The concept of “political system” is voluminous in content. A political system can be defined as a set of political institutions, social structures, norms and values, and their interactions, in which political power is realized and political influence is exercised.
A political system is a set of state, political and public organizations, forms and interactions between them, through which the implementation of generally significant interests is carried out using political power.
Theory of the political system.
Topic 5. The political system of society and the problem of power.
1. The theory of the political system.
2. Structure and functions of the political system.
3. Types of political system.
4. Soviet-type political system.
The need to create a holistic view of the processes in political sphere, its relationship with outside world caused development systematic approach in political science.
The term “political system” was introduced into political science in the 50-60s. XX century American political scientist D. Easton, who created the theory of the political system. Then this theory was developed in the works of G. Almond, W. Mitchell, K. Deutsch. etc. This was due to the need to consider politics as a system. This concept was intended to reflect 2 points: 1) the integrity of politics as an independent sphere of society, representing a set of interacting elements (state parties, leaders, law...); 2) the nature of the connection between politics and the external environment (economics,..). The concept of a political system can help identify the factors that ensure the stability and development of society, and reveal the mechanism for coordinating the interests of various groups.
Therefore, the political system includes not only political institutions involved in politics (state, parties, leaders, etc.), but also economic, social, cultural institutions, traditions and values, norms that have political significance and influence the political process. The purpose of all these political and social institutions is to distribute resources (economic, monetary, material, technological, etc.) and encourage the population to accept this distribution as mandatory for everyone.
Previously, politics was reduced to the activities of state structures, identifying them as the main subjects of power relations. Up to a certain point, this explanation reflected reality. However, the processes of development of civil society, the emergence of a free individual with his rights and freedoms led to the fact that the citizen began not only to obey, but also to influence the state through political organizations. Power has ceased to be a monopoly (prerogative) of the state, and power relations have become complex, because Non-governmental organizations began to participate in them. The complexity of power relations led to a revision of the then dominant institutional and behavioral approaches to explaining politics. Politics should have decided more difficult task: search for universal patterns and mechanisms that would provide society with stability and survival in an unfavorable external environment.
Systems theory originated in biology in the 1920s.
The concept of “system” was introduced into scientific circulation by a German biologist L. von Bertalanffy(1901-1972). He studied the cell as a “set of interdependent elements,” that is, as a system connected with the external environment. These elements are so interconnected that if you change even one element of the system, then all the others, the whole set, will change. The system develops due to the fact that it responds to signals from the outside and to the requirements of its internal elements.
The concept of “system” was transferred to society for consideration T. Parsons. He political system considers as specific element of the social system. That. Talcott, Parsons views society as a social system consisting of four subsystems that interact - economic, political, social and spiritual. Each of the subsystems performs its functions, responds to demands that come from within or from the outside, and together they ensure the functioning of society as a whole. Defining collective goals, mobilizing resources to achieve them, making decisions constitute the functions political subsystem. Social subsystem ensures the maintenance of an established way of life, conveys to new members of society norms, traditions, customs, values (which constitute the motivational structure of the individual.) And, finally, the integration of society, the establishment and preservation of ties of solidarity between its elements is carried out spiritual subsystem.
However, T. Parsons’ model is too abstract to explain all processes in the political sphere; it does not include cases of conflicts and tensions. Nevertheless, Parsons' theoretical model has had a significant influence on research in sociology and political science.
Theory of the political system by D. Easton. (systemic analysis)
Systems theory introduced into political science by an American political scientist D. Easton, who defined politics as “the volitional distribution of values.” ( Easton's main contribution to political science is the application of methods system analysis for the study of political systems, as well as the study of problems of political socialization). Hence, politic system, according to D. Eastonues set of political interactions in a given society . Its main purpose consists of the distribution of resources and values. The systematic approach made it possible to more clearly define the place of politics in the life of society and identify the mechanism of social changes in it.
So with one side,politics stands as an independent sphere, the main purpose of which – resource allocation , and on the other hand, policy There is part of society, it must respond to impulses entering the system, prevent conflicts arising over the distribution of values between individuals and groups. That. a political system can exist with the ability to respond to impulses coming from the external environment and adapt to external operating conditions.
The mechanism of functioning of the political system.
The exchange of resources and interaction of the political system with the external environment is carried out according to the principle "entrance" And "exit».
"Entrance"- these are the ways
influence of the external environment on the political system.
"Exit"- this is a response, (reverse impact) of the system on the external environment, appearing in the form of decisions developed by the political system and its institutions.
D. Easton distinguishes 2 input types: requirement and support . Requirement can be defined as an appeal to authorities regarding the distribution of values and resources in society. For example, workers’ demands for an increase in the minimum wage. or teachers' demands for increased funding for education. Demands tend to weaken the political system. They are a consequence of the inattention of power structures to the changing interests and needs of social groups.
Support, on the contrary, means strengthening the entire system, and is an expression of a devoted, benevolent attitude towards the regime. Forms of manifestation of support can be considered the correct payment of taxes, fulfillment of military duty, respect for government institutions, and devotion to the ruling leadership.
