The political encyclopaedia, т.II
I. Political changes, political process and political development. All live, allocated with reason, by all means moves, changing in time and space. Change- the natural form of life of all objects and the phenomena, representing constant transition from one condition in another. Change in a broad sense includes all evolutionary processes, and also occurrence of the new phenomena in the world, therefore categories of political change and political development are closely interconnected and usually considered in steam. These concepts belong to number of the most important and often used in a modern political science.
Sources of dynamics of political systems consist in development dialectics, in the permission of internal contradictions and in answers to external influences. Political process arising thus it is possible and it is necessary to explain as certain changes in a condition of the political system, providing a cycle of its reproduction (formation, functioning, development with an exit on higher level).
The term process (from an armour. processus - advancement) usually is designated by the certain movement, any course, the order of movement having the direction; consecutive change of conditions, stages, evolutions; set of consecutive actions for achievement of any result. If to summarise various approaches to the characteristic of political process it is possible to allocate two its kinds - more schematical, simple and more complex, difficult. The first of them defines political process as consecutive and long in time change of conditions of political system and its subsystems or change in them of separate elements which are made under the influence of external and internal living conditions of a society. The second assumes that the concept of political process means:
1) dynamic integrated measurement of political lifeof any society, comprising reproduction of components of its political system, and also certain changes in a condition of the political system, providing a cycle of its reproduction;
2) cumulative political activity of social and political subjects with consecutive expansion in “real time” all set of individual political actions and events;
3) struggle for control over meansвластвования and managements of a society, characterised by certain arrangement and a parity of sociopolitical forces.
Political process is always closely connected with such three forms of existence of the political phenomena, as functioning, development and decline:
- Functioning of the political phenomena at society level is a way of maintenance of the developed political system, reproduction of that balance of forces which reflects their base relations, продуцирования the basic functions of structures and institutes, forms of interaction of elite and electorate, political parties and local authorities. At such way of changes of tradition and continuity possess a conclusive priority before any innovations;
- Developmentcharacterises such updatings of base parametres of the political phenomena which assume positive character of evolution of the last, that is the policy is deduced on level which allows the authorities to answer adequately time calls, effectively to operate public relations;
- Declinerepresents such way of transformation of the developed base forms and relations which assumes negative prospect of political evolution of the phenomenon. According to P.Struve, decline is “a regressive metamorphosis” politicians. Decline in essence means disintegration of the developed political integrity, for example, falling of a political mode.
The tradition of the analysis of dynamics of political life has developed far back in the past. For example, Poliby in II century BC has stated ideas about the complete circulation of political life assuming natural transition of the state in a stage of formation, blossoming and decline. A major landmark in creation of bases of the concept of political process in the western political science were K.Marx and F.Engelsa's works, put forward ideas of alternation of social and economic formations and change of their political superstructures. V.Pareto has developed in “the Treatise on the general sociology” the concept of circulation (circulation) of elite that has given J.Shumpeteru's grounds to name its founder of "sociology of political process”. But the present revolution in the theory of political process was made by A.Bentli's book "Managerial process" (1908). By which the concept of groups of interests and treatment of dynamics of political process as struggle and mutual pressure of social groups in rivalry for the government have been in detail developed.
David Truman who has published in 1951 the book “Administrative process” became Bentley's successor in working out of a problematics of political process, proceeding from the concept of groups of interests. As well as its predecessor, it understood struggle of social groups as political process for the power and for control over distribution of imperious resources. However has given to this process existential characteristics because group dynamics, in its opinion, appears as a wavy cycle of transition from astable interactions to an establishment of relative balance, to restoration of old model of balance between groups or to creation of new model.
The system approach to research of political process in the western political science is connected with T.Parsons and D.Istona'snames. They considered it through four phases: 1) an input - influence of the social and extrasocial environment on political system in the form of its support and promotion to it of requirements; 2) conversion - transformation of requirements to decisions; 3) an exit - reaction of political system in the form of decisions and actions; 4) feedback - return to a balance starting point. This model of "circulation", that is cyclic functioning of political process was rather popular and only in second polovine70 th years ХХ centuries has started to give way to more modern campaigns.
Bases of dynamic model of political process as adaptations of political system to changing conditions of the social environment were put by G.Almond. In the theoretical scheme he has tried to connect activity of separate groups to functioning of all system, having allocated some joint blocks of actions of political subjects and political system. D.Apter and some other American political science used ideas of Almonda for the description of political processes of last quarter of the XX-th century in the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America that has helped not only to updating of the theory of development, but also a policy of modernisation.
The policy characteristic as process allows to see the special parties, sides of interaction of subjects concerning the government. Some scientists identify political process with political sphere in whole (R.Douz) or with all set of behavioural actions of subjects of the power, change of their statuses and influences (C.Merriam). S.Hantingtonconnects political process with functioning and transformation of institutes of the power. D.Iston understands it as set of reactions of political system on environment calls. R.Darendorf places emphasis on rivalry of groups for statuses and power resources, and J. Mannheim and R.Rich treat it as a difficult complex of the events defining character of activity of the state institutes and their influence on a society. Being guided on вышеозначенные approaches, it is possible to consider that political process represents set of all dynamic changes in behaviour and relations of subjects, performed by them of roles and functioning of institutes, and also in all other elements of political space which are carried out under the influence of external and internal factors. It is considered the most widespread following definition: political process is the consecutive, internally connected chain of political events and the phenomena, and also set of consecutive actions of various subjects of the policy directed on a gain, deduction, strengthening and use of the political power in a society.
