Political communications

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.

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 Dominges have 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 Platon and Aristotle. The typology 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 прогрессизме and 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-linearity as 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 relations operated 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 change in 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. The given 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.

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 In Portugal, 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 in political 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. The concept 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 Koulmanom and Ljusenom the Share which 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.

III. Political modernisation. For the characteristic of political process changes of type of development which are connected with definition of a qualitative orientation of evolution of political system, its progress or recourse have special value. Many of ideas expressing about it and concepts are anyhow reflected in theory of the modernisation representing set of various schemes and models of the analysis which allow to describe and open dynamics of overcoming of backwardness of the traditional states. It arises in communication by necessity of scientific judgement of ways of transformation received clearing in 50-60th years ХХ century from colonial domination of the countries. The term "modernisation" in such context began to mean simultaneously and a stage (condition) of public transformations, and process of transition of the released states to a condition of modern societies. As front lines in such cases the western countries in this connection the westernisation, that is copying of the western samples of development in all areas of life became a core of numerous theories of modernisation in essence were represented. Thus for modernisation the unique form of progress - “catching up development” admitted lawful. However by 80th years ХХ century of model of modernisation such have actually failed, to a limit having complicated life of many afro-Asian states.

It is remarkable that for some decades of attempts of research of a problematics of political development with use of positions of the theory of modernisation various authors and have not come to any one point of view. It is natural, as scientists analyzed the most interesting and clear it fragments of a difficult and inconsistent reality. So, for one, inheriting Max Vebera's ideas, modernisation was represented first of all in the form of rationalisation political society spheres as a whole. For others it meant mainly deepening of differentiation of social and political structures ( Tolkotta Parsons's thought ). However anyway in a basis of different treatments of political development as modernisations the uniform theoretical scheme has initially been put: the history and political process were understood as the movement predetermined by objective socio-economic factors from a so-called traditional society to a society transitive, and then - to modern. One of the first the American researcher Uolter Rostou which theoretical workings out and are used today by consideration almost all problems of the present connected with development has addressed to this problematics. In the general opinion the scientists traditional and modern societies essentially differ on the base social paradigms. Modernisation and, as consequence, formation of bases of a modern society leant against following objective preconditions:

1. Reduction to uniformity of codes of intranational dialogue, consolidation of the territorial, ethnic and language space, creating favorable conditions for formation of the nation-state and political system of modern type.

2. Realization of the industrialisation conducting to qualitative shifts in social structure which, in turn, serve as the incentive reason осовременивания political sphere.

3. Formation national воспроизводственного a complex functioning in a mode of self-supported growth, supported with incorporated transport and information infrastructures.

Urbanization (i.e. transformation of a society from mainly rural in city) which promotes occurrence of city culture as way of life and the style of behaviour defining an orientation of development of a society.

Increase of social and territorial mobility of the population owing to the statement of industrial forms of economic activities and, as consequence, washing out of rigid public and institutional communications of traditional type.

6. Transformation, under influence вышеобозначенных structural shifts, a policy in one of spheres of self-realisation of the person, and the individual - in the independent, independently conceiving and operating subject of political process, henceforth free from restrictions of the closed groups (communities).

7. The Statement of the new political institutes, beginning to function in a mode of representation of all variety of interests present at a society.

At the same time, including from initiators of working out of the theory of modernisation, there was a criticism of its separate most vulnerable positions:

- First, «культуроцентризма» the installation setting western sociopolitical and other reference points as criteria of an estimation of an orientation and a rhythm of political changes in not western societies;

- Secondly, representations about linearities of the development, which legitimacy has been called into question by experience of modernisation of some societies, revealed impossibility to explain within the limits of the given theory original character of political changes in many not western regions of the world, and also a reality of a nonlinear way of development, including recurrence, returns, recourse.

In 80-90th years of the XX-th century communication the modernisation theory in a political science has been reconsidered. Concepts of the transients have been entered, which steels to be interpreted as a certain independent stage of development. Having generalised lessons of modernisation of the various countries and the modes, many scientific steels to draw on necessity of certain sequence of transformations, observance of certain rules at their realisation. So, U.Mur and A.Ekstajn believed what to begin reforming it is necessary from society industrialisation, K.Griffin - from reforms in agriculture. M.Levi insisted on the intensive help of the developed countries, S.Ejzenshtadt - on development of institutes which could consider social changes. U.Shramm considered that the leading role in the given processes is played by the political communications broadcasting the general values, and B.Higgins asserted that the main link of modernisation - an urbanization.

