process

The political process is one of the central and at the same time a very specific category of political science. The characteristics of politics as a process, that is, the procedural approach, allows us to see the special facets of interaction between subjects in relation to state power.

However, due to the fact that the scale of the political process coincides with the entire political sphere, some scientists, in particular R. Dawes, identify it with politics as a whole, and C. Merriam with the entire set of behavioral actions of subjects of power, changing their statuses and influences. Proponents of the institutional approach, for example S. Huntington, associate the political process with the functioning and transformation of institutions of power. D. Easton understands it as a set of reactions of the political system to challenges environment. R. Dahrendorf focuses on the dynamics of group rivalry for status and power resources, while J. Mannheim and R. Rich interpret the political process as a complex set of events that determines the nature of the activities of state institutions and their influence on society.

All these approaches in one way or another characterize the most important sources, states and forms of the political process.

Scientific research into political processes is accompanied by numerous discussions regarding the problem of defining the category “political process”. There are three most common points of view here. Firstly, under political

process understands everything that happens in politics. Secondly, this concept identified with the category “politics”. Thirdly, the concept of “political process” is interpreted as a change in the state of the political system of society. In this work, the political process is considered according to the first point of view.

The concept of “political process” reflects the characteristics of political life as a set of actions carried out by its subjects. In a meaningful sense, it can be considered as the production and reproduction of the political system, means of political power, ways of presenting the interests of class, socio-ethnic and other social groups in institutions of power, forms of adoption and implementation of government (managerial) decisions, political participation, types of political culture and etc.

The concept of “political process” captures the relationship “society - political system”. Individuals and social groups strive to realize their own interests, relying on recognized ethical and legal norms, party ideology, and government agencies. All this is a process of will formation and expression, various ways of “presenting” one’s interests (elections, referendums, party membership, etc.). To the extent that interest groups try to impose their will on society, the state imposes its own will through coercion or compromise / carried out by political leaders and elites. The political process manifests itself as the relationship “society - power” in three main functions: formation, change of the political system, its support or opposition to it; articulation as a process of formation of interests by individuals and groups and the activity of interest groups and associations; aggregation as the activities of parties, political course and recruitment of political personnel. The fulfillment of these universal functions forms in each political system certain structures and corresponding modes of behavior. This applies to interest groups, pressure groups, political parties and elections, which together constitute the political process, the process of political will-formation. Despite all the differences in the theoretical interpretation of the political process, it is generally accepted that it reflects the real interaction of political subjects, which has developed both in accordance with the intentions of leaders or party programs, and as a result of the action of a wide variety of external and internal factors. In other words, the political process shows how individuals, groups, and institutions of power with all their stereotypes, goals, and prejudices interact with each other and with the state, realizing their specific roles and functions. And since situations, incentives and motives of human behavior are constantly changing, the political process excludes any predetermination or predetermination in the development of events and phenomena.

Revealing the content of politics through the established forms of execution by subjects of their roles and functions, the political process demonstrates how their implementation reproduces some elements of the political system, destroys others, creates and develops others. Thus, the political process reveals both superficial and deep changes in the political system and characterizes its transition from one state to another. At the same time, the duration or short-term duration of the time periods of these changes in the forms of administration of power, the balance of forces, methods of decision-making, etc. is of utmost importance for the political process.

Taking into account the mentioned features of the political process, we can say that it reveals the movement, dynamics, evolution of the political system, changes in its states in time and space. The political process is a set of actions of institutionalized and non-institutionalized subjects aimed at implementing their specific functions (dysfunctions) in the sphere of power and ultimately leading to the development or decline of the political system of society.

In relation to society as a whole, the political process reveals the interaction of social and political structures and relations, that is, it shows how society forms its statehood, and the state, in turn, “conquers” society. From the point of view of internal content, the political process expresses the technology of exercising power, representing a set of relatively independent, local interactions of subjects, structures and institutions, united by certain specific goals and interests to maintain (or change) the system of government.

Some researchers believe that the political process is a spontaneous phenomenon of an irrational nature, depending on the will and character of people, first of all political leaders. The significance of random phenomena and events is especially noticeable at the micro level. However, the general nature of political activity as the achievement of goals, as well as its institutional and other contexts (rules, certain forms and modes of behavior, traditions, dominant values, etc.) make the political process as a whole orderly and meaningful. It represents a logically unfolding sequence of interactions between actors.

Structure and parameters of the political process

The political process is a holistic phenomenon that can be structured and scientifically analyzed. The unpredictability and apparent inexplicability of certain events should be considered mainly as a consequence of the imperfection of the scientific apparatus and tools.

The structure of the political process can be revealed by analyzing the interaction between various political actors and the dynamics (main phases of the political process, changes in these phases, etc.) of this phenomenon. Great importance also has to clarify the factors influencing the political process. Thus, the structure of the political process can be defined as a set of interactions between actors, as well as the logical sequence of these interactions (“plot” of the political process). Each individual political process has its own structure and, accordingly, its own “plot”. The actors, the totality, the sequence, the dynamics or plot of their interactions, the time units of measurement, as well as the factors influencing the political process are usually called the parameters of the political process. The main actors in the political process are political systems, political institutions, organized and unorganized groups of people, as well as individuals.

The “core of the political system” is the political and bureaucratic elite (elected politicians and appointed managers), which directly ensures the political process. Its task as a set of bodies for managing the political process and its coordination (parliament, government, administration) is to transform the needs, interests and demands of the public into political decisions.

A political institution is a set of norms and rules, reproduced over time, as well as organizational potential that regulate political relations in a certain sphere of political life.

The main political institution is the state. Civil society can also be considered a political institution. It should be noted that the state and civil society as political actors are formed in Europe and the United States around the modern period under the influence of the modernization changes occurring there. At the same time, the state becomes the main institution of power in society, having a monopoly on coercive violence in a certain territory. At the same time, civil society is being formed as a kind of antithesis to the state. Political parties, which also represent interest groups, political institutions, individuals, organized and unorganized groups of people, are smaller-scale actors in the political process. Individuals and groups can participate in politics not only in an institutional form, such as voting in elections, but also in non-institutional forms, such as spontaneous mass protests.

People have varying degrees of political activity. Many are not very active, but generally participate in most institutionalized processes. Some only observe from the sidelines, not only not taking an active part in political life, but also not participating in elections, not reading newspapers, etc. Others, usually a minority, on the contrary, take an active part in political life. To achieve group goals, individuals can create special groups that differ in varying degrees of institutionalization - from casual, formed at a meeting, to highly organized, permanent in nature and operating according to strict rules of an interest group. Not only the achievement of specific goals depends on the degree of institutionalization of political activity (it, as a rule, is more effective, the higher the degree of institutionalization), but also the reproducibility, repeatability, regularity of any political relations, their consolidation in rules and norms.