Owing to such interpretation of political process by its central characteristic changewhich means any updating of structure and functions, institutes and forms, constants and variable lines, rates of evolution and other parametres of the political phenomena acts. In a science there was a set of representations about sources, mechanisms and forms of changes. K.Marx, for example, saw principal causes of political dynamics in influence of economic relations, V.Pareto connected them with circulation of elite, M.Veber - with activity of the charismatic leader, T.Parsons - with execution by people of various roles etc. However more often as the basic source of political changes name the conflict understood as one of possible variants of interaction of political subjects. As the source of political process the conflict represents a version and result of competitive interaction of two or more parties (groups, the states, individuals), imperious powers challenging each other distribution or resources.
Political processes worldwide differ original character, dynamics and orientation degree. At the same time a number of criteria allows to allocate the basic versions of political processes:
Locally-regional and global. Division of political processes by such principle is connected by that frequently the result of this or that regional process can influence and the general course of world politics. For example, the ethnopolitical conflict between Serbs, босняками and Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina from a domestic concern of the former Yugoslavia has outgrown in the scale phenomenon, affected on all European and even world politics;
Intersystem and transitive (transit). Such sight at political processes opens one more party of the given phenomenon - the relation to system of institutes and the norms, a forming framework in general any process. Intersystem processes are developed in such political space where the number of players and judges is accurately defined, that is institutes, time and game rules - political norms. It concerns the countries with the established political system in enough which rigid borders political process is developed. Processes concern type of transit processes in the countries enduring the period of a radical change of the power, including its institutes and other subjects;
Stable and crisis. In the Marxist literature distinction of stable and crisis processes was quite often reduced to a dilemma - reform or revolution. Really, in the politician acute political crises quite often turn to revolutionary explosions, and series even deep governmental reforms provide stable evolution. At the same time both revolution, and reform can be way of the permission of political crisis that is caused by the mechanisms of the most political process connected with presence or absence of balance and a consensus of leading political forces, acting as its subjects;
Legal and shadow. Such distinction of political processes is connected by that in their basis always there are values and norms of dominating political culture, and also separate subcultures. These values also define rules of a game of politics, border permitted and not resolved, official and informal, legal and illegal (shadow) processes. For example, revolt and revolution, terror and putsch at all types of modes are prohibited by constitutions and norms of political life. In a reality. Nevertheless, political process frequently is beyond a legal field, and the so-called political expediency is appreciated above, than legality.
Types of political processes can be allocated on ways of achievement of dynamic balance of political system during its transformations assuming certain sequence of political changes (such classification represents result of a theoretical assumption, exarticulation of certain ideal types which with political practice are closely interconnected, bound among themselves). In that case speech can go about processes texnocratic, идеократического and charismatic types:
- Political process of texnocratic type prefers political technologies and procedures, traditions, ways of legitimate investment with the power, decision-making when subjects strictly adhere to those political roles and functions which are ordered them by the legislation, political traditions, and leaders represent itself as carriers of interests of those institutes which they directly represent;
- Political process идеократического type is characteristic for traditional societies where there is no the independent person, the developed differentiation of political roles and functions where integration diverse in ethnocultural and social and economic relations of a society is carried out on the basis of national idea;
- Political process of charismatic type is characteristic for east cultural tradition where the role and the status of the political leader are absolutised, and is frequent it simply idolise, where political process can be effective under a condition if it is supplemented texnocratic and идеократическим with political processes. At immaturity of a civil society, at low legal culture and absence of the national consent concerning lines and properties of a desirable society such societies should hope for the charismatic person. Its charisma can be based or on the official status, or on ability to express expectation of the overwhelming majority of members of a society, using thus discontent, the protest and promising to change by all means a situation to the best.
In a political science attempts типологизировать political processes on цивилизационной are presented also to a basis. So, L.Paj allocated "the not western" type of political process. It carried to its features:
Propensity of political parties to apply for formation of outlook and development of a way of life;
The big freedom of heads in definition of strategy and tactics of political structures and institutes;
Presence of sharp distinctions in political orientations of generations;
Intensity of the political debates poorly connected with decision-making, etc.
At the same time between concepts of political process, political change and political development there are essential distinctions. If process reproduces political system changes and development represent not simply transformation of internal properties of systems, but also its transition to other qualitative condition or change of one system type by another. Political development allows to create also institutes which are capable to include in the sphere of influence and to order participation in the politician of new groups, and also to stimulate social and economic changes.
Political changeappears in that case as transformation of structures, processes or the purposes, mentioning distribution or realisation of imperious powers on management of any society. Political change promotes or to the adaptation of existing system of the power and management to new requirements of time and the changing social environment, or replacement of the given system another owing to that it is not capable and to support the effective functioning further. The basic types - political reform, revolution, revolution, restoration, partial or full revision of the constitution.
Political development is a set of the dynamic processes developed in the given society which define changes in its political system or its replacement another, as a rule, in a direction большей abilities control facilities to cope with shown requirements. Laws of political development reflect steady mutual relations between social groups and practical activities of actors in political sphere. They are shown as a tendency, resultants a combination or the conflict of various interests, as causes character of the actions based on them.