As a result, the impact on "entrance" cause a reaction to "exit" On "exit"appear political decisions And political action. They come in the form of new laws, policy statements, court decisions, subsidies, etc.
(Consequently, the political system and the external environment are deeply interconnected).
In turn, decisions and actions influence the environment, resulting in new requirements. " Entrance and exit"systems constantly influence each other. This continuous cycle is called "feedback loop" . In political life Feedback is of fundamental importance to check the correctness of decisions made, correcting them, eliminating errors, organizing support. Feedback is also important for possible reorientation, departure from a given direction and selection of new goals and ways to achieve them.
Politic system, ignoring feedback, is ineffective because it fails to gauge levels of support, mobilize resources, and organize collective action in accordance with public goals. Eventually it turns out political crisis And loss of political stability.
That. the political process shows how social demands arise, how they turn into generally significant problems, and then into the subject of action by political institutions aimed at shaping public policy and the desired solution to problems. A systems approach helps to understand the mechanism for the formation of new political strategies, the role and interaction of various elements of the system in the political process.
However, D. Easton focused on interaction with the external environment And ignored internal structure of the hollow system which helps maintain balance in society.
Theory of the political system by G. Almond. (functional analysis P.S.)
An American political scientist proposed a different approach to the analysis of political interactions G. Almond.(specialist in general theoretical and comparative political science). He assumed that the ability of a political system to carry out transformations and maintain stability depends on the functions and roles of political institutions. Almond conducted comparative analysis different political systems, with the aim of identifying the main functions that contributed to effective social development. Comparative analysis of P.S. implied a transition from the study of formal institutions to the consideration of specific manifestations of political behavior. Based on this, G. Almond and G. Powell determined political system How a set of roles and their interactions carried out not only by government institutions, but also by all structures of society. The political system must perform three groups of functions: Functions of interaction with the external environment ;
· Interconnection functions within the political sphere;
· Functions that ensure system preservation and adaptation.
Communicative theory of the political system by K. Deutsch.
The transition of developed countries to information technology, introduction of computer technology, allowed us to consider the political system How mechanical model. He was the first to liken the political system cybernetic machine American political scientist K. Deutsch(b. 1912). He viewed the political system in the context of a “communication approach,” in which politics was understood as a process of managing and coordinating the efforts of people to achieve set goals. Special meaning in political communication has the exchange of information between managers and governed in order to achieve agreement. Therefore, the formulation of goals is carried out by the political system on the basis of information about the situation of society and its relationship to these goals. The functioning of a political system depends on the quality and volume of information coming from the external environment and information about its own movement. Political decisions are made based on two streams of information.
Model K. Deutsch draws attention to the importance of information in life half and
social systems , but omits the value of other variables: gender will, ideology, which can also influence the selection of information.
The political system consists of subsystems that are interconnected with each other and ensure the functioning of public power. Changing one leads to a change in the functioning of the entire system.
Institutional subsystem includes the state, political parties, public organizations and movements, pressure groups, media, church, etc. The central place is given to the state, which represents the entire society. It has sovereignty within state borders and independence beyond them. (By concentrating the majority of resources in its hands and having a monopoly on legal violence, the state has great opportunities to influence various aspects of public life). The maturity of this subsystem determines the degree of specialization of the roles and functions of its structures. Thanks to specialization, this subsystem can quickly and effectively respond to new needs and requirements of the population.
Regulatory includes legal, political, moral norms, values, traditions, customs. Through them, the political system has a regulatory impact on the activities of institutions and citizens.
Functional - these are methods political activity, means and methods of exercising power (consent, coercion, violence, authority, etc.). The predominance of certain methods (coercion or coordination) determines the nature of the relationship between government and civil society, methods of integration and achieving integrity..
Communicative includes all forms of political interaction between government, society, and individual (press conferences, meetings with the population, television appearances, etc.). Communication system characterizes the openness of power, its ability to enter into dialogue, strive for agreement, respond to the needs of various groups, and exchange information with society.
Cultural – includes a value system, religion, mentality (a set of ideas about society, image, character and way of thinking). The higher the degree of cultural homogeneity, the higher the efficiency of the activities of half of the institutions.
Functions of the political system.
By interacting with each other, the subsystems ensure the life activity of the PS and contribute to effective implementation its functions in society. One of the most complete classifications of functions by P.S. given by G. Almond and D. Powell.
. Function of political socialization.
1. Regulatory function. It is expressed in the regulation of the behavior of groups, individuals, communities on the basis of the introduction of political and legal norms, compliance with which is ensured by the executive and judicial authorities.
2. Extraction function. Its essence lies in the ability of the system to draw resources from the external and internal environment for its functioning. Any system needs materials, financial resources, and political support.
3. Distribution (distributive)function. P.S. distributes received resources, statuses, privileges social institutions, individuals and groups to ensure integration within society. Thus, education, administration, and the army require centralized financing. These resources are drawn from the external environment, for example, from the economic sphere, through taxes.