Ultimately, all private political processes are united by the same need of their subjects to influence the political decisions taken by the state authorities. Therefore, the main task of all actors of various political processes is to include their interests and demands in the management decisions made by the institutions of state power.

The institutions of state power are the most important tool taking into account group demands and developing general collective goals of political development (the political will of society). Thus, in their activities, all private political processes express one or another aspect of the development, adoption and implementation management decisions. The degree of centralization of power and distribution of powers between groups involved in developing the goals of political development depends on the activities of state institutions.

Using their stability and mobility, institutions of state power are able to support even those norms and goals (and, consequently, the private political processes associated with them) that do not meet the interests of the main part of society, diverge from the political traditions of society and contradict the civil mentality.

When analyzing the political process, one should take into account the nature of the interaction between its subjects, which largely depends on the scale of the political process and its actors. In particular, the nature of the interaction between the political system and the environment (socio-economic, socio-cultural and other conditions) will be determined by the level of their evolutionary development, for example, the degree of internal differentiation. At the same time, the nature of interaction between actors, in particular between a citizen and a certain party, will be determined by other parameters: institutional conditions, characteristics of party development, the party’s place in the political system, socio-psychological characteristics of personal development, etc. In general, when abstracting from the specifics of political processes and actors, most often the nature of interaction between actors is described in terms of confrontation, neutrality, compromise, alliance, consensus.

Two groups of factors in the political process can be distinguished: internal and external. External include the environment and its impact, systemic but external political circumstances for a given political process, such as the rules and conditions of the political game, external political events, etc. Internal include the characteristics of actors, their goals and intentions, the distribution of power resources , logic and “plot” of the political process.

An important parameter of the political process is the stages into which it can be divided. Political processes of various kinds provide an example of a combination of different stages. The diversity and uniformity of processes leads to the fact that it is quite difficult to identify any stages common to all types of processes. The stages of functioning of the political system, the electoral process or the process of creating and functioning of a political party will be different. Therefore, identifying specific stages is appropriate in relation to certain types of political processes.

Most interactions between political actors involve the exercise of public power. Due to this circumstance, the importance of the process of making and implementing political decisions is especially great. The question of the optimal division of this process is one of the most debated in foreign political science. There is no consensus among researchers regarding the number and content of its stages, however, summarizing the various points of view, the following can be identified as the main ones: -

problem statement (collection of necessary information about existing problems, public demands and possible solutions, identification of primary and secondary problems); -

formulation alternative solutions; -

comparative analysis and selection of the most effective solution; -

formulating a government decision and legitimizing it (by passing laws, voting, etc.); -

implementation of decisions made; -

monitoring implementation and providing feedback.

If we turn to the process of functioning of the entire political system, the set of stages will be significantly different, since the interaction of the system with the environment will be taken into account. At the same time, attempts known in science to identify the main stages of this process are also concentrated on the adoption and implementation of management decisions. The “classical set” of main stages is considered to be the set proposed by G. Almond and G. Powell: 1.

Articulation of individual and group interests. 2.

Aggregation of these interests (their combination in a single position). 3.

Policymaking. 4.

Implementation of decisions made. 5.

Monitoring the implementation of these decisions.

However, it should be noted that this model reflects only one type of political process and cannot be considered universal.

Political changes and their types

Based on the approaches discussed above, we can consider that the political process is the totality of all dynamic changes in the behavior and relationships of subjects, in the performance of their roles and the functioning of institutions, as well as in all other elements of the political space under the influence of external and internal factors.

Political changes within the framework of the political process represent a specific type of social change, associated primarily with changes in the mechanism of power regulation of society. The political system, under the influence of qualitative changes in the social environment, is constantly in motion and development. In fact, there are no two states of the same political system that are identical to each other. Consequently, political change represents transformations of institutional structures, processes and goals that affect the distribution and administration of power to govern a developing society.

Political change can occur either by adapting the system to new requirements social environment, without affecting the basic structures and mechanisms of power (for example, leaders, governments, individual institutions may change, but leading values, norms, methods of exercising power remain in the same quality), or by modifying the supporting basic elements, which together contribute to the achievement of a new quality by the system condition.

Within a single society, political changes that have a widespread and lasting impact on society can be defined as a revolution. Revolution is a radical type political changes, as a result of which the previous political tradition is interrupted and a new political system is formed. In the 20th century The political process in Russia has repeatedly changed under the influence of revolutions. In 1905, twice in 1917 and in 1991, revolutionary changes took place in the political system of society, as a result of which state and political structures, processes and goals affecting the distribution and administration of power to manage Russian society were transformed.

A revolution as a type of political change should be distinguished from a coup d'etat. The latter is a sudden and unconstitutional change of ruling elites, which in itself

gg Lrj-i "іpanakhdel Russian Federation"

is not associated with any deep changes in the organization

BIOLIOI with Ka

military relations.

Revolutions and coups d'etat are not the most common type of political change, although they always arouse public interest. The most common type of change is the adaptation of the system to new demands or changes in the social environment, which occurs constantly in any normally functioning political system. This kind of change may be associated with a redistribution of political influence within a given society, with the introduction of constitutional changes to the structure of power relations within the same political system, etc.

Conscious, systemic changes in the state of social and political relations that have a broad and sustainable impact on society, but reproduce the previous political system, can be defined as reform. Therefore, the most important characteristic of the political process is the method or mode of exercising political power (reproduction of the political system). Reform of political relations, changing constitutional and legal methods and methods of exercising political power within the framework of one political system, creates a certain political regime. Consequently, the concept of a political regime characterizes the political process from the point of view of the functioning and self-reproduction of a certain political system of a given society.

Depending on the choice of constant and variable characteristics of political changes, two approaches have developed in political science: contextual and institutionalist. The first approach is based on the idea of ​​the primary role of the social context, social environment, socio-economic, socio-cultural conditionality of political and institutional changes (R. Aron, R. Dahl, S. Lipset). The second approach focuses on the internal institutional structure of the political process. The nature and success of social change primarily depends on the level of political institutionalization. A wide variety of fluctuations in the social environment, economic crises and public protests are possible, but everything ultimately depends on the effectiveness and adaptive response of institutional mechanisms for managing society and maintaining stability in it (S. Huntington, T. Skolpol, D. March).

Changes in the forms, methods and functions of management carried out by institutions of state power lead to changes in the regimes of political processes. Most often, three such modes are distinguished. The first is a mode of operation that does not take the political system beyond the established relationships between citizens and institutions of state power. In this case, political processes reflect the simple reproduction by power structures of routine, day-to-day relations between the elite and the electorate, political parties, local governments, etc. Traditions and continuity in the development of connections between participants in political processes have an undeniable priority over any innovation.