Political changes are constant, as there are no completely static political systems, no less than stiffened in one condition, not developing societies. However it is necessary to differentiate nevertheless two kinds of development - dynamic which is based on necessity of the constant movement dictated by logic of an industrial society, and stationary, подпитываемое by the weak social impulses which are not deducing from a stable condition structure of traditional type. Process of formation of an industrial society has made advance irreversible, and political development - forward-ascending. The durability of political systems, their perfection depend on possibilities of societies to change and adapt to new circumstances. Moreover, stability of political system is completely not equivalent to absence of changes in it. On the contrary, stability is a characteristic of system ability to adapt for internal and external influences. Political development of system reflects its active reaction to the structural, financial, resource and other crises of a modern industrial society pointing out the defects of its device. Мобилизуя the not involved potential and spending a regrouping of sociopolitical forces, the society thereby can already recreate viability of political system on higher equilibrium level.
Сэмюэл Huntington and Josés Domingeshave defined political development as «the scheme of the changes occurring in a society of certain type owing to the concrete reasons and directed on the purpose which achievement is functionally necessary for the given society» Scientists consider that development occurs through changes and means growth: 1) complexities; 2) specialisations; 3) differentiations of political institutes of the given society.
Interest to a problematics of political change and political development last decades obviously grows in modern political science. The given tendency is directly connected with occurrence after the Second World War of set of the new states, so, and political systems. David Apter writes thereupon that "the new" comparative political science with its accent on development problems has appeared in atmosphere of the general optimism of the post-war period. Preconditions and development prospects were represented by the blessing. The Third World countries balancing between the USA and the USSR have used such statement of a question. For Americans the political problem of global distribution of the influence was reduced to necessity of a combination of decolonization, democratisation of the new states and reorientation of their nationalism to the state building that demanded economic growth. For realisation of such program, according to Aptera, there was very useful the theory of development assuming that the developing world will necessarily reproduce the cores political, social both cultural values and institutes of the western industrial countries.
The theme of changes far is not new to a political science. For understanding of a being of a parity of political change and political development formation of this problematics in the beginning is better to consider in a retrospective show. In antiquity philosophers have allocated and in own way investigated questions of stability of the states and political changes. They were the focus of attention Platonand Aristotle. Thetypology which has appeared in their works of three "correct" forms of government (aristocracy, a monarchy and полиархия) and three "wrong" (тимократия, a despotism and democracy) described certain political dynamics of transition from one of them to another. However these thinkers have drawn different conclusions. Platon - the pessimist: he saw in modern to it the political world mainly the degeneration understood as a turn of changes, movement from aristocracy to тимократии, then to oligarchy, from it - to democracy and, at last, to tyranny.
The above-named typology of the forms of government and their ascending or descending development - one of the most effective conceptual schemes in the history of political thought. In those or other variations it is present at works of such outstanding thinkers, as Tsitseron, Nikkolo Makiavelli, Jean Voden, John Lock, Charles Lui Montesquieu, etc.
But only the Education epoch has brought essentially new components in these traditional representations about political changes - it is a question about прогрессизмеand one-linearities of development. Progress (an armour progressus - advance, success) - a direction of development with transition from the lowest to the higher, from less perfect to more perfect condition, quality. This transition can be fixed in a condition of political system in whole, in its structure and separate elements. One-linearityas concept reflects in itself the theory of a unique line of development of a human society - from simple to more difficult. She assumes that all societies, ascending by the way of evolution, should overcome the same stages.
Through these basic concepts the becoming more and more made economic, social, political and spiritual reality of Europe expressed itself. The industrial civilisation of New time has created the person economic, i.e. the sovereign individual, which basis of activity have already been almost released from "traditional" socially-institutional restrictions. The person began to co-ordinate the actions with own interests, and similar historic breakthrough marked transformation of a policy into rather independent space of public relationsoperated internal laws and logic of development. Perhaps, since this time boundary of the politician becomes sphere of the constant changes quite precisely reflecting dynamics of economy industrialized in fast rate. Thus, changes have already started to be understood as realised and directed for it was obvious that they gradually resulted political institutes in the increasing conformity with consistently developing social and economic structure, with internal human nature as rationally conceiving and operating beings, from a birth allocated with inalienable laws and duties. This "progressive", ascending movement conducted, as then it seemed, to an ideal of national board. The similar understanding of the maintenance of political development was defended, for example, by the French philosopher-educator Jean Kondorse (1743-1794). “Our hopes of improvement of a condition of mankind in the future can be shown to three important positions: inequality destruction between the nations, equality progress between various classes of the same people, at last, the valid perfection of the person”, - was written by him in «the Sketch of a historical picture of progress of human reason».
The linearly-Progressistsky scheme of political development in XIX century in unusual way was reproduced in Marxism with its representation about linearity of history and the concept of change of socioeconomic structures. For Charles Marx and Fridriha of Engels political changes (dynamic processes in a superstructure) reflected qualitative social and economic shifts in basis. Along with obvious achievements in understanding of problems of development, such its rigid treatment considerably simplified historical process, disturbed to its volume perception.
It is accepted to carry political reform, revolution, revolution to the basic ideal types of political changein political science, is more rare - restoration and partial or full revision (audit) of the constitution. Peace political change in state frameworks - the nations is a reform. Thegiven term reflects first of all evolutionary and nonviolent character of development of political process, ability of concrete political system to adapt to more and more diverse interests and requirements of the national community, new structural factors (economic, social, ethnic and so forth), to consider, changing, environment influence provides its stability. The bright examples of reform - the constitutional changes in executive power (in the government etc.) Reorganisation of a parity of forces and influences in party system or in parliament. Stability of any political system throughout considerable time - at all a sign of absence of changes, and the certificate of flexible and skilful system reforming by not compulsory methods, anticipations of problem situations, adjustment of politiko-standard mechanisms for peace changes. Political reform(фр. reforme from an armour reformo - I transform) - change, a reorganisation in a way of activity and as a part of institutes, establishments not destroying bases of existing political structure Reform is spent, as a rule, in a legislative order and from above with a view of perfection of abilities of political system to adapt for conditions of its functioning changing in process.