4. Reaction function. It is expressed in the ability of the political system to be receptive to the (impulses) demands of various groups of the population. The quick response of the system determines its effectiveness.
5. Function of political socialization. It means the process of assimilation by a person of half-values, ideals, knowledge, feelings, experience, allowing him to fulfill various political roles.
We must acknowledge Almond's merit in understanding the political system. Its result is the identification of three levels, equally inherent in all political systems:
First level. It represents the capabilities of the system. They reflect the power of the government over the population, the power of influence on the feelings, consciousness, will and activity of people in the interests of orientation towards the goals of the government. These include:
Extractive capability is the ability of a political system to extract and use resources for selected purposes. They determine human, labor and material resources, including: the activity and ability of people, organizational and moral support of people, financial sources and money.
- regulatory opportunity as the use of control over the behavior of people of interest and their groups, regulation of the activities of organizations;
- distributive opportunity as the ability to conduct the reproductive process and regulate the distribution of material and intangible values.
- responsive capability as the ability of a system to respond to “input requirements”, the formation of satisfying policies recognized by influential interest groups.
- symbolizing the ability as the ability of the system to pick up and develop popular and symbolic beliefs, views, myths, develop and create from them bright, intelligible images, appeals and slogans, and on this basis manipulate the population in order to ensure the necessary level of legitimacy of power.
Most political systems are regulative and extractive in nature. Totalitarian systems act by suppressing the demands of society, refuse to respond to them, they do not recognize the demands of the external environment, but they develop their symbolizing capabilities well.
The practice of political activity has led democratic systems to the formation of “outputs” of regulation, extraction and distribution, based on the composition and essence of the demands of groups during the “input”. This order reveals democracy as a higher responsive ability, which, according to political scientists, creates greater efficiency of the system - its ability to shape the result: create and place values.
At the second level of functioning, what is happening inside the system is revealed and has a conversion process as a way of transforming incoming factors into outgoing ones. The conversion process of different political systems is analyzed and compared according to the six main functions of Almond's scheme. This:
Formation of requirements (articulation of interests);
- procedure for establishing and compiling requirements into alternative action programs (aggregation of interests);
- formation of norms (rule-making);
- translation of norms into practice (implementation of norms);
- control and regulation (control over norms);
- the relationship between regulatory actions within the system and during the interaction of the system with the environment (communication).
At the third level there are models and adaptations: the process of socialization and recruitment - the emergence of new roles and the entry of previously unknown people into political life.
- - - - - - - -
One side is theory, the other is life, together - testing political life through theory. One side is the generation of abstract entry requirements, the other is the formation of a group of interests, the third is the feeling of consequences in the actions of “output” of system decisions. Each participant in the political field always generates certain demands. For the most part, they are based on certain needs and related interests. For many, they allow themselves to be included in the composition of participants in one of the political actions or in some interest group. Receive political, economic or legal preferences through it and use them at your discretion. Anyone who manages to prove his loyalty to the political guidelines of a group or party can take a key position in the hierarchy of available positions. Much less often, a new participant manages to become an organizer of the political activities of a separate party, although Russian history knows enough examples, most of which were unable to leave behind any history other than the intention or fact of registration with the Ministry of Justice. This is also a greater achievement, but it can usually be of significance for personal history. When responding to such activity at the entrance, the system can only make personnel decisions: involve the initiator in some activity, admit him into the political composition, or close his entrance.
A completely different plan of political activity provides the presentation of new ideas and the introduction of their meanings into political life. It is impossible to pretend to be serious, to imitate such activity: the rejection will be immediate and painful for the initiator, but it will be the will of the entire political field. Another case is the emergence of previously unknown ideas. The iron rule for dealing with them is to be surrounded by silence. Somehow it takes time to understand. Usually the political field waits for an authoritative opinion, then, as a rule, it is divided into harsh criticism and some solidary support. This is all a reward for many years of torment and one’s own trials. This is the perspective of an innovator in the political field. There are no political subsidies here. This state gives the innovator of the political process the right and opportunity to go his own way and approve new ideas, rules and balance of power for the political field. And only he can make such a decision, as well as take on the burden of the hardest work. It continues.
Under the structure of the political system means the way of connecting its elements into a single, holistic system formation, that is, the establishment of stable connections and relationships between the elements of this system.
In the legal literature there are the following components, or subsystems, political systems, which are connected with each other and ensure the functioning of public authority.
1. Institutional;
2. Regulatory;
3. Functional;
4. Communication;
5. Cultural and ideological.
Institutional subsystem consists of political institutions, each of which is also a system - state, party, socio-political, which in turn consists of private subsystems. The leading political institution, which concentrates maximum political power, is the state. A special role in the political system belongs to political parties and socio-political movements, including trade unions, entrepreneurs’ organizations and all kinds of lobbying organizations created within the structures of legislative and executive power. On the one hand, they are important participants in the political process and carry out a kind of mediation between various government structures and the population. For this reason, they are sometimes combined under the general concept of “political infrastructure.” A specific place in the political system is occupied by such social institutions, non-political in nature, as means mass media and the Church, which are capable of significantly influencing the process of formation public opinion, and through it - to put pressure on political power.