In a general view the problem of a choice of variants and modernisation ways dared in theoretical dispute of liberals and conservatives. The first recognised that basically four cores of a variant of succession of events are possible at modernisation:

- At a priority of a competition of elite over participation of ordinary citizens there are the optimal preconditions for consecutive democratisation of a society and realisation of reforms;

- In the conditions of increase of a role of a competition of elite, but at low activity of the basic part of the population preconditions for an establishment of authoritative modes of board and braking of transformations are formed;

- Domination of political participation of the population over competition of free elite when activity of the operated advances professional activity of managing directors, promotes increase охлократических tendencies that can provoke toughening of the forms of government and delay of transformations;

- Simultaneous minimisation соревновательности elite and political participation of weights conducts to chaos, decomposition of society and political system that also can provoke coming to power of the third force and a dictatorship establishment.

According to theorists of conservative orientation, the main source of modernisation is the conflict between population "mobilisation" (joining in political life as a result of occurrence of contradictions) and “институциализацией” (presence of structures and the mechanisms intended for an articulation and aggregation of interests of citizens). Thereupon, as notices S.Hantington, modernisation causes “not political development, and political decline”. For a policy the main indicator of development is stability, therefore the strong political mode is necessary for the modernised states with the legitimate party in power, capable to constrain a tendency to разбалансированию for the power, that is, unlike the liberals, conceiving of strengthening of integration of a society on the basis of culture, formations, to religion, conservatives do an emphasis on organisation, an order, authoritative methods of board. Owing to that authoritative modes are non-uniform, conservatives also specify in presence of alternative variants of modernisation. H.Lind allocates, in particular, полусостязательный authoritarianism as an advancement step to democracy. Further he writes that authoritative modes can carry out the partial liberalisation connected with certain redistribution of the power in favour of opposition or owing to valuable priorities of ruling elite, etc.

Extensive experience of transformations in the countries of "the third world” has given the chance to allocate some steady tendencies and stages in evolution of transitive societies. So, S.Blek allocated stages of "comprehension of the purposes”, “consolidation of modernised elite”, “substantial transformation” and “society integration on a new basis”. S.Ejzenshtadt wrote about the periods “the limited modernisation” and “distribution of transformations” on all society. But the most develop этапизация transitive transformations belongs О’Доннелу, F.Shmitteru, A.Pshevorsky, etc., proved three following stages:

- A stage of liberalisation which is characterised by an aggravation of contradictions in authoritative and totalitarian modes and the beginning of washing out of their political bases. As a result of initial struggle “the dosed out democracy”, легализующая supporters of transformations in political space is established;

- The democratisation stage, different institutional changes in power sphere. Cardinal value at this stage has a question on consent achievement between ruling circles and democratic counterelite. As a whole for successful reforming it is necessary to reach three basic consensuses between these two groups: concerning last development of a society; concerning an establishment of the paramount purposes of social development; by definition of rules of "game of politics" of a ruling mode;

- A stage of consolidation of democracy when the actions providing irreversibility of democratic transformations in the country are carried out. It is expressed in maintenance of loyalty of the basic actors in relation to the democratic purposes and values in the course of decentralisation of the power, realisation of reforms of local government. As the English political scientist M.Garreton considers, criteria of irreversibility of democracy are:

Transformation of the state into the guarantor of democratic updating and its democratisation;

Autonomy of social movements and transformation of party system;

Fast economic growth, increase of a standard of living of the population; growth of political activity of citizens, adherence to the democracy purposes.