The central phenomenon even among the basic types of political change is revolution- the collective, violent and realised capture of the power by any public group. Besides, the word revolution can be used and figuratively for a designation of the powerful tendencies promoting radical restructuring, revolution in any area of ability to live of a society (scientific and technical and information revolutions, «revolution in art»). Revolution (позднелат. revolutio - turn, revolution from revolvere - to overturn) - radical qualitative change in development something. A social revolution - revolution in all political and social and economic structure of a society. As one of two predominating forms of political development revolution противополагается evolutions(an armour evolutio - expansion) - to slow, gradual process of changes in political sphere In the modern politological literature are used also terms инволюция (an armour. invotutio - curling) in value of return development and деволюция as movement back, downwards, decrease in level something.
The general definition of concept of revolution is not present.Dictionaries explain it laconically enough and neutrally. Researchers essentially and differently expand similar interpretation, paying attention to different characteristic aspects of revolutionary process. Марксисты, as well as founders of this doctrine, start with sequence of socioeconomic structures and do conclusions in respect of the development theory: revolution - a quantum leap on its higher step. Peter Shtompka at ordering of explanations of revolution has divided them into three groups. It has included definitions according to which revolutions are fundamental and widespread transformations of a society in the first, i.e. their depth and scale is accented, and in the given sense they are opposed to reforms: it «unexpected, radical changes in political, economic and social structures of a society». Definitions in which the emphasis becomes on violence, struggle and speed of changes, i.e. «are included In the second group Technics »realisation of revolutions, so, they противополагаются evolutions as« the fundamental sociopolitical changes which have been carried out quickly and a violent way ». The third group combines approaches of first two that, according to Shtompki, it is most useful: revolution is« fast, base transformations of social and class structures of societies by revolutions from below ».
Revolution is characterised by researchers as the most intensive, violent and realised process of all social movements. In it see limiting expression of free will and deep feelings, display of uncommon organizational abilities and advanced ideology of the social protest. Special value is given to the utopian or emancipating ideal based on symbolics of equality, progress, freedom and on belief that revolutions create a new and best social order. To the above-stated explanations of concept of revolution it is necessary to add some more which were underlined by the French political scientist Jean-Lui Kermonn:
1. Revolution is always directed against an existing mode to replace it for the sake of opposite legitimacy; it can pour out in uncontrollable process of stage-by-stage planting of astable modes while one of them will not manage to establish new political balance in a society.
2. Revolution actuates crowd which identifies itself with all people.
3. If the revolutionary initiative belonged to minority it declares that operates on behalf of the majority of citizens or oppressed, but a majority class.
Political scientists converge usually in three cases, specifying in following signs of revolutions: these are radical, universal changes of bases of a social order; in them the big weights of the mobilised people operate; revolutionary process is necessarily accompanied by violence. Therefore in political science simple enough classification of revolutions is used:
1. Political revolutions at state level; they are limited to transformation of institutes, changing them легитимизацию;
2. The revolutions connected with transformation of a society; they quite often happen are accelerated by military defeat of the state;
3. The revolutions creating the new state; frequently are a product of disintegration of multinational empire or decolonization.
Results of revolutions, according to Shmuelja Ejzenshtadta, happen multilateral. First, this violent change of an existing political mode, bases of its legitimacy and its symbolics. Secondly, replacement of incapable political elite or ruling class others. Thirdly, far-reaching changes in all major institutional spheres, first of all in economy and class relations, - changes which are directed on modernisation of the majority of aspects of social life, on economic development and industrialisation, centralisation and expansion of a circle participating in political process. Fourthly, radical rupture with the past. Consider, fifthly, that revolutions carry out not only institutional and organizational transformations, but also make changes to morals and education, creating or generating the new person.
Revolution- sudden unconstitutional capture of the power, illegal change of ruling elite in whole (presidencies, the governments, the personnel of administrative structures) which are not connected with any basic changes of a political mode, social and economic relations. The general for revolution and revolution - collective and violent character of political action, and also aspiration by means of propagation идеологизировать event. Distinguishes these concepts that circumstance that plot, and organised in state institutes happens a revolution source usually. Revolution does not have other purposes, except destruction of legitimacy of the existing power, the statement in the head of the state of other person or minority which will keep the found powers force. Illegality of revolution forces it to qualify as the political change denying a lawful state.
The concept of revolution has some actual synonyms. Putsch (it. рutsch) is an overthrow or attempt of overthrow of the government by means of a part of army, group of officers. Such political change almost always represents negation of the stable form of government and conducts national community to anarchy or to dictatorship. At the same time, in a world political history cases when result of typical revolution was process of creation of a new mode are noted. In this respect the estimation of consequences of revolution depends on character of the political mode established by its results - authoritative, totalitarian or focused on democracy. Mussolini's march to Rome in 1922 promoted the statement of totalitarian dictatorship; revolution of 1974 InPortugal, on the contrary, has shaken the discredited authoritarianism inherited by the country from dictator Salazara, and has opened a way «revolutions of carnations» - to a cycle of political changes which democracies as a result have led.
Restoration(позднелат. Restauratio - restoration) name process of the political changes directed on revival of a way of board (mode), before subverted by revolution or revolution. In a historical retrospective show of restoration were reactionary (for example, secondary board of a dynasty of Burbons in France in 1815-1830) more often. Much less often they promoted an establishment of more democratic mode («republican restoration» under general Charles де Gaulle in France in 1945-1947 when useful structural reforms inpolitical and social spheres have been carried out).