Regulatory subsystem forms all kinds of norms - legal and moral, political traditions, values, customs. With their help, the political system has a regulatory impact on the activities of institutions and the behavior of citizens, defining the rules of their relationships.
Functional subsystem is expressed in the forms and directions of political activity, in various political processes, in the way and methods of exercising power. It forms the basis political regime, whose task is to ensure the functioning, transformation and protection of the mechanism of power and society.
Communication subsystem presupposes a set of relations and forms of interaction that develop between classes, social groups, nations, and individuals regarding their participation in the exercise of power, the development and implementation of policy. At the same time, these are relations based on the rules of law, as well as informal norms and relationships not enshrined in the rules of law.
Political relations are the result of numerous and varied connections between political subjects in the process of political activity. People and political institutions are motivated to join them by their own political interests and needs.
Highlight primary and secondary (derived) political relations. To the first, include various forms of interaction between social groups (classes, nations, estates, etc.), as well as within them, to the second– relations between states, parties, and other political institutions that reflect in their activities the interests of certain social strata or the whole society.
Cultural-ideological subsystem represents a set of political ideas, views, perceptions, and feelings of participants in political life that are different in content. The political consciousness of the subjects of the political process operates at two levels – theoretical (political ideology) and empirical (political psychology). The forms of manifestation of political ideology include views, slogans, ideas, concepts, theories, and political psychology includes feelings, emotions, moods, prejudices, traditions. They have equal rights in the political life of society.
In the ideological subsystem, a special place is occupied by political culture, understood as a complex of political orientations, attitudes, values and models of political behavior typical for a particular society.
Political culture is the experience of political activity passed on from generation to generation, which combines knowledge, beliefs and behavioral patterns of individuals and social groups. Political culture ensures the stability of the political system of society and the reproduction of political life on the basis of continuity.
In modern political science it is accepted typology of political culture, proposed by scientists S. Verba and G. Almond. Having chosen as a criterion the degree of orientation of people towards participation in political life, they identified three “pure” types of political culture.
1. Patriarchal political culture is characterized by a complete lack of interest among community members in political institutions and global political processes. The carriers of this type of political culture are focused on local values, indifferent to politics, attitudes and norms central authorities. This type of political culture is characteristic of developing countries in Asia and Africa.
2. Subject political culture is distinguished by the orientation of subjects towards the political system and the activities of the central authorities. Its bearers have their own idea of politics, but do not take an active part in it, expecting either benefits or orders from the authorities.
3. Civil political culture is inherent in modern developed democratic states. The bearers of this culture are not only focused on the political system, but also strive to be active participants in the political process. They obey the orders of the authorities, but at the same time influence the development of decision-making by government bodies.
Today it is rare to find a “pure” type of political culture. For most modern societies characteristic mixed types: patriarchal-subject, subject-civil And patriarchal-civil political culture.
The political system acts as the unity of all these subsystems, which are closely interconnected and cannot function if at least one of the subsystems does not work properly.
The essence of the political system of society is most clearly manifested in its functions. Therefore, the description of the political system will be incomplete without considering them.
In systems theory function refers to any action aimed at maintaining the system in a stable state and ensuring its vital activity.
The following can be distinguished functions of the political system:
1. Function of political socialization, i.e. familiarization of the individual with political values, adherence to socially accepted standards of political behavior, loyal attitude to the institutions of power. This process involves the formation of the political consciousness of the individual, when the latter is included in the work of specific political mechanisms, due to which the political system is reproduced by introducing more and more new members of society to political participation and activity. Thus, political socialization plays the role of a conservation mechanism political values and the goals of the system, makes it possible to maintain the continuity of generations in politics.
2. Adaptation function. Preparation and selection of government subjects (leaders, elites) capable of finding the most effective solutions current problems and offer them to the community.
3. Reaction function. With the help of this function, the political system responds to signals coming from outside or from within the system. This function allows the system to quickly adapt to changing conditions. This is especially important when new demands of groups and parties appear. Ignoring these requirements can lead to disintegration and collapse of society.
4.Extraction function. Extracting resources from the external and internal (natural, economic, social, etc.) environment.
5 . Distributive (distributive) function. Involves the distribution of functional load between various political institutions and components of the political system, Distribution of resources among groups within society; maintaining the normal functioning of the political system and ensuring its daily operation and further development.
6.Regulation function, i.e. impact on society. This impact can be manifested through the introduction of norms and rules on the basis of which individuals interact, as well as the application of measures against violators.
(Greek monopolion from poleo - [one] I sell) - a form of political organization of society, political power, with...
1. The role of the behavioral approach, systemic and structural-functional methods in creating a theory of the political system.2. Structure and functions of the political system of society
3. Typology of political systems Lecture 8. POLITICAL SYSTEM
8.1. The role of the behavioral approach, systemic and structural-functional methods in creating a theory of the political system
8.1.1. Advantages of the behavioral approach
The creation of a theory of the political system became possible in the mid-1950s thanks to the behavioral approach to policy analysis, as well as the use of systemic and structural-functional methods. The emergence of the behavioral approach marked a kind of protest in political science, which came from a number of American scientists. They expressed open dissatisfaction with the achievements of traditional political science, called for abandoning the old theory and developing additional methods and approaches that would arm political science with empirical hypotheses and system theories.