Political modernisation in the theoretical literature is considered as the change of political system characterised by increase of participation in the politician of various groups of the population (through political parties and groups of interests) and formation of new political institutes (division of the authorities, political elections, multi-party system, local government). Usually the concept of political modernisation is used with reference to the bodies which are carrying out transition to an industrial society and a democratic political system. In this case it is underlined that political modernisation is an importation by traditional societies of new social roles and the political institutes generated within the limits of the western democracies. Having arisen in the late fifties ХХ century As a theoretical substantiation of a policy of the West in relation to developing countries, the concept of political modernisation finally has turned to a substantiation of a certain general model of the global process, which essence - in the description of characteristic features and directions of transition from traditional to a modern rational society in the conditions of scientific and technical progress, socially-structural changes, transformation of standard and valuable systems.

With a certain share of convention it is possible to speak about existence of two stages in development of the concept of political modernisation. At the initial stage of development of this theory political modernisation was perceived as:

Democratisation of the developing states on the sample of the western countries;

Condition and means of successful social and economic development of the countries of "the third world”;

Result of their active cooperation with the USA and the states of the Western Europe.

The present stage of development of the concept of political modernisation is characterised by occurrence of theories of "partial modernisation”, “deadlock modernisation”, “a crisis syndrome of modernisation”. In them it is a question of inevitability of a serious collision of old values traditional for given political culture and norms of political life and the new, modernised institutes which cannot get accustomed without serious changes in societies of "catching up" development. The concept of "new authoritarianism” which essence consisted in refusal of liberal approaches to political development and democratisation began to be proved. The great prestige was won by the concept of political modernisation of Dankvarta Rastou which perceived it as process of quickly increasing control over the nature by means of close стотрудничества people. In its theory of political modernisation three overall objectives of this phenomenon are allocated: 1) national unity; 2) the stable power; 3) equality. модернизационных transformations he considers as the most comprehensible variants models 2> 1> 3 or 1> 2> 3 according to which all successful modernisations have been realised. According to Rastou, equalities should achieve not earlier than achievement of national unity and stability of the power for in the absence of any of these elements the probability of disintegration of a political mode and the subsequent anarchy is great.

One of the most authoritative theories of political modernisation is put forward by Semjuelem Huntington which is defined by it as the process including: 1) power rationalisation: 2) differentiation of social, state and civil structures; 3) increase of level of political participation. By criterion of sequence of achievement of these purposes the scientist has allocated three models of modernisation. In evropejsko-continental модернизационном process he underlined rationalisation of the power and differentiation of structures. In Great Britain, unlike the continental countries, Huntington allocates parliament as an embodiment of the centralised power, instead of a monarchy. In the USA, in its opinion, modernisation was reduced to growth of political participation at preservation of political institutes of the British sample. At such modelling approach it allocated two kinds of modernisation:

Texnocratic, with its temporary restriction of participation of citizens, increase in capital investments and the economic growth aggravating an inequality (first of all in incomes);

Populist kind of modernisation where equality for the sake of which possibilities of political participation of citizens increase dominates, measures on maintenance of equal position of people in the material plan are taken.

Historical experience of political modernisations and their theoretical judgement allows to allocate among them following types:

- Spontaneous modernisations which arose and proceeded a natural way of spontaneous transformations of social and economic structure of a society and, as consequence, its political institutes. So business in Great Britain, the USA was;

- Directed modernisations in societies of "late start” (Germany, Italy, Russia, Japan) where agents of development independent of the political power of this kind actually were not issued. In societies of "the second wave of modernisation” law was accurately looked through: the more low there was a start point (that is initial level for modernisation), the necessity of the state intervention for public processes was more essential;

- National variants of modernisations among which experience of Great Britain where for the first time in history mankind was formed civil relations and institutes of a civil society is allocated. Here there is an industrially-capitalist society which in a political science it is accepted to name modern;

- Modernisations of so-called transitive societies - a conglomerate of the nations and the states where today's developing countries enter, “new democracies” east and Central Europe, state of the South European region (except for Italy) where processes of political modernisation have got steadily irreversible character only from the middle of 1970th years.