Constitution revision(full or in its considerable part) - one more version of political changes quite often estimated as reform. But between these concepts there are differences. Procedure of single audit of the organic law of the state is used as the politiko-legal tool, helping to begin process of peace change of a mode losing legitimacy. Such wise politician as де Gaulle when in 1958 has submitted for approval a referendum absolutely new constitutional text, and in France there was институционализирована V Republic - the political mode existing, with small updatings, has used to this day this way.
II. Actual positions of concepts of development in treatment of concepts of traditional, transitive and modern societies.In the middle of XX century with distribution of comparative political researches the new stage in working out of the theory of development has begun. The politological approach to a development phenomenon meant, first of all, revealing and an explanation of general characteristics of variety of communications, relations and processes of a political reality for as a result of development there is a new condition of public sphere. The general theory of political development develops of an abundance of the concepts considering it from the various parties and offering the schemes of a scientific substantiation of a problem. More low in the form of theses Most significant of them in тезисном a kind are listed only look as follows:
1. Political development - the precondition of economic progress. Concepts such treat political development as such condition of political system which can facilitate economic growth.
2. Political development - the policy typical for industrial societies. It is supposed that the industrial society creates universal model of political life to which each society, without dependence from a condition of the industry is capable to direct. Certain models of presumably rational and responsible behaviour of the government become specific qualities of political development in that case:
- Refusal of the precipitate actions menacing to legitimate interests of considerable social classes;
- Accent on social programs; representation about high value organised administrative and legal proceedings;
- A recognition of that a policy - the fair tool of resolution of problems, instead of end in itself;
- Known restrictions of leadership of a policy; the consent with some forms of mass participation.
Political development as modernisation.In models of such plan it is proved that the advanced industrial countries are «samples for imitation» because set rates of development on the majority of directions of social and economic life. It is quite clear to extend aspiration this assumption and to political sphere. At the same time, a problem of political development, especially when it comprehend as political modernisation, comprises difficulty of distinction "western" and "modern".
Political development as state actions - the nations.Concepts of this plan are based on the assumption that historically there was a set of types of political systems, and any communities created own type of a policy, however with the advent of the state - the nations there was also a special set of requirements to a policy. Political development, from this point of view, is interpreted as process, by means of which community, being the states - the nations only under the form and thanks to the international environment, become those in a reality. The test for original political development in that case - creation of a set of the public institutes making a necessary infrastructure of the state, and controllable expression of nationalism in political life. That is political development is understood as the nationalism entered in frameworks of the state institutes. It is important to notice that authors of similar concepts almost always underline: Nationalism - necessary, but the sufficient condition for maintenance of political development is far not. It, basically, should transform the absent-minded, unorganized nationalist sentiments to spirit of citizenship, to promote creation of the state institutes capable on the basis of nationalist and civil aspirations to generate a political policy and various programs.
5. Political development as perfection of administrative and legal systems. Theconcept of political development as formations of the organisations has the big history and the expert underlies many public. The law and an order demand presence of bureaucratic structures and government development. As the recent history shows, political development means much bigger, than the organisation of the governmental administrative structures. When such development considerably advances other directions of social and political evolution, in system can arise the disproportion, becoming in due course obstacles in a way of creation of the state - the nations. Important here that political development should extend as well on not state institutes of a society.
6. Political development in the form of mass mobilisation and participation. Concepts of this sort are connected mainly with behaviour and roles of citizens, and also required for осовременивания new standards of their political participation and loyalty in relation to the state.
One of modern approaches to interpretation of concept of political development is presented by James Koulmanomand Ljusenom the Sharewhich has defined it as a combination of processes of structural differentiation, increasing requirement for equality and expansions интегративной, adaptive, responsible functions of political system. Together all it makes «a development syndrome» which almost all societies face. Formation of the named syndrome is caused by the crises inherent to political development as a whole, no less than to any difficult public process.
In the theory of political development of Albert Hirshmana the general theoretical conclusion looks as follows: for stable development the system needs to create at first new requirements and gradually to overcome alienation of citizens from a policy, and then, according to these requirements, институционализировать besides new forms of participation that its lifting has not led to blasting of a political order.
Life has shown demand for the new, interdisciplinary theory which would interpret multi-variant approach of process of political changes. There was objectively a scientific necessity for working out of the generalised paradigm of development. There were the researches based on empirical indicators where it is considered as increase in adaptive possibilities of political system, its ability to keep plasticity in the conditions of quickly changing reality. Such approach assumes the description of processes, instead of their results that expands possibilities of knowledge of a phenomenon of political development.
Control questions to a theme
1. What approaches to definition of political process exist in a political science?
2. What criteria of typology of political processes?
3. In what of merits and demerits of the classification offered by L.Paem?
4. Why modern political process in Russia cannot be laid in one system of the classifications existing in the western political science?
5. What approaches to definition of type of modern political process in Russia you could name? Name merits and demerits of each of them.
6. Formulate the contradictions underlying "wavy" character of political process in Russia.
7. Name features of modern political process in our country.
8. Why political process in Russia always had mainly disputed character?
9. Name the factors influencing political process as strengthening of their influence.
10. Why political tradition of Russia which remained since a monarchy and has reached up to now, there is what political process is developed between the limited number of participants?