Politics, according to behaviorists, is the actions of people in political life, and not the various types of institutions and structures through which citizens act. The main achievements of the behavioral method include the following: 1) consideration of “political behavior” as the main object of research; 2) maximum use of statistical and quantitative formulations; 3) development of theories that can explain political events.
8.1.2. System analysis: its role in the development of the theory of the political system
Within the framework of the behavioral approach, its role in the formation of systemic and political theories of structural-functional methods appeared and developed. systems. Systems analysis entered political science thanks to Parsons' theory of social systems, who borrowed the idea of a system from biological theory. Fundamental to Parsons' systems approach is the postulation of four basic functional requirements for the system under consideration, which ensure the preservation and survival of any system: adaptation, goal achievement, integration and maintenance of the model.
At the level of the social system, the adaptation function is provided by the economic subsystem, the goal achievement function is provided by the political subsystem, the integration function is provided by legal institutions and customs, the model maintenance function is provided by the system of beliefs, morality and socialization bodies (family, educational institutions, etc.). Thus, it is necessary to consider politics and other subsystems of society in the context of these basic functions.
According to system analysis, any system, including a political one, has the following characteristics: 1) the system consists of many parts; 2) the parts make up a whole; 3) the system has boundaries. Political life is considered as a functioning system, that is, there is a relatively stable relationship between the diverse aspects of politics and political phenomena.
Systems theory divides interaction processes into three cycles: input, conversion, transformation and output. As for the border of the political system. then it can expand or contract. Since individuals in society are subjects of a number of systems and subsystems, they actually perform different roles in the variety of systems with which they are associated: political, economic, religious, etc.
In a political system, individuals primarily perform the roles of citizens, subjects, and voters. On election day, for example, the boundary of the political system expands as people leave their immediate jobs and “cross” the boundary of the political system. During war, the boundaries of the political system are significantly expanded, since a large number of people are attracted to military service, the activities of commercial companies are regulated and additional measures are taken to ensure internal security.
In modern political science there is no universal definition of a political system, because there are different approaches to the definition of power and politics, with which the category “political system” is directly related. But there is something common to all definitions of a political system: a political system is associated with the use of legalized physical coercion in society. All definitions emphasize the political system's legal right to punish, coerce, and subjugate.
8.1.3. Easton's model of political system
The systems approach in political science was first applied by the major political researcher D. Easton. Easton Trilogy: The Political System (1953), Conceptual Framework for political analysis"(1965), "System Analysis of Political Life" (1965) is an empirically oriented political theory; a huge contribution to the practice of using systems analysis in political science.
In the first book, Easton makes a convincing case for the possibility and necessity of the existence of a general theory in political science. The second develops the conceptual structure of the theory, sets out the main categories and concepts with which this theory could operate, and also proposes some theoretical statements. This is a purely theoretical work. In the third book, Easton sets out to make this concept structure work. In addition, he continues to carefully develop concepts with a view to applying them to an empirical situation.
Easton defines a political system as the interactions through which values (material and spiritual) are authoritatively distributed in society and, on this basis, conflicts between members of society are prevented. He identifies two main functions of a political system: 1) the political system must be able to distribute values in society; 2) the political system must convince its citizens to accept this distribution as mandatory. These two qualities, Easton emphasized, make it possible to immediately distinguish a political system from other types of social systems.
Based on the diagram of the fundamental process of operation of any system (“input”, “conversion”, “output”), Easton classified requirements and support as “incoming” factors, and decisions and actions as “outgoing” factors.
Easton defines “demands” as a form of expressing an opinion on the legality of a binding distribution on the part of subjects of power. He divides requirements into external, coming from the environment, and internal, coming from the system itself. The requirement can be specific, simple in essence, directly expressing resentment or dissatisfaction with specific actions or phenomena. For example, an increase in crime or corruption in a country may stimulate demands to strengthen the fight against these negative phenomena. Easton classifies requirements as follows: 1) requirements relating to the distribution of goods and services; 2) requirements related to the regulation of behavior; 3) requirements in the field of communication and information.
To keep the political system in working order, in addition to requirements, support is needed.
Easton considers support to be the main sum of variables connecting the system with the environment. The forms of support can be different: material support such as payment of taxes and other assessments, provision of services to the system, compliance with laws and directives, participation in political life, attention and respect for official information and authority. Easton names three objects of support: 1) “ political society" - a group of people connected with each other in one structure, thanks to the division of activities in politics; 2) “regime”, the main components of which are considered values (goals and principles), norms and power structure; and 3) "government", which he refers to people who participate in the daily affairs of the political system and are recognized by the majority of citizens of the society as responsible for their activities.