The second mode - development - characterizes such modifications of the basic parameters of political processes that presuppose the further positive nature of the evolution of the latter. For example, on the scale of society, development can mean such changes in which state policy is brought to a level that allows the authorities to adequately respond to the challenges of the time, effectively manage social relations, and ensure the satisfaction of the social demands of the population. This nature of political changes means that the goals and methods of management of the institutions of state power and the ruling circles correspond to the ongoing changes in the social structure, the changing balance of forces within the country and in the international arena. Political development is accompanied by intensive interaction between macro and micro factors of power, leading to an increase in the correspondence of the political system to other spheres of public life, an increase in the complexity of its structure, and an increase in the ability to use flexible strategies and technologies of power, taking into account the diverse interests of groups and citizens.

The third type of political processes is the regime of decline. According to P. Struve, this is a “regressive metamorphosis” of politics. In a state of decline, political changes are characterized by an increase in entropy and the predominance of centrifugal tendencies over integration ones. Therefore, decline essentially means the collapse of the existing political integrity (for example, the fall of a political regime, the dissolution of a party, the seizure of the state by external forces, etc.). On a societal scale, such changes may indicate that the decisions taken by the regime are less and less helping it effectively regulate social relations, as a result of which the regime is losing the stability and legitimacy necessary for its existence.

A classic example of such a course of political processes is the fate of the majority of former socialist countries in the European and Asian regions, where the ruling circles have not found adequate measures and methods of governance to respond to the socio-economic and spiritual demands of the time.

Science has developed different ideas about the sources of political change. For example, K. Marx saw the main reasons for political dynamics in the influence economic relations, Pareto associated them with the circulation of elites, M. Weber - with the activities of a charismatic leader, D. Parsons - with the performance of various roles by people, etc. However, conflict is most often cited as the main source of political change.

Conflict is one of the possible options for interaction between political actors. However, due to the heterogeneity of society, which continuously generates people’s dissatisfaction with their position, differences in views and other forms of discrepancy in positions, as a rule, it is the conflict that underlies changes in the behavior of groups and individuals, the transformation of power structures, and the development of political processes. As a source of the political process, conflict is a type (and result) of competitive interaction between two or more parties (groups, states, individuals) challenging each other for the distribution of power or resources.

Features of political processes

Coinciding in scale with the entire political space, the political process extends not only to conventional (contractual, normative) changes that characterize behavioral actions, relationships and mechanisms of competition for state power that meet the accepted norms and rules of the political game in society.

Along with this, political processes also involve those changes that indicate violation by subjects of their role functions recorded in the regulatory framework, exceeding their powers, and going beyond the limits of their political niches. Thus, the content of the political process also includes changes that take place in the activities of subjects who do not share generally accepted standards in relations with government authorities, for example, the activities of illegal parties, terrorism, criminal acts of politicians in the sphere of power, etc.

Reflecting actually existing, and not just planned changes, political processes have a pronounced non-normative character, which is explained by the presence in the political space of various types of movement (wave, cyclical, linear, inversion, that is, return, etc.), which have their own forms and methods transformation of political phenomena, the combination of which deprives the latter of strict certainty and stability.

From this point of view, the political process is a set of relatively independent, local transformations of the political activity of subjects (relations, institutions), which arise at the intersection of a wide variety of factors and the parameters of which cannot be accurately determined, much less predicted. At the same time, the political process is characterized by discrete changes or the possibility of modifying some parameters of a phenomenon while simultaneously maintaining others unchanged (for example, a change in the composition of the government can be combined with maintaining the previous political course). The uniqueness and discrete nature of changes excludes the possibility of extrapolation (transferring the values ​​of modern facts to the future) of certain assessments of the political process, complicates political forecasting, and sets limits to predicting political prospects.

Each of the political processes has its own internal rhythm, that is, cyclicality, repetition of the main stages of interaction of its subjects, structures, and institutions. For example, the electoral process is formed in connection with election cycles, so the political activity of the population develops in accordance with the phases of nominating candidates for legislative or executive bodies, discussing their candidacies, electing and monitoring their activities. As a rule, the peak of such activity occurs during elections, after which political life seems to calm down, and implementation control functions the managers become routinized.

The decisions of the ruling parties can set their own rhythm for political processes. Thus, in the former USSR, the regular congresses of the CPSU, defining “historical” tasks, milestones of five-year plans, etc., determined the rhythm of the activities of all institutions of power in the domestic and foreign policy arena. During periods of qualitative reformation of social relations, the decisive influence on the nature of the functioning government agencies and the methods of political participation of the population are influenced not by the decisions of the highest governing bodies, but by individual political events that change the alignment and balance of political forces. Military coups, international crises, natural disasters, etc. can set such a “ragged” rhythm for the political process (for example, the August “putsch” of the State Emergency Committee in 1991, the April referendum in 1993, the crisis in October 1993 in Russia, military coups in a number of Afro-Asian states, changing both the institutional structures of governance and the conditions for the inclusion of the population in political life).

In addition, the political process certainly includes in its content the corresponding technologies and procedures of action. In other words, the political process demonstrates the nature of changes that are associated with the activities of a specific subject using, at one time or another and in one place or another, the methods and methods of activity familiar to him. Therefore, the use of different technologies in solving even homogeneous problems involves changes of different nature. Thus, without this technocratic link, political changes acquire an abstract character, losing their specificity and concrete historical design.

Typology of political processes

The manifestation of the indicated features of the political process in various time and other conditions predetermines the emergence of its various types. Thus, from a substantive point of view, domestic political and foreign policy (international) processes are distinguished. They differ in their specific subject area, special ways of interaction between subjects, the functioning of institutions, trends and patterns of development.

From the point of view of the significance for society of certain forms of political regulation of social relations, political processes can be divided into basic and peripheral. The first characterize those various changes in various areas political life, which relate to the modification of its basic, systemic properties. These include, for example, political participation, characterizing ways of including broad social strata in relations with the state, forms of transforming the interests and demands of the population into management decisions, typical methods of forming political elites, etc. Here we can also talk about the process of public administration (decision-making, legislative process, etc.) , which determines the main directions of the targeted use of the material power of the state. Peripheral political processes express changes in areas that are not so significant for society. For example, they reveal the dynamics of the formation of individual political associations (parties, pressure groups, etc.), the development of local self-government, and other connections and relationships in the political system that do not have a fundamental impact on the dominant forms and methods of exercising power.

At the same time, both basic and peripheral political processes differ in time and nature of implementation, and in the focus of their subjects on the norms of competition or cooperation.

Political processes can reflect changes that occur in overt or hidden forms. For example, an explicit political process is characterized by the fact that the interests of groups and citizens are systematically identified in their public claims to state power, which in turn makes the phase of preparation and adoption of management decisions accessible to public control. In contrast to the obvious, the hidden, shadow process is based on the activities of political institutions and centers of power that are not publicly formalized, as well as on the power claims of citizens that are not expressed in the form of an appeal to official government bodies.