Logic tasks and problem questions
1. What of definitions of political process, in your opinion, is closer to true:
Political process is a result «interferences of groups» (A.Bentli, the American political scientist);
Political process represents set «concrete receptions, methods, the procedures realised and spontaneous strategy, concrete decisions conducting to acceptance» (D.Iston, the American political scientist);
Political process is «a difficult complex of events which defines, what actions will be undertaken by the government and they will render what influence on a society condition» (J. Mannheim, R.K.Rich, the American political scientists)?
2. As you think that causes an orientation of political changes: the conflict or a consensus? Analyse following points of view:
«Group conflicts are life and democracy blood» (S.Lipset, the American political scientist);
«Between democracy and dictatorship it is less than distinction, than distinction between those countries in which there is a consensus, unity, legality, efficiency (managements), and those countries in which politician there are no these lines» (S.Hantington, the American political scientist).
3. As you think, what of types of political process creates more favorable environment for realisation of politically significant interests: spontaneously developing or operated? Analyse in this context the following statement of known philosopher K.Popper: «There are no such people who possess true and to which need to give the power that the true kind world was carried out. Such people are not present. All of us go by trial and error... We do not have idea of absolutely other world closed in. The same who had this idea and who tried to realise it, that always or as a rule comes to dictatorship in which people force to be happy».
4. Reveal merits and demerits of three variants of political process:
«We call the anarchy, convinced that from this anarchy, that is from full display of the released national life, there should be freedom, equality, the justice, a new order and force of revolution against reaction...» (M.A.Bakunin);
«The difficult civilisation assumes that the individual should adapt to the changes which nature is unknown to it» (F.A.Hayek);
«At a known step of the development material productive forces of a society come to the contradiction with existing relations of production... From forms of development of productive forces these relations turn to their fetters. Then there comes a social revolution epoch» (K.Marx).
5. What type of political process: revolutionary (offering radical change of political norms, institutes and shown in the raised conflictness), evolutionary (connected with gradual change of standards of political behaviour and institutes) or mixed -
Exists, in your opinion, in modern Russia? Give reason for the answer.
6. Development and an orientation of political process are influenced by various factors. The known political scientist G.Morgentau considers that political process is caused by external factors: «In the world divided by a competition and race for power... All nations, according to their separate possibilities, aspire to one: to protection of the physical, political and cultural identity in the face of danger of intrusion from the outside». Allocate merits and demerits of the similar statement and their urgency for an explanation of character of political process in modern conditions.
МУНТЯН ПЕРЕВОД
Политические перемены, политический процесс и политическое развитие
Политический процесс – форма функционирования политической системы общества; определенная совокупность действий, осуществляемых субъектами, носителями и институтами власти по реализации прав и прерогатив в политической сфере, по осуществлению специфических функций (дисфункций) в сфере власти и, в конечном результате, обеспечивающих развитие (или распад) данной политической системы.
Политическая энциклопедия, т.II
I. Политические перемены, политический процесс и политическое развитие. Все живое, наделенное разумом, непременно движется, изменяясь во времени и пространстве. Изменение – естественная форма бытия всех объектов и явлений, представляющая собой постоянный переход из одного состояния в другое. Изменение в широком смысле включает в себя все эволюционные процессы, а также возникновение новых явлений в мире, поэтому категории политического изменения и политического развития тесно взаимосвязаны и обычно рассматриваются в паре. Эти понятия принадлежат к числу наиболее важных и часто употребляемых в современной политической науке.
Истоки динамики политических систем заключаются в диалектике развития, в разрешении внутренних противоречий и в ответах на внешние воздействия. Возникающий при этом политический процесс можно и нужно объяснять как определенные перемены в состоянии политической системы, обеспечивающие цикл ее воспроизводства (становление, функционирование, развитие с выходом на более высокий уровень).
Термином процесс (от лат. processus - продвижение) обычно обозначают определенное движение, какой-либо ход, порядок движения, имеющий свое направление; последовательную смену состояний, стадий, эволюций; совокупность последовательных действий для достижения какого-либо результата. Если суммировать различные подходы к характеристике политического процесса, то можно выделить два его вида – более схематичный, простой и более комплексный, сложный. Первый из них определяет политический процесс как последовательную и продолжительную во времени смену состояний политической системы и ее подсистем либо изменение в них отдельных элементов, которые совершаются под влиянием внешних и внутренних условий жизни общества. Второй предполагает, что понятие политического процесса означает:
1) динамическое интегральное измерение политической жизни какого-либо общества, заключающее в себе воспроизводство компонентов его политической системы, а также определенные перемены в состоянии политической системы, обеспечивающие цикл ее воспроизводства;
2) совокупную политическую активность социальных и политических субъектов с последовательным развертыванием в “реальном времени” всего множества единичных политических действий и событий;
3) борьбу за контроль над средствами властвования и управления обществом, характеризующуюся определенной расстановкой и соотношением социально-политических сил.
Политический процесс всегда тесно связан с такими тремя формами существования политических явлений, как функционирование, развитие и упадок:
- функционирование политических явлений на уровне общества – это способ поддержания сложившейся политической системы, воспроизводства того равновесия сил, которое отражает их базовые отношения, продуцирования основных функций структур и институтов, форм взаимодействия элиты и электората, политических партий и органов местного управления. При таком способе изменений традиции и преемственность обладают неоспоримым приоритетом перед любыми инновациями;
- развитие характеризует такие модификации базовых параметров политических явлений, которые предполагают позитивный характер эволюции последних, то есть политика выводится на уровень, который позволяет властям адекватно отвечать на вызовы времени, эффективно управлять общественными отношениями;
- упадок представляет собой такой способ трансформации сложившихся базовых форм и отношений, который предполагает негативную перспективу политической эволюции явления. По мысли П. Струве, упадок есть “регрессивная метаморфоза” политики. Упадок по существу означает распад сложившейся политической целостности, например, падение политического режима.