A system, according to Easton, is the means by which “input” (demands and support) is turned into “output” (decisions and actions). By transforming input factors into output factors, the political system provides a means of mobilizing public resources to achieve goals and coordinating the efforts of members of society in accomplishing assigned tasks. Can anything get in the way of the conversion process? Easton responds that even the existence of extreme deviations in the structures of political systems from democratic to totalitarian is not able to prevent the implementation of this process. The conversion of "input" to "output" is not a feature of a particular type of system, but a process inherent in all systems.
In Easton's model, output factors serve to conceptualize the ways in which a system responds to its environment and, indirectly, to itself by modifying, often successfully, input demand and support factors. Therefore, “outgoing” cannot be considered an endpoint. "Outgoing" is part of a continuous cycle of activity that Easton calls a "feedback loop." This concept proposed by him to indicate returning information and ways to take advantage of it. Here we mean two processes that form a closed cycle: firstly, outgoing systems and their consequences, i.e. adaptation of power in certain situations); secondly, the information itself (i.e., the flow of feedback about the state of the system and the consequences of the authorities’ responsive activities).
Feedback is the main mechanism for eliminating tension in society, but it performs this function only thanks to the ability of the authorities to respond to impulses entering the system. If the government is indifferent to the demands of members of society and pays attention only to its own demands and ideas, then its decisions and actions will never find support.
This is especially important to consider if the government seeks not only to maintain a minimum level of support for the system, but is also looking for a new base of support or trying to create a different regime. Change, adaptation, self-preservation, reorientation of efforts, change of goals - all of these are considered by Easton to be the main means by which one can cope with tensions or stresses in the political system.
Thus, the political system, from Easton’s point of view, is not just a system of interaction of its structures, but a constantly changing, functioning, dynamic system.
8.1.4. Features of the structural-functional method
The development of the theory of the political system was facilitated by the structural-functional method, which largely complemented system analysis. The structural-functional method in its modern and systematic form penetrated into political science from the works of representatives of the anthropological school (Malinowski, Brown) and the sociological school (Parsons, Merton, etc.). The latter, despite the differences in their theories, argued that explanation and prediction in the social sciences is only possible when we think about social structures and institutions as performing functions in systems. The “structural” element of the approach applies to any organization of human society: family, public associations, courts, various commissions, legislative bodies, etc.
Functional element correlates with the activities of organizations and the external effect of its impact.
8.1.5. Almond's model of political system
The American scientist G. Almond is rightfully considered the most consistent representative of the structural-functional approach to political science. Almond defines the political system as a system of interaction existing in all independent societies, which performs the functions of integration and adaptation (within society, outside it and between societies) through the use or threat of use of more or less legitimate physical coercion.
The political system, in his opinion, is a legitimate, order-maintaining and transformative system in society. This is a legitimized force that permeates all the “incoming” and “outgoing” factors of society and gives it special properties and meaning, ensuring its cohesion as a system.
Almond, unlike Easton, is not so much interested in the analysis of ongoing processes as in the determining significance of the stable structures of the political system. The term "structure" along with the term "culture" occupies a central place in Almond's analysis. By “structure” he means the observable activities that shape a political system. That specific part of people's activities that participates in the political process is called a role. Roles are the units that make up all social systems, including the political one. In this regard, one of the main components of the political system is the political role. Specific collections of interrelated roles constitute structures. For example, a judge is a role, a court is a structure of roles.
Fundamental to the entire approach is the postulation of functional requirements for the system. There is a certain number of goals selected from a limited number of alternatives and necessary for the life of society. In order for these goals to be translated into specific actions, the system must perform certain functions. In the social sciences, functions are purposeful activities. Expediency is determined by the framework of the system. Directed or objective functions are called "explicit". Others that are not such are called “hidden”, which must also be taken into account in order to better understand all the derivatives of actions and structures. The advantage of the structural-functional method is that it contributed to the awareness of the importance of functions, especially hidden ones, performed by political actors and groups.
According to Almond, the inputs and outputs of a political system should be analyzed in terms of the functions inherent in the system. He poses the question: who? (i.e. what structures), what functions does it perform? and how?
Easton and Almond made major contributions to the process of creating a theory of the political system, which is still ongoing. The scientific utility of Easton and Almond's models is that they can be used as a source of concepts and working models that can be applied in many specific and distinct areas to generate empirically unifying hypotheses. In addition, it became possible to standardize terminology, codify data, and store information that is very relevant for solving some important problems of empirical analysis.
These models are appropriate for studying ways to preserve and regulate the system. But their (especially Almond’s model) maximum effect is manifested in comparative study political systems. Easton and Almond, having created their models of the political “system”, made the concept of system a macro-unit for comparative analysis. Their concept makes it possible to compare not only colonies, federations, city-states, but also to include any unit in the analysis (metropolises, member states of federations, pressure groups, parties, churches, industrial enterprises etc.) as a differentiated whole of interconnected components that perform the functions of the political system.
8.2. Structure and functions of the political system of society
A political system is a set of interacting subsystems. There are three subsystems in the structure of the political system: 1) institutional; 2) information and communication; 3) normative and regulatory.