Political processes are also divided into open and closed. The latter mean the type of changes that can be fairly unambiguously assessed within the framework of the criteria of best-worst, desirable-undesirable, etc. Open processes demonstrate a type of change that does not allow us to assume what kind of character they have - positive or negative for the subject. the transformations that have occurred or which of the possible future strategies is more preferable. For example, during the development of international crises or the reform of transitional social relations, it is often, in principle, impossible to understand whether the actions he performs benefit the subject, how to generally assess the current situation, which alternatives to prefer in this regard, etc. In other words, this type of process characterizes changes that occur in extremely unclear and uncertain situations, which imply increased hypotheticalness of both performed and planned actions.

It is also important to divide political processes into stable and transitional. Stable political processes express a clearly defined direction of change, the predominance of a certain type of power relations, forms of organization of power that presuppose the stable reproduction of political relations even with the resistance of certain forces. Outwardly, they can be characterized by the absence of wars, mass protests and other conflict situations threatening to overthrow or change the ruling regime. In unstable processes, there is no clear predominance of certain basic properties of the organization of power, which do not exclude the possibility of a qualitative assessment of changes. In this sense, the exercise of power is carried out in conditions of both imbalance in the influence of the main (economic, social, value, legal) prerequisites, and imbalance in the political activity of the main subjects in the political space.

Science also presents attempts to typologize political processes on a civilizational basis. Yes, J1. Pai, comparing the general political processes of different countries, identifies two types - Western and non-Western. In his work “The Non-Western Political Process”1 he notes that in non-Western societies: -

there is no clear boundary between politics and the sphere of public and personal relations; -

political parties tend to claim to express a worldview and form ideas about a way of life; -

the political process is dominated by clans; -

the nature of political orientations suggests that the leadership of political groups has significant freedom in determining the strategy and tactics of the structures and institutions of power; -

the performance of opposition parties and elites seeking power is often revolutionary in nature; -

there is little consensus on the legitimate ends and means of political action; -

the intensity and breadth of political discussion have little to do with political decision-making; -

the national leadership is forced to appeal to the people as a single whole, without distinguishing between social groups; -

the emotional and symbolic aspects of politics overshadow the search for solutions to specific issues and general problems; -

The role of charismatic leaders is great.

The political process here is characterized by: -

lack of integration among participants due to the lack of a unified communication system in society; -

a significant scale of recruitment of new elements to perform political roles; -

sharp differences in the political orientations of generations; -

high degree of combination and interchangeability of roles; -

weak influence of organized interest groups playing functionally specialized roles; -

unconstructive nature, which forces leaders to adhere to more specific views in the external, rather than in domestic policy; -

absence in most cases of the participation of “political brokers”.

Another type of typology of political processes is based on their differentiation into horizontal and vertical. The first are based on the recognition of the formal equality of the main participants and their relative autonomy. All participants in the political process “play” according to general rules, relying on uniform legal norms. This type of political process is possible in democratic political regimes with an adequate type of political culture. A vertically organized political process is distinguished by the fact that its participants strive in every possible way to form and maintain their authority. This is achieved through various methods of introducing people to values ​​that imply respect for the law and obedience.

Modern political process in Russia

In the 90s XX century The Russian political system was quickly transferred to a new state. This affected both the form of government and the political regime. Let's start with the form of government. Today Russia, as emphasized in the Constitution of the Russian Federation (Article 1), is a republic. However, the current republican form differs very significantly in content from the republican USSR. The general political process in the country has filled it with new content, essential characteristics which are the separation of powers, political pluralism, free elections as a way to form the highest state power. At the same time, the Russian republican form of government retains a number of features of Soviet statehood: the state strives to remain in the role of the main distributor of funds, continue to control various aspects of the life of society, and the nomenklatura principle of selecting management personnel is preserved to a certain extent. Thus, there is no reason to say that Russia is characterized by a complete republican form of government that meets all its main criteria.

The same can be said about the state of the Russian state structure in terms of its national-territorial division. In this regard, the general political process, as it developed, gave rise to many difficulties, and the modern federal structure of the Russian state is one of them. In Russia, among the subjects of the Federation there are both national-state formations (including republics, autonomous regions, autonomous okrugs) and administrative-territorial units (territories, regions, cities). There are more than 80 of them, which is more than in any other country. Capabilities of the subjects of the Federation in terms of natural resources, and on the scale of industrial production differ significantly, as a result of which their positions on the issue of delimitation of powers with the Center cannot be the same. Therefore, bilateral agreements are constantly concluded between the Center and the constituent entities of the Federation, which consolidate their competencies2.

The development of the political process in Russia is characterized by the fact that the established regime does not correspond to the “pure” type of any of the main political regimes. The general political process “brought” him out of the totalitarian form, directed him towards democracy, but was still far from introducing him into this form in its perfect form. Being a transition from totalitarianism to democracy, the current regime is closest to authoritarianism. The basis of such development is liberalization. Its essence lies in the fact that the state’s efforts are aimed primarily at creating the economic basis of democracy. We are talking about the need to develop a socially oriented market economy. In turn, this presupposes equality of all forms of property, improvement of privatization carried out in the country, and the formation of a middle class as a social force contributing to the economic and political stabilization of the country. Liberalization should also affect the political field of the country. However, the following testifies against liberalism today:

First, the deep-rooted psychology of collectivism combined with the traditional nature of power.

Secondly, in Russia at the beginning of the 21st century. There are still no institutions and traditions of civil society, the legal culture is in its infancy. The legislative, executive and judicial branches of government, through joint efforts, have brought their authority to an almost zero level; they are not trusted and only expect tricks from them. The other side of the coin is a focus on specific individuals and distrust of political institutions. For the foreseeable future, the charisma factor will continue to be of key importance, so we can also predict a clearly expressed authoritarian nature of the system of power at all levels. Even if outwardly democratic attributes remain, it will be the reign of mass (plebiscitary) rather than liberal democracy.

Thirdly, statehood in Russia is traditionally one of the strongest factors in economic life, so one should expect that the public sector will be an order of magnitude higher for a long period than is envisaged by the standards of Western economies, which in turn are subject to significant revision against the backdrop of the global economy. financial crisis that began in 2008

Fourthly, in Russia there is practically no “middle class”, the presence of which is a criterion of liberalism, and the social group that would be capable of being a conductor of liberal ideology - the intelligentsia - over the past twenty years has turned out to be the most humiliated, materially impoverished part of Russian society, and therefore forced to rely on the strengthening of statehood. Historically, the Russian economy, in its progress towards the market, is burdened with a huge burden of social obligations. The need to finance social protection programs reinforces the paternalistic role of the state, on which the life of almost every family will significantly depend for a long time. It is clear that this cannot in any way contribute to the eradication of the psychology of dependency in society. The ideology of “social justice”, materialized in the programs of the “welfare state”, is one of the main obstacles to the liberal reorientation of modern society. In post-Soviet Russia, the process of formation of special interest groups is ahead of the process of denationalization of the economy. Here the main actors are industry and territorial or ethnic clans and large corporations. Lobbying becomes the main area of ​​application of their efforts. By nature, this is a deeply anti-liberal society, torn apart by distributive conflicts.