Традиция анализа динамики политической жизни сложилась в далеком прошлом. К примеру, Полибий еще во II веке до н.э. высказал идеи о целостном круговороте политической жизни, предполагающем закономерный переход государства в стадии становления, расцвета и упадка. Важной вехой в создании основ концепции политического процесса в западной политологии явились работы К. Маркса и Ф. Энгельса, выдвинувших идеи чередования социально-экономических формаций и смены их политических надстроек. В. Парето разработал в “Трактате по общей социологии” концепцию циркуляции (круговорота) элит, что дало основание Й. Шумпетеру назвать его основоположником “социологии политического процесса”. Но настоящую революцию в теории политического процесса произвела книга А. Бентли “Процесс управления” (1908). Которой подробно была разработана концепция групп интересов и трактовка динамики политического процесса как борьбы и взаимного давления социальных групп в соперничестве за государственную власть.
Преемником Бентли в разработке проблематики политического процесса, исходя из концепции групп интересов, стал Дэвид Трумэн, опубликовавший в 1951 г. книгу “Управленческий процесс”. Как и его предшественник, он под политическим процессом понимал борьбу социальных групп за власть и за контроль над распределением властных ресурсов. Однако придал этому процессу пространственно-временные характеристики в связи с тем, что групповая динамика, по его мнению, предстает как волнообразный цикл перехода от нестабильных взаимодействий к установлению относительного равновесия, к восстановлению старой модели баланса между группами или к созданию новой модели.
Системный подход к исследованию политического процесса в западной политологии связан с именами Т. Парсонса и Д. Истона. Они рассматривали его сквозь четыре фазы: 1) вход – воздействие социальной и внесоциальной среды на политическую систему в форме ее поддержки и выдвижения к ней требований; 2) конверсию – преобразование требований в решения; 3) выход – реакция политической системы в виде решений и действий; 4) обратная связь – возврат к исходной точке равновесия. Эта модель “круговорота”, то есть циклического функционирования политического процесса была весьма популярной и только во второй половине70-х годов ХХ столетия начала уступать место более современным походам.
Основы динамической модели политического процесса как адаптации политической системы к изменяющимся условиям социальной среды заложил Г. Алмонд. В своей теоретической схеме он попытался соединить деятельность отдельных групп с функционированием всей системы, выделив несколько совместных блоков действий политических субъектов и политической системы. Д. Аптер и некоторые другие американские политологии использовали идеи Алмонда для описания политических процессов последней четверти ХХ века в странах Азии, Африки и Латинской Америки, что помогло не только обновлению самой теории развития, но и политики модернизации.
Характеристика политики как процесса позволяет увидеть особые стороны, грани взаимодействия субъектов по поводу государственной власти. Некоторые ученые отождествляют политический процесс с политической сферой в целом (Р. Доуз) либо со всей совокупностью поведенческих действий субъектов власти, изменением их статусов и влияний (Ч. Мэрриам). С. Хантингтон связывает политический процесс с функционированием и трансформацией институтов власти. Д. Истон понимает его как совокупность реакций политической системы на вызовы окружающей среды. Р. Дарендорф делает акцент на соперничестве групп за статусы и ресурсы власти, а Дж. Мангейм и Р. Рич трактуют его как сложный комплекс событий, определяющих характер деятельности государственных институтов и их влияния на общество. Ориентируясь на вышеозначенные подходы, можно считать, что политический процесс представляет собой совокупность всех динамических изменений в поведении и отношениях субъектов, в исполнении ими ролей и функционировании институтов, а также во всех иных элементах политического пространства, осуществляющихся под влиянием внешних и внутренних факторов. Наиболее распространенным считается следующее определение: политический процесс – это последовательная, внутренне связанная цепь политических событий и явлений, а также совокупность последовательных действий различных субъектов политики, направленных на завоевание, удержание, укрепление и использование политической власти в обществе.
В силу такой интерпретации политического процесса его центральной характеристикой выступает изменение, которое означает любую модификацию структуры и функций, институтов и форм, постоянных и переменных черт, темпов эволюции и других параметров политических явлений. В науке сложилось множество представлений об источниках, механизмах и формах изменений. К. Маркс, например, видел основные причины политической динамики во влиянии экономических отношений, В. Парето связывал их с циркуляцией элит, М. Вебер – с деятельностью харизматического лидера, Т. Парсонс – с исполнением людьми различных ролей и т.д. Однако чаще всего в качестве основного источника политических изменений называют конфликт, понимаемый как один из возможных вариантов взаимодействия политических субъектов. Как источник политического процесса конфликт представляет собой разновидность и результат конкурентного взаимодействия двух или более сторон (групп, государств, индивидов), оспаривающих друг у друга распределение властных полномочий или ресурсов.