8.2.1. Institutional subsystem
The institutional subsystem consists of institutions such as the state, political parties, and interest groups. The leading institution that concentrates maximum political power is the state. The importance of political parties and interest groups in the political system is great. In democratic societies they are autonomous and successfully carry out their functions. Political parties and interest groups influence the formation of government structures, adjust political goals, and direct political development. In authoritarian and totalitarian societies, interest groups and political parties are strictly subordinated to the ruling elite and bureaucratic apparatus, and their natural functions are deformed.
8.2.2. Information and communication subsystem
The structure of the political system includes an information and communication subsystem, which establishes connections between the institutions of the political system. Elements of this subsystem include channels for transmitting information to the government (the procedure for hearing cases in open meetings, commissions of inquiry, confidential consultations with interested groups, etc.), as well as the media, which means television, radio, newspapers, magazines , books designed for a huge audience.
The significance of this subsystem is great, because people, as is known, are able to evaluate actions, including political ones, only if they have a certain amount of knowledge and information. If in democratic societies the media are quite independent, then in authoritarian and totalitarian ones they are completely subordinated to the ruling elite.
8.2.3. Normative and regulatory subsystem
The normative-regulatory subsystem is formed by all kinds of norms that determine the behavior of people in political life, namely their participation in the processes of putting forward demands, turning these demands into decisions, and implementing decisions. These norms are the basic rules of participation in all types of political process. Norms can be divided into two types: 1) norms-habits and 2) norms-laws. In democratic countries, for example, the usual norm is the participation of citizens in politics through political parties and interest groups. It is also common that citizens feel attention from the authorities.
Norms-habits largely determine the form of the political system within which norms-laws operate. In totalitarian systems, for example, the usual rule is that the winner takes all. In the Soviet Union after Stalin's death, when succession of new leaders was established without the physical destruction of officials, it became apparent that the fundamental shape of the system had changed.
Norms-laws determine the process of legislation, establish (or not, depending on the regime) the rights: vote, freedom of speech, creation of associations, etc. Both types of norms contribute to political interaction, without them it is hardly possible to avoid disorder or chaos.
8.2.4. Functions of the political system
In modern political science, Almond analyzed the functions of the political system most fully, in detail and consistently. He states that all systems perform two basic sets of functions: 1) “input” functions and 2) “output” functions. Almond identifies four functions of “input”: 1) political socialization and participation; 2) articulation of interests; 3) aggregation of interests; 4) political communication; and three functions of conclusion: 1) development of norms and laws; 2) application of standards; 3) control over compliance with standards.
“Input” functions are carried out primarily by non-governmental subsystems, while “output” functions are the prerogative of the government.
The function of “political socialization and participation”, which promotes the spread of the “spirit of participation” among members of society, is characteristic of all modern political systems. But if in democratic countries this function is performed by non-governmental bodies, although even there the influence of state structures on the process of socialization is obvious, then in totalitarian societies this function is, in fact, the prerogative of the state, since all agents of political socialization (schools, youth organizations, the media and etc.) are under the control of the state and cultivate the “spirit of participation” strictly in accordance with the dominant ideology.
In democratic countries, as a result of the spread of the “spirit of participation”, individuals are transformed from “subject” to “citizen”. In totalitarian regimes this process is absent. Currently, the process of political socialization and participation in Russia is beyond the control of the state. But the main task of the process of political socialization in Russia - the creation of a new political culture - is being solved slowly and difficultly.
Articulation of interests is the first functional step in the course of political conversion, which is carried out by interest groups. In democracies characterized by official respect for public opinion and adherence to the doctrine of freedom of association, interest groups can be seen as links between citizens and the state.
In the Russian political system before 1985, the articulation of interests had a specific character. People could not express interests that were not adequate to the interests of the CPSU. It was assumed that the CPSU was the only exponent of all social interests. The interests of social groups “should” strictly correspond to the interests of the CPSU, i.e. were largely coercive in nature. In this regard, it can be stated that there were no true interest groups in Russia, and the articulation of interests was actually carried out by the ruling party. At present, interest groups are being formed in Russia; the first steps of the process of articulation of interests, emerging from the control of the party and the state, are obvious.
According to Almond, a political system that is able to articulate interests is also capable of aggregating them, i.e. transform demands into public policy alternatives. Political Party is considered a specialized aggregating structure in the modern political system.
Political communication is the process of conveying information and beliefs. The American political scientist Lasswell described the act of communication as follows: “Who? What did you say? To whom? With what result? Through this function, communication is ensured between the various structures of the political system. Directing and implementing policy generally requires a vertical flow of information from the people to the government and from the government to the people. In addition, a horizontal flow of information between levels and authorities is also necessary. Thanks to the communication process, spontaneous actions to seize power are clothed in a certain form of relationships between people, respect for authority is formed, and statehood is created.
As a result of rule-making, laws are developed that determine the behavior of citizens in society. Typically, the rulemaking process involves a number of steps: developing policies and selecting general goals, developing solutions and specific rules to achieve the goals. This function carried out by legislative, executive and judicial bodies.