Fifthly, in the Russian legal consciousness, historically the word “liberal”, “liberal” for a fairly long period was associated with negative assessments - “rotten”, “soft”, and in the mass consciousness the mere mention of “price liberalization” causes at least shock.

Sixthly, liberalism turned out to be devalued by the fact that under democratic slogans the former “party state nomenklatura” special effort turned into a “demnomenklatura of not the first freshness,” while the parties, by name of the liberal-democratic persuasion, are, in essence, completely opposite to the liberal idea.

Finally, political elite, especially at the federal level, the country’s leaders themselves, with their authoritarian methods of activity, do not fit well with their declared affiliation with the liberal credo.

All of the above indicates the absence of the soil necessary for the establishment of liberal values.

In post-Soviet Russia, the idea of ​​freedom was overshadowed by the ideas of democracy and national self-determination. The disappointment generated by the democratization experience of the last twenty years has not only cooled sympathy for the concepts of democracy and national self-determination, but also negatively affected the reputation of the liberal idea.

Thus, the liberal movement in Russia is fragmented and the prospects for its consolidation are vague, which was clearly confirmed by the elections to the State Duma held at the end of 2007. Liberalism has disintegrated into dwarf, ambitious parties and parties. Relationships between leaders are not easy. zo

many of them are quite authoritarian in their methods of activity, which does not fit well with their declared ideas. However, the liberal perspective, against the backdrop of the discrediting of the socialist idea, most closely corresponds to the deep, spontaneous interests of various groups of society, which have already gained sufficient independence from the political situation. And the vector of social development has so far been directed towards expanding the area of ​​freedom. This is precisely what gives us hope that liberalism has a future in the new Russia.

Successful further development of the general political process in Russia should lead to: 1) increasing the level of political leadership of Russian society; 2) achieving sustainability of social relations; 3) intensification of activities to create a legal and social state; 4) the formation of new relationships between the state and civil society; 5) improving the federal structure of the Russian state; 6) formation of the middle class; 7) further democratic transformations in economic sphere; 8) development of political pluralism; 9) conducting effective social policy; 10) creation and implementation of a clear geopolitical program for the development of the country in compliance with its national interests.

When studying the political process in modern Russia and the changes that are taking place in the country, one cannot help but note such features, the roots of which go back to the past: -

firstly, the indivisibility of politics and economics, social and personal relations. Due to historical circumstances, power and property have never been separated from each other. In Russia, not a single issue of economic, social or spiritual development cannot be resolved without the intervention of government authorities; -

secondly, the lack of a tradition of agreement between participants in political life (in the past - Cadets and Octobrists, Mensheviks and Bolsheviks, in the present - right-wingers and Yabloko members, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and Zhirinovites), mainly due to the immaturity of the institutions of civil society that should would limit and control political power. All development

the party-political system is aimed at the past - towards the creation of one party, the party in power; -

thirdly, the concentration of an unreasonably large amount of power in only one structure - the presidential one. State power has always been personified and associated with its specific bearer: “ Grand Duke", "king", "emperor", " general secretary", "the president"; -

fourthly, the state in the political process of Russia, as always, acts not as a reconciling, but as a pacifying principle, and subjects (conditionally citizens) are either silent: “The people are silent!”, or rebellious: E. Pugachev, S. Razin, Decembrists , populists, terrorists, revolutionaries; -

fifthly, the complete indifference and alienation of the majority of Russian society to the actions of state power, be it during the era of palace coups or in October 1917, during the shooting of the White House in 1993 or during the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Although today this indifference has been somewhat shaken: the political life of Russian society is characterized by a fairly high participation of citizens in politics. There is a struggle between people for their interests. Their involvement in election campaigns is unusual. Some are supporters of reforms and modernization of society, others are opponents of the renewal of the country and the entire system of socio-political relations.

For the successful development of the political process in Russia, political modernization is necessary, implying the mood of society for continuous renewal, for constant transformations of social practices, democratic institutions, ideas about the future, assessments of the present, for gradual but irreversible changes in the technological, economic, cultural fields, for steady improving quality of life3.

Irkhin Yu.V., Zotov V.D., Zotova L.V.

“You cannot build a happy world on blood; with consent – ​​it’s possible.”

Postulate

§ 1. The essence of the political process

The term “process” (from the Latin processus - advancement) usually characterizes a certain movement, a course, an order of movement that has its own direction; sequential change of states, stages, evolution; a set of sequential actions to achieve a result.

The political process is a consistent, internally connected chain of political events and phenomena, as well as a set of sequential actions of various political subjects aimed at gaining, retaining, strengthening and using political power in society. The political process is the cumulative and consistent activity of social communities, socio-political organizations and groups, individuals pursuing certain political goals; in the narrow sense - purposeful and related activities social and institutional subjects of politics over a certain period of time to implement political decisions.

The political process as a whole: the course of development of political phenomena, the totality of actions of various political forces (subjects of politics), movements seeking the implementation of certain political goals; the form of functioning of a certain political system of society, evolving in space and time; one of the social processes, as opposed to legal, economic, etc.; designation of a specific process with the end result of a certain scale (revolution, reform of society, formation of a political party, movement, progress of a strike, election campaign, etc.).

The political process acts as a functional characteristic of political life as a whole, determining the performance by subjects of power of their specific roles and functions. It expresses a very specific Set of actions carried out by subjects, bearers and institutions of power to exercise their rights and prerogatives in the political sphere. In the political process, various political subjects and factors interact, resulting in changes and transformations in the political sphere of society.

Revealing the content of politics through the real forms of execution by subjects of their roles and functions, the political process demonstrates how the implementation of these roles reproduces or destroys various elements of the political system, shows its superficial or deep changes, the transition from one state to another. The political process reveals the nature of the movement and sociodynamics of the political system, the change in its states in time and space. It represents a set of actions of institutionalized and non-institutionalized political subjects to implement their main functions in the sphere of power, leading to change, development or collapse of a given political system of society.

Analyzing the content of the political process along the “vertical”, we can say that it includes two main forms of political expression of citizens. Firstly, these are various ways for ordinary participants in the political process to present their interests in various types political activity: participation in elections, referendums, strikes, socio-political movements, etc. Secondly, the adoption and implementation of management decisions carried out by political leaders and elites.