Политические процессы в различных странах мира отличаются своеобразным характером, степенью динамики и направленности. Вместе с тем ряд критериев позволяет выделить основные разновидности политических процессов:
а) локально-региональные и глобальные. Разделение политических процессов по такому принципу связано с тем, что зачастую результат того или иного регионального процесса может воздействовать и на общий ход мировой политики. Например, этнополитический конфликт между сербами, босняками и хорватами в Боснии и Герцеговине из внутреннего дела бывшей Югославии перерос в масштабное явление , повлиявший на всю европейскую и даже мировую политику;
б) внутрисистемные и переходные (транзитные). Такой взгляд на политические процессы раскрывает еще одну сторону данного явления – отношение к системе институтов и норм, образующей рамки вообще любого процесса. Внутрисистемные процессы разворачиваются в таком политическом пространстве, где четко определено число игроков и судей, то есть институты, время и правила игры – политические нормы. Это относится к странам с установившейся политической системой, в довольно жестких границах которой и разворачивается политический процесс. К типу транзитных процессов относятся процессы в странах, переживающих период полного изменения власти, включая ее институты и другие субъекты;
в) стабильные и кризисные. В марксистской литературе различение стабильных и кризисных процессов нередко сводилось к дилемме – реформа или революция. Действительно, в политике острые политические кризисы нередко превращаются в революционные взрывы, а серии даже глубоких правительственных реформ обеспечивают стабильную эволюцию. Вместе с тем и революция, и реформа могут быть способом разрешения политического кризиса, что обусловлено механизмами самого политического процесса, связанными с наличием или отсутствием баланса и консенсуса ведущих политических сил, выступающих его субъектами;
г) легальные и теневые. Такое различение политических процессов связано с тем, что в их основе всегда находятся ценности и нормы доминирующей политической культуры, а также отдельных субкультур. Эти ценности и определяют правила политической игры, границы дозволенного и неразрешенного, официального и неофициального, легального и нелегального (теневого) процессов. К примеру, восстание и переворот, террор и путч при всех типах режимов воспрещены конституциями и нормами политической жизни. В реальности. Тем не менее, политический процесс зачастую выходит за рамки правового поля, а так называемая политическая целесообразность ценится выше, чем законность.
Типы политических процессов могут выделяться по способам достижения динамического равновесия политической системы в ходе ее преобразований, предполагающих определенную последовательность политических изменений (такая классификация представляет собой результат теоретического допущения, вычленения неких идеальных типов, которые с политической практике тесно взаимосвязаны, переплетены между собой). В таком случае речь может идти о процессах технократического, идеократического и харизматического типов:
- политический процесс технократического типа отдает предпочтение политическим технологиям и процедурам, традициям, способам легитимного наделения властью, принятия решений, когда субъекты строго придерживаются тех политических ролей и функций, которые предписаны им законодательством, политическими традициями, а лидеры выступают в качестве носителей интересов тех институтов, которые они непосредственно представляют;
- политический процесс идеократического типа характерен для традиционных обществ, где отсутствует автономная личность, развитая дифференциация политических ролей и функций, где интеграция разнородного в этнокультурном и социально-экономическом отношениях общества осуществляется на основе общенациональной идеи;
- политический процесс харизматического типа характерен для восточной культурной традиции, где абсолютизируются роль и статус политического лидера, а нередко его просто обожествляют, где политический процесс может быть эффективным при условии, если дополняется технократическим и идеократическим политическими процессами. При незрелости гражданского общества, при низкой правовой культуре и отсутствии общенационального согласия по поводу черт и свойств желаемого общества таким обществам приходится уповать на харизматическую личность. Ее харизма может основываться либо на должностном статусе, либо на способности выражать чаяния подавляющего большинства членов общества, используя при этом недовольство, протест и обещая непременно изменить ситуацию к лучшему.
В политической науке представлены и попытки типологизировать политические процессы на цивилизационной основе. Так, Л. Пай выделял “незападный” тип политического процесса. К его особенностям он относил:
а) склонность политических партий претендовать на формирование мировоззрения и выработку образа жизни;
б) большую свободу руководителей в определении стратегии и тактики политических структур и институтов;
в) наличие резких различий в политических ориентациях поколений;
г) интенсивность политических дискуссий, слабо связанных с принятием решений и т.п.
Вместе с тем между понятиями политического процесса, политического изменения и политического развития есть существенные различия. Если процесс воспроизводит политическую систему, то изменения и развитие представляют собой не просто преобразование внутренних свойств систем, а еще и ее переход в иное качественное состояние либо смену одного системного типа другим. Политическое развитие позволяет также создать институты, которые способны включать в свою сферу воздействия и упорядочивать участие в политике новых групп, а также стимулировать социально-экономические перемены.
Политическое изменение предстает в таком случае как преобразование структур, процессов или целей, затрагивающее распределение или осуществление властных полномочий по управлению каким-либо обществом. Политическое изменение содействует либо приспособлению существующей системы власти и управления к новым требованиям времени и меняющейся социальной среде, либо замене данной системы другой в силу того, что она не способна и далее поддерживать свое эффективное функционирование. Основные типы – политическая реформа, революция, государственный переворот, реставрация, частичный или полный пересмотр конституции.
Политическое же развитие – это совокупность динамических процессов, развертывающихся в данном обществе, которые определяют перемены внутри его политической системы или же ее замещение другой, как правило, в направлении большей способности средствами управления справляться с предъявляемыми требованиями. Закономерности политического развития отражают устойчивые взаимоотношения между социальными группами и практическую деятельность акторов в политической сфере. Они проявляются как тенденции, результирующие сочетание либо конфликт различных интересов, что и обусловливает характер основанных на них действий.
Политические изменения постоянны, поскольку не существует полностью статичных политических систем, равно как и застывших в одном состоянии, неразвивающихся обществ. Однако следует все же разграничивать два вида развития — динамическое, которое основано на необходимости постоянного движения, диктуемого логикой индустриального общества, и стационарное, подпитываемое слабыми социальными импульсами, не выводящими из стаби
Дата добавления: 2017-06-02; просмотров: 502;