VI. Features of modernisation of a modern Russian society. Carrying out transitive transformations, the Russian society in own way solves arising problems, gives own answers to time calls. As a whole the Russian society can be carried to a version “делегативной democracies” which as it was inherent also in other countries, tests an identity acute crisis. It causes search by people of new spiritual reference points for comprehension of the place in a society and communications with the state owing to disintegration of those ideals and values which underlay before dominating political culture. It is possible to allocate eight features of political changes, political development and modern political process in Russia:

- The firstfeature consists in нерасчлененности politicians and economic, social and personal relations. The policy is not separated from other spheres of life owing to immaturity of institutes of a civil society which should limit and supervise it. Political process of the Russian Federation is characterised also by getting ability of a policy which penetrates all spheres of life of the society, any of economic or other major questions does not dare without intervention of power structures;

- The second feature - absence of a consensus between participants of political process concerning legalisation of the purposes and means of political action. Absence of aspiration to the consent concerning the proclaimed purposes of democratic transformations speaks not only absence of culture of a consensus which could not be generated for some years of modernisation. The main reason consists in essentially different understanding of values of freedom and democracy political forces existing in a modern Russian society, in an inequality of possibilities of active participation in reformatory process and satisfaction of own interests;

- The third feature consists in неструктурированности the Russian political process, highly possibilities of combination and interchangeability of political roles. Absence of differentiation and specialisation of political roles and functions at subjects and power carriers is caused by the Russian political tradition of concentration of the power, domination of the uniform centre. The slightest easing of political domination of exclusively dominating person or group leads to conflicts, controllability loss by social processes;

- The fourth feature consists in absence of integration among participants of political process that is a consequence of absence in a society of uniform communication system. Vertically organised political process usually is carried out thanks to the adjusted dialogue of the power and a society in which the last informs the requirements to power structures through the branched out system of representation. The branched out system of representation of interests in Russia just is created. The greatest possibilities of representation of the interests the ruling elite and the bureaucracy supervising resources and political influence now possesses;

- The fifthfeature is expressed that at the heart of political process in Russia active political style lies. The active role of the state both in a formulation of problems, and in the compelled integration of interests of various groups is caused by cultural-religious, ethnic and political heterogeneity of a society. Absence of real differentiation of political roles and functions among government institutes allowed to carry out decision-making process anonymously.

- The sixthfeature of the Russian political process consists that in it not so much groups of interests prevail, and “political клиентелы” - presidential, governmental, parliamentary. The affinity to the president which concentrates considerable volumes of imperious powers in the hands, allows these клиентелам to count on special possibilities of use of the power;

- The seventh feature of political process consists in the Russian Federation that excessive concentration of the power and resources in hands of ruling elite forces counterelite and opposition to represent itself as radical movements, instead of political opponents. The sharp antagonism of elite and counterelite acts as a consequence of cultural-political heterogeneity of the elite which different groups are guided both on liberal, and by socialist, conservative and other values;

- The eighthfeature of political process of Russia follows from intensive маргинализации большей parts of a modern Russian society. At small efficiency of institutes of a civil society it has caused a situation when leaders are compelled to adhere to more certain sights in foreign policy, than concerning the internal.

POLITICAL CONFLICTS AND CRISES

People are amazingly mistrustful to each other, all time the attack, from here their monstrous aggression expect.

JU.M.Nagibin

I. Political conflicts and their typology. The political conflict represents one of possible variants of interaction of political subjects. It can be defined as a version (and result) competitive interaction of two and more parties (groups, the states, individuals), challenging each other imperious powers or resources. The concept of a political conflict designates struggle of one subjects against others for influence in system of political relations, access to acceptance of valid decisions, the order resources, monopoly of interests and their recognition socially necessary, for all that makes the power and political domination. One of founders of modern conflictology of L.Kozer defined a political conflict as “ struggle for values and claims for the certain social status, the power and the material for all material and spiritual blessings; Struggle in which the purposes consisting in a conflict of two sides is neutralisation, drawing of a damage or destruction of the contender ”.

Experts - конфликтологи as basic elements of the conflict allocate the following:

- The source (subject) of the conflict expressing a being of disagreements between participants of dispute;

- An occasion characterising concrete events which have served as the beginning of active actions of the parties on upholding of the interests, the purposes, positions in relations with the competitor;

- The parties of the conflict meaning number of subjects, directly and indirectly participating in struggle for imperious statuses and resources in policy sphere;

- Perception and the positions of subjects opening them of the purpose in competitive interaction, the relation to counterparts, perception of the conflict and other subjective characteristics of behaviour of the parties;

- The means of the conflict characterising typical resources applied by the parties, ways, receptions in interaction with each other;

- The character of the conflict opening the most typical relations of the competing parties, rigidity or plasticity of positions occupied with them, ability to updating of a subject of dispute, involving of intermediaries etc.