Political processes unfold both on a global scale and within the political system of society, a separate region, or a local territory. They can be typologized by scale, nature of transformations, composition of participants, time duration, etc. Political processes act as global and national, national and regional (local), as interclass, intergroup, and within classes, social and other groups, outside or within political parties and movements. According to the nature, significance and forms of development (course), political processes are basic (on problems of development of the entire society) and peripheral (on issues of a region, a group of people), revolutionary and evolutionary, open and closed, stable and unstable, long-term or short-term (election period ).

The main problem of the political process is the problem of making and implementing political decisions that should, on the one hand, integrate the various interests of citizens, and on the other, take into account the interests of the development and progress of the entire society.

The fact is that the development of general collective goals is formed, as it were, at the intersection of the actions of, on the one hand, official bodies and institutions of power, and on the other, the public, interest groups, etc. The leading role in the actions under consideration is played by the highest institutions of state power. They are the main mechanism for making and implementing decisions. The degree of centralization of power and distribution of powers between groups involved in developing the goals of political development depends on their activities. Thanks to their stability and mobility in the political process, government institutions are able to support even those norms and goals that do not meet the needs of the development of society, diverge from the political traditions of the population and contradict the mentality and interests of citizens. The nature of the activities of institutions essentially determines the characteristics of the relationships between political subjects, as well as the rhythms, stages and pace of political changes in society.

The activities of institutions usually determine the cycles of the political process characteristic of specific societies. The process of developing and implementing national, collective decisions is most often carried out by leading political institutions. For example, in democratic countries the political process is shaped from above. The peak of political activity of the population occurs during elections to the highest legislative and executive bodies of state power. At the same time, when legislators go on summer vacation (“parliamentary recess”), political life, as usual, calms down.

From point of view system qualities the organization of political power distinguishes two main types of political processes: democratic, which combines various forms of direct and representative democracy, and non-democratic, the internal content of which is determined by the presence of totalitarian or authoritarian regimes; activities of the relevant political parties and public organizations and leaders, the existence of an authoritarian political culture and mentality of citizens.

Based on the nature of the transformation of power, political processes are typologized into revolutionary and evolutionary.

The evolutionary type of political process is characterized by a gradual resolution of accumulated contradictions and rationalization of conflicts; separation of functions and roles of various political subjects; stability of the formed decision-making mechanisms; joint activities of the elite and the electorate, mutually controlling each other and having freedom of action within the framework of their acquired statuses; legitimacy of power, the presence of common socio-cultural values ​​and guidelines for managers and managed; consensus and the mandatory presence of constructive opposition; a combination of management with self-government and self-organization of political life.

The revolutionary type of political process develops in an environment of a revolutionary situation or close to it (according to V.I. Lenin: the “tops” cannot, the “bottoms” do not want to live in the old way, high political activity of the masses). It is characterized by a relatively rapid qualitative change in power, a complete revision of the Constitution of the state; the use of both peaceful and violent means to overthrow the previous regime; electoral preferences give way to spontaneous arbitrary forms of mass political movements; at all levels of government there is a lack of time for making management decisions; the declining role of advisory and expert bodies, the increasing responsibility of political leaders; increasing conflict between the traditional and new elites.

It is advisable to highlight the main stages of the formation and development of the political process:

Its beginning can be considered the stage of developing and presenting the political interests of groups and citizens to institutions that make political decisions.

The third stage of the political process is the implementation of political decisions, the embodiment of the strong-willed aspirations of government institutions and various political subjects.

From the point of view of the stability of the main forms of interrelation of social and political structures, the certainty of the functions and relationships of subjects of power, stable and unstable political processes can be distinguished.

A stable political process is characterized by stable forms of political mobilization and behavior of citizens, as well as functionally developed mechanisms for making political decisions. Such a process is based on a legitimate regime of government, an appropriate social structure, and the high efficiency of legal and cultural norms prevailing in society.

An unstable political process usually arises in conditions of a crisis of power. This may be a complication international relations, decline material production, social conflicts. The inability of the regime to respond to the new needs of society or its main groups in an adequate manner causes instability in the political process.

Goal: To reveal the essence and structure of the political process, the varieties of its manifestation.

1. The essence and structure of the political process.

2. Types and varieties of the political process.

Basic concepts: political process, political activity, phases (stages) of the political process, types of political process. Mode of existence, stages, war, revolution, reform, terrorism, compromise.

Literature:

Main:

1. Bozhanov V.A. Political science: the world of modern politics. – M, 2008. – p.233-250.

2. Melnik V.A. Political science. Textbook. - Mn.: Higher school, 2002. – p. 280-324.

3. Political science: Textbook / Edited by M.A. Vasilik. - M.: Yurist, 1999. – pp. 257-272.

Additional:

2. Political Science: Textbook / Ed. S.B. Reshetnikova. – Mn.: TetraSystems, 2001. – pp. 258-280.

3. Political science. Textbook / Ed. V.A. Achkasova. – M.: 2005. – p. 457-568.

4. Appendix 8.

1. The political process is a joint activity of political subjects, organized to achieve common goals. The concept of the political process is usually used in two respects, conventionally referred to as its macro and micro dimensions. In the macro aspect, it is defined as the course of development in general, the reproduction of the political system under the influence of influencing factors. In the micro aspect, the political process is understood as a certain resultant of the actions of various social and political subjects, i.e. a set of subprocesses.

In modern political science, there are several approaches to the study of political processes:

Systems approach (D. Easton, T. Parsons). The process is divided into 4 phases: entry, conversion, exit, feedback. This model of cyclical functioning of the p/p (circulation) was widespread in the 50-80s of the twentieth century.

Dynamic approach (G. Almond). He considers the process as an adaptation of the political system to changing conditions; he identifies several blocks of joint activity of subjects.

Block of transformation of social needs (articulation, aggregation, implementation and control over execution;

Impact block;

Block of adaptation, inclusion of individuals and their groups in political life.

Behavioral and interactionist approaches consider the political process as the resultant action of all participants or as a set of interactions (interactions).

The basis of the political process is political activity.

Political activity is the sum of practical actions aimed at gaining, exercising and maintaining power.

Political activity is often designated under the category “political behavior.”

Political activity has its own subjects, i.e. direct participants in political actions (individuals, groups of people, social institutions and their bodies that have political power, political parties and their functionaries, socio-political movements and their leaders, social strata, classes, nations, ethnic groups).

The objects of political activity are the existing social and political system, i.e. Political subjects, in the course of their activities, strive to transform, modify or preserve the existing social structure of society, the content of socio-political relations, the structure of political organizations and government.

At the same time, various subjects, in their ultimate goal, have in mind the transformation of the entire socio-political reality. Projects of transformation can be realistic, or they can act as absolute and relative political utopias.

So, the political process is the total activity of all subjects of political relations associated with the formation, change, transformation and functioning of the political system that mediates public power.

There are 3 modes of existence of the political process:

Functioning;

Development;

Decline.