More often allocate four principal causes of occurrence of political conflicts:

Discrepancy of statuses of subjects of a policy, their role appointments and functions;

Collision of interests and requirements for the power;

Lack of resources;

Divergences of people (their groups and associations) concerning values and political ideals, the cultural traditions, those estimations or other events.

II. Tipologizatsija of conflicts. In the general view in a political science it is accepted to classify conflicts as follows:

- c the points of view of zones and areas of their display allocate foreign policy and internal political conflicts;

- On degree and character of standard regulation conflicts are divided on институциализированные and неинституциализированные, characterising ability or inability of people (institutes) to submit to operating rules of a game of politics;

- Under qualitative characteristics of conflicts are allocated:

"Deeply" and "superficially implanted" in consciousness of people disputes and contradictions;

Conflicts “ with the zero sum ” when positions of the parties are opposite and consequently the victory of one of them turns around defeat another;

Conflicts “ with the nonzero sum in which there is at least one way of a finding of the consent”;

Conflicts “ with the negative sum ” in which all participants appear in loss;

The antagonistic and nonantagonistic conflicts (K.Marx), which permission contacts destruction of one of the contradictory parties or accordingly preservation of contradictory subjects.

- On intensity degree it is accepted to allocate эскалированные and conflicts of low intensity;

- From the point of view of publicity of a competition of the parties it makes sense to speak about the open and closed conflicts;

- Under time characteristics of competitive interaction of the parties long-term and short-term conflicts are divided;

- In view of a structure and the organisation of a mode of the power, allocate conflicts vertical (conflicts between the central and local elite, federal authority and local government bodies) and horizontal (in ruling elite, between not parties in power, members of one political association).

Many конфликтологи hold the opinion that three basic types of conflicts differ:

- Conflicts of interests prevail in economically developed countries, the steady states where the political norm considers "auction" concerning a sharing of economic "pie"; this type of the conflict most easily gives in to regulation as here always it is possible to find the conciliatory proposal;

- Conflicts of values which are characteristic for the developing states with an unstable political system; they demand more efforts on settlement, as the compromise concerning such values, as freedom, equality, justice труднодостижим if at all it is possible;

- Identity conflicts, characteristic for societies in which there is an identification the subject of to certain group (ethnic, religious, language), instead of with a society and the state as a whole; this type of conflicts arises in the conditions of opposition of races, ethnic or language contrast.

III. The Basic strategy of management by conflicts. As the most significant strategy in which frameworks own technologies on conscious influence on the conflict are formed, it is possible to allocate following purposes characterising them:

- инициация the conflict, meaning a permanent aggravation of contradictions available in a society, strengthening of escalation of conflicts and preservation of sharply competitive relations for the purpose of generation of a situation which would be fashionable for using more effectively, than the opponent can make it;

- рутинизация the conflict, meaning conscious maintenance of the arisen intensity in relations of the parties on purpose to use it in own interests;

- The prevention of the conflict aimed at a non-admission of transition of contradictions in an open phase of an antagonism and increase of a political tension;

- The settlement of the conflict focused on full or partial removal of a sharpness of an antagonism of the parties, and also on avoiding the most negative consequences for itself, the state, a society as a whole;

- The resolution of conflict providing or elimination of the reasons of the conflict, exhaustion of the subject of dispute, or such change of a situation and circumstances which would generate frictionless relations of the parties, has excluded danger of relapse of disagreements, has removed probability of a new aggravation of already settled relations;

- The replacement of the conflict assuming transferring of responsibility for various ways of end of the conflict on other level of political system (for example, with federal on regional or on the contrary).

Political practice and the theory develops some general forms and ways of prevention, regulation and a resolution of conflicts. Among them the most known - the compromise and a consensus. The compromise in dictionaries political terms is defined as the agreement on the basis of reciprocal concessions. Distinguish compromises compelled and voluntary. The first with inevitability are imposed by the developed circumstances. The second consist on the basis of agreements on certain questions and correspond to any part of political interests of all co-operating forces. Concept of a consensus (from an armour. consentio - the generality of feelings and thoughts, mutual understanding) means the agreement of the considerable majority of people of any community rather most prominent aspects of its social usages, expressed in actions. In democratic systems usually distinguish three objects of the possible agreement:

- Ultimate goals (freedom, equality, justice etc.) which make structure of system of representations;

- Game, procedures corrected;

- The concrete governments and a state policy.

These three objects can be transformed to three levels of a consensus:

Consensus at level of community or the basic, valuable;

Consensus at level of a mode or procedural;

Consensus at policy level.

The first of these levels shows, whether divides the given society identical valuable representations and the purposes. Procedural or second level establishes the game rules fixed in constitutions. The third level of a consensus puts in the forefront a parallel "power-opposition" when disagreement on questions of a policy and opposition to the government is caused by the relation to members of the government, instead of to the form of government. In all cases efficiency of a consensus depends on participation in distribution of compensations, privileges, the power, well-being of a society, level of political culture.

Settlement of conflicts - concept wide enough, but, first of all, includes three directions:

- The prevention of open forms of display of the conflicts accompanied by violent acts (wars, mass riots etc.);

- A resolution of conflicts assuming elimination of the reasons causing them, formation of new level of relations between conflicting parties;

- Settling of conflicts (decrease in level of animosities of conflicting parties, conflict transfer in a channel of a joint solution of a problem).

According to these three directions it is possible to allocate three groups of the methods facilitating search of a peace exit from the conflict. Each of these groups of methods, as well as methods, possess a number of advantages, lacks and restrictions. Usually the most effective is complex application of various methods depending on concrete conditions and character of the conflict.

Early diagnostics and revealing of the reasons concern the first group of methods not to admit its further growth. For these purposes the standardised procedures based on tracing of disputed relations by means of the COMPUTER are often used. However the basic accent becomes on development of institutes and mechanisms of the prevention of violent forms of development of conflicts. Creation of a wide network of the state and not state consulting services concerns their number.

Methods of the second group concentrate on elimination of the reasons of occurrence of conflicts. In this case the resolution of conflict contacts change of its deep structures. Correctly organised dialogue between the social groups which are in the conflict, is one of the central methods in the given approach. It is directed on change of character of perception, and also by means of it is on change of the relation of the parties to each other.

The third group of methods includes a number of receptions which assume conflict transfer in the rational plan. Only very few conflicts by the nature are conflicts to the zero sum that is when interests of conflicting parties are completely opposite. Giving to the conflict of nonzero character opens prospects of its decision. Other variant - to diversify values and the purposes, that is to make so that different groups aspired to a miscellaneous, to not crossed purposes. The parties can generate the purposes of higher order, allowing to unite for the sake of their achievement. The basic problem at use of the methods focused on search of a mutually acceptable variant of the decision, consists that conflicting parties not always behave rationally and are not always ready to compromises for the sake of consent achievement. Despite the specified restrictions, in frameworks of this group of methods the technology of negotiating and realisation of intermediary services is developed.

The choice of a way of the resolution of conflict entirely depends on conflicting parties, but a main role in it can play and concomitant factors. For example, a choice of a peaceful way of settlement of the conflict can influence such factors, as presence in a society of the balance of forces, corresponding historical experience, publicity, institutional conditions for consultations and negotiations. One of leading representatives of Anglo-Saxon political science of D.Apter, proceeding from the theory of balance of a society, considers that there are three stages of development of public conflicts:

- Collision of preferences (cooperation);

- Collision of interests (competition);

- Collision of the basic values (the original conflict).

According to Aptera, at a resolution of conflicts the problem consists in transforming conflicts of values to conflicts of interests, or better still - in collision of preferences, that is in a competition or cooperation. For its realisation use different methods: negotiating process, intermediary, separation of the parties, etc. Thus it is necessary to observe a number of conditions:

The consent about negotiating rules is obligatory for both parties;

Not идеологизировать the conflict;

To establish the real reasons of the conflict and to find right ways to its permission.

E.Nordlindzher has proved six main principles for successful settlement of political conflicts:

Дата добавления: 2014-01-04