The nature of the political process:

Ambivalent (internally contradictory);

Asynchronous (reversible, disproportionate).

Therefore, the political process is a set of institutionalized and non-institutionalized actions of political subjects who carry out the formation and implementation of the will of society by intergroup authorities.

Phases (stages) of the political process:

1. Representation of political interests of groups to institutions making management decisions (articulation of interests).

2. Decision making and formation of political will.

A.) Rational-universal.

B.) Method of sequential restrictions (branch method).

3. The stage of implementation of political will, expressed in the form of management decisions.

The political process is divided into 4 stages:

1. Constitution of the political system.

2. Reproduction of components and features of political culture.

3. Making and executing political and managerial decisions.

4. Control over the functioning and direction of development of the political system.

The process of recognition of a political system can be active or passive, open or hidden, voluntary or forced, direct or indirect, conscious or unconscious.

The political process is associated with the reconstruction of political relations, institutions, political norms, values, signs, symbols, languages. It is very closely related to continuity.

The political process cannot exist without a control mechanism, which includes: criteria for assessing political factors. Self-assessment of politically significant facts; the influence of persons involved in the political process on the facts.

Public administration as a political sub-process occupies a significant place in the political process. The specifics of public administration are determined by the universal role of Constitutional law as a system of basic norms; universality, predetermination of broad powers and functions.

Public policy is closely related to public administration. It contains the following blocks:

Formation of legitimate subjects and institutional hierarchy;

Development of a strategic course and adoption of government decisions;

Administrative means of implementing management decisions;

State control and arbitration.

Closely related to political leadership and public administration is the problem of political decision making.

A political decision is a conscious choice of one of at least two possible courses of action. Preparation and adoption of a political decision is difficult process, consisting of several stages:

Statement or identification of a socio-political problem that requires resolution;

Formation of possible alternatives to resolve this problem;

Discussion or comparative analysis of proposed solutions;

Making the final decision.

There are several decision-making methods: rational-universal and the method of sequential restrictions (“branch method”). Most political scientists are inclined to believe that the “branch method” is more effective, but a number of scientists propose a more advanced method, because mixed-scanning method, which combines the advantages of the first two.

You can select following types decisions made:

Laws and regulations of higher authorities;

Solutions local authorities authorities;

Decisions made directly by citizens;

Decisions of the highest bodies of political parties and socio-political organizations;

Decisions of local bodies of political parties and public organizations.

Concept of political process

Definition 1

The political process is understood as a special way of functioning of the political system of society, which changes in space and time and is ensured through the functioning of the political system.

The essence of any political processes is determined based on the framework within which political system they operate and which political regime they correspond to. For example, a democratic regime of government is characterized by the following features: citizens have broad administrative and electoral rights, human and civil rights and freedoms are widely ensured and fully respected, state interference in the affairs of citizens is excluded except in cases stipulated by Federal Law.

Like any process, the political process is represented by an object and a subject. In particular, the object refers to the goal that must be achieved by the policy. The subjects are the bearers of certain political actions. In addition, the political process is implemented through certain methods, these can be either dispositive methods or imperative ones, that is, those provided by the state with coercive power.

The political process within a particular state may also use resources, such as monetary resources, human resources, and so on. In addition, the political process has executors, that is, those individuals who directly implement the policy.

Various policy actors make conscious efforts, resulting in certain policy outcomes. Subjects can be represented by individuals, various social groups, political parties, government agencies, and so on.

Note 1

Each subject has its own role and tasks that it implements during the political process. At the same time, subjects of the political process are able to reproduce, develop, destroy, and change specific elements of political life and the system. All changes that occur in the political system inevitably affect its subjects.

Stages of the political process

The political process, like any phenomenon, has certain stages of its development. In particular, the following main stages can be distinguished: formation of a political system, reproduction of the political system, its components and features, implementation of management decisions in the field of politics, control over the implementation of the political system.

The most interesting is the stage of reproduction of the political system, since it is here that the system is modified and updated, its views change. Participants in political systems can also change their points of view and views.

At each stage, control is exercised over how the political system develops and functions. This control is achieved both through public surveillance and through control by the state, state and municipal bodies. It also establishes certain standards for political activity, its conduct, and the procedure for holding elections. In particular, in the Russian Federation, the main provisions in this area are established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as well as federal legislation.

The result of a particular political process depends on the goals that the subjects entering into political relations set for themselves. It may depend on favorable and unfavorable factors that influence the development of individual phenomena. These factors can be either accidental or intentionally created by human forces. Other factors, for example, the forces of nature, may have a certain influence. Interaction within the framework of political processes occurs not only within one state, but also in the international arena.

Signs of the political process

The political process consists of a set of features that characterize a given phenomenon. The term “process” itself was borrowed by political scientists from cybernetics, where it is understood as a series of relationships that leads to a certain result.

Accordingly, from the very definition of the political process, some of its characteristics can be identified:

• The subjects' actions take place in the political sphere. The political process is often identified with the word “politics,” but these phenomena differ.
• Participation in the political activities of various subjects. The subjects here are understood as political parties, associations, citizens, and so on.
• A certain procedure. The process does not consist of systematic actions of people, but of a set of actions that constitute a system, that is, they have a certain basis and are regularly replenished.
• Having a specific goal. The goal is political, since each participant in the political process pursues a specific policy goal. Other purposes may also be affected.
• Using various resources. Resources can be knowledge, science, technology, financial resources, the presence of a certain ideology, the formation of a certain public opinion, and so on.
• The influence of legislation on the functioning of politics. Thus, laws regulate certain areas of policy and the procedure for conducting it.

Thus, the political process is characterized by the presence of various features that characterize it as a political phenomenon. As part of the implementation of any political activity in Russia, it is necessary to take into account that all power is divided into three branches: legislative, executive, judicial. Therefore, any principles for the implementation of power are built taking into account this division, as well as a system of checks and balances for these branches of government.

Note 2

The core of any political process is the adoption of a specific political decision, which can be made both collectively and individually. This decision has certain goals and objectives, methods and ways to achieve them. Goals are set by leaders of parties, certain government agencies, public associations, and so on. All of them must have appropriate design.

The development of any state is a process that can consist of a variety of components. It involves the authorities solving a variety of problems and the participation of a wide range of actors. The same can be said about one of the aspects of state building - the development of the political system. It also builds into a process. What might its characteristics be?

What is the political process?

Let's explore the process. What could be its definition? IN Russian science This is understood as a sequence of events, phenomena and actions that characterize the relationships of various subjects - people, organizations, authorities - in the sphere of politics.

The process under consideration can take place at different levels and in different spheres of social life. For example, it can characterize communications between subjects within one government agency or the entire government system, or take place at the municipal, regional or federal level.

The concept of a political process may imply a rather broad interpretation of the corresponding term. Moreover, each of its interpretations may mean the formation of independent categories within the framework of the phenomenon under consideration. Thus, they distinguish Various types political processes that may be characterized by significant differences from each other. Let's consider this feature more details.

Classification of political processes

In order to explore the types of political processes, it is necessary first of all to determine the possible grounds for classifying this phenomenon. What criteria might apply here?

In Russian science, there is a widespread approach according to which the political process can be divided into domestic political and foreign policy, depending on the nature of the key subjects directly influencing its course.

Another basis for classifying political processes is classifying them as voluntary or controlled. Here, the described phenomenon is considered in terms of the characteristics of the mechanisms of participation of subjects in relevant communications.

There are such forms of the political process as open and shadow. The key criterion here is the publicity of the subjects influencing the relevant phenomena.

There are revolutionary and evolutionary types of political processes. The key criterion in this case is the time frame during which certain changes are implemented at the level of communication between subjects, and in many cases, the methods by which they are implemented.

Political processes are also divided into stable and volatile. In this case, what matters is how stable and predictable the behavior of the subjects influencing the course of the phenomenon under consideration can be.

Let us now study the specifics of the development of political processes within the framework of the noted classification in more detail.

Foreign policy and domestic political processes

So, the first basis for classifying the phenomenon under consideration is the classification of its varieties as foreign policy or domestic policy. The process classified as the first type involves the participation of subjects who are directly related to the institutions of government and society that function within a single state. These could be people holding positions in government, heads of enterprises, public structures, parties, or ordinary citizens. The foreign policy process assumes that its course is influenced by subjects of foreign origin - heads of state, foreign corporations and institutions.

Some researchers highlight communications carried out exclusively at the international level. Thus, a process is formed. Events and phenomena characteristic of it may at the same time influence the state of affairs in individual states - for example, if we are talking about discussions regarding the writing off of external debts in relation to a country, or the imposition of sanctions.

Voluntary and controlled processes

The next basis on which certain types of political processes are determined is the classification of the phenomena under consideration as voluntary or controlled. In the first case, it is assumed that subjects influencing the course of relevant events act on the basis of personal political will, guided by their beliefs and priorities. This can be expressed, for example, in the participation of people in the elections of the head of state. Attendance at them is voluntary, as is the choice of candidate. Controlled political processes assume that the subjects influencing them act on the basis of the requirements of the law or, for example, due to administrative influence from authorized structures. In practice, this can be expressed, for example, in the presence of visas required by one state for the entry of citizens of another: in this way the migration aspect of the international political process is controlled.

Public and shadow processes

The next basis for classifying the phenomenon under consideration is classifying its varieties as open or shadow. Political processes of the first type assume that the subjects influencing it conduct their activities publicly. This is what happens in most developed countries: in particular, people elect a president from among candidates who are known to everyone. The procedures for electing the head of state are fixed in laws and are available to everyone for review. The president, whom the people elected, has powers known to everyone and implements them. But there are countries in which senior officials are also elected, but real ones can be accepted by non-public entities, the essence of which is incomprehensible to ordinary citizens, and access to relevant information is closed. In the first case, the political process will be open, in the second - shadow.

Revolutionary and evolutionary political processes

Political processes may vary depending on the methods by which their subjects carry out certain activities, as well as the speed of changes that characterize certain aspects of communications. Regarding evolutionary processes: methods, as a rule, are based on the provisions of sources of law - laws, regulations, orders. Changing them involves quite time-consuming parliamentary and administrative procedures. But in case of instability in the state, the sources that predetermine the methods used by the subjects of the political process can become slogans, manifestos, demands that are not related to existing laws. As a result, events and phenomena that are not typical for the first scenario are possible. Thus, a revolutionary political process is formed. It often happens that significant changes affect the entire structure of government.

Stable and volatile processes

The political process - in society, in the international arena - can be characterized by stability or, conversely, volatility. In the first case, the subjects influencing the relevant events and phenomena will rely on norms and customs that do not change noticeably over a long period of time.

In the second scenario, it is possible to turn to sources containing provisions that can be interpreted or changed quite freely due to the preferences of the subjects of the political process.

Structural components of the political process

Let us now study the structural aspect of the phenomenon under consideration. What are the common theses of Russian researchers regarding this issue? The structure of the political process most often involves the inclusion of the following components:

Subject (authority, public, political structure or specific citizen capable of influencing the course of relevant events and phenomena);

Object (the area of ​​activity of the subject, characterizing the purpose of his actions, priorities, preferences);

Methods on which the subject relies when solving his problems;

Resources at the disposal of the subject of the political process.

Let's study in more detail the specifics of each of the noted points.

The essence of the subjects of the political process

So, the structure of the political process presupposes the inclusion of subjects in it. These most often become government bodies as independent institutions or specific ones. The political process in Russia, as many researchers note, is characterized by the significant role of the individual in the relevant sphere of communications. On the scale of the entire state, the key role can be played by the president, in the region - by its head, in the city - by the mayor.

Objects of the political process

Their nature may be different. Thus, some researchers consider economic and political processes in a single context, considering the former to be a type of object for the latter. The development of the national economic system, business, solving problems of employment of citizens - these problems are relevant for any state.

Accordingly, the goal of the subjects of the political process, who are the highest officials, there may be achievement of positive results in relevant areas of work. That is, the economy in this case will be the object of the political process.

Methods of the political process

The nature of the methods in question can also vary significantly. A subject of power, called upon to solve problems of modernizing the economic system of the state and other problems, must first of all somehow obtain his position. In this case, we are talking about methods based on which a person can take power into his own hands.

The political process in Russia assumes that these will be elections - at the level of a municipality, region or country as a whole. In turn, the actual solution of problems, for example, in modernizing the economy, will be implemented on the basis of a different method - lawmaking. For example, it can initiate the adoption of certain legal acts aimed at stimulating the development of the country’s economy.

Resources for the Political Process

The subject of power may have at his disposal the most effective methods for solving the assigned tasks, but if he does not have the necessary resources at his disposal, then it will not be possible to implement the plans. How can the corresponding component of the political process be represented?

First of all, this is, of course, capital. If we talk about politics, these can be budget funds or borrowed funds. The term “resource” can also be interpreted in a slightly different way - as a certain source for maintaining the legitimacy of power. This will no longer necessarily be finance. Such a resource can be the expression of the will of people, citizens of the state. It is formed in this way, implying constant interaction between government and society. At the same time, by analogy with financial sector, the resource in this case can be understood as a credit of trust on the part of citizens, which the subject of public administration must justify.

So, the term “political process” that we are considering can be understood, on the one hand, as a set of events and phenomena that are observed at one or another level of communications, and on the other hand, as a category with a complex structure, including rather dissimilar elements. In turn, the individual components of the political process will also be characterized by complexity, and their essence can be interpreted through a variety of approaches.