Public policy does not end with the adoption of laws. An important aspect politics and the decision-making process is the function of “applying norms”, which is performed not only by executive bodies and administrative bureaucracies, but often also by legislative and legal structures.
Enforcement is the interpretation of laws and action to determine whether that law has been violated and to impose appropriate penalties. Review is primarily the responsibility of the judiciary, although the executive and legislative branches sometimes play a significant role in judicial proceedings.
8.2.5. Levels of functioning of the political system
Almond examines the functioning of the political system at three levels, which allows comparison of different types of political systems. The first level is the capabilities of the system. Almond understood opportunity as the power of government over society, the degree of influence on the minds and behavior of people in the interests of achieving government goals. He pointed to five different types of opportunities, which can be very large in some cases and extremely small in others:
1). extractive opportunity is the ability of the system to draw human and material resources (people's talents, support, money) for certain purposes;
2). regulatory capability is the ability to control the behavior of individuals and groups in society, to regulate the activities of society;
3). distributive opportunity is the ability to create, place and distribute material and intangible values in society;
4). responsive capability is the ability of the system to respond to the requirements of the “output” of the appropriate policy, to respond to the diverse demands emanating from various groups;
5). The symbolizing opportunity is closely related to the need for legitimacy and support, with the ability of the system to develop popular beliefs, views, myths, creating bright, intelligible symbols and slogans, to manipulate them in order to maintain the necessary legitimacy to achieve its goals.
Many political systems are essentially regulative and extractive in nature. Totalitarian systems suppress the demands of society and do not respond to demands emanating from the external environment. It is known that communist totalitarianism differed from fascist totalitarianism in its strong distributive ability.
The symbolizing possibility in totalitarian systems is also great.
In democratic systems, the “outputs” of regulation, extraction, and distribution are influenced by the “inputs” of group demands. Therefore, we can say that democracies have a higher responsiveness. The capabilities of the system are, of course, related to the effectiveness of the system, that is, its general ability produce results, create and place value.
The second level of system functioning reflects what is happening within it, i.e. This refers to the conversion process. Conversion processes (or functions) are ways of converting input factors into output ones. The conversion process of one political system can be analyzed and compared with the process of another according to Almond's scheme, which provides six main functions:
1). how requirements are formed (articulation of interests);
2). how requirements are compiled into alternative action programs (aggregation of interests);
3). how norms are formed (rule-making);
4). how these norms are put into practice (implementation of norms);
5). how they are controlled and regulated (control of norms);
6). how all these diverse actions relate to each other within a given system, as well as when the system interacts with the environment (communication).
Considering the third level of functioning of the political system, Almond refers to the functions of maintaining the model and adaptation, to which he refers, first of all, to the process of socialization and recruitment, during which new roles are created and new people “burst” into political life.
8.3. Typology of political systems
8.3.1. Basic typologies of political systems
The description and comparison of the constitutional orders of various countries and their electoral laws, the correlation of the rights of legislative and executive bodies that have developed in certain states, existing traditions and stereotypes in public opinion, as well as the analysis of other components of the organization of political power in various countries made it possible to identify many types of political systems . Their diversity reveals the richness of the evolution of political orders in the world.
The typologization of political systems fully bears the imprint of various paradigmatic and ideological approaches that determine scientists’ understanding of the essence of the political process, the nature of their interpretation of the main problems of social development, etc. Thus, supporters of positivist-legal approaches often distinguish political systems according to formal criteria, for example, by the nature of government, by the presence of certain institutions of power, by their norms and functions) Representatives of the Marxist school, considering the contradiction as fundamental for the capitalist phase of human development between labor and capital, traditionally identify and describe the features of “bourgeois” and “socialist” political systems. Supporters of class-neutral teachings, such as the English scientist D. Coleman, analyzing the process of formation and development political world in the historical aspect, there are “traditional”, “patriarchal”, “mixed” and “modern” political systems. Adherents of geopolitical approaches, using territorial-spatial factors as typologization criteria, distinguish, for example, “island” and “continental” political systems. The typology of political systems based on the characteristics of ruling regimes: totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic has become very widespread.
A very original point of view was expressed by the famous American theorist S. Huntington. In his opinion, in the modern, increasingly complex world, the main source of political conflicts is no longer ideology, reflecting social (class, ethnic) group conflicts, but cultural components. Moreover, “the most significant conflicts in global politics will unfold between nations and groups belonging to different civilizations.” In other words, the line of demarcation of political systems will be the emerging or already emerging lines of “faults” between civilizational structures. Huntington identifies Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and African civilizations as such relatively autonomous and independent political systems.
These civilizations, representing the broadest level of human community, certainly have not only a certain integrity, but also a certain internal heterogeneity. And if, as, for example, in the case of Japan, a civilization can cover one state, then in most other cases various nation-states can be included in such political systems.
Moreover, since, according to Huntington, due to the end of the Cold War, the so-called Western phase of world history, when many Western countries played a primary role in world politics, is coming to an end, one should expect increased activity on the part of states belonging to other countries. civilizations, and the intensification of their confrontation with the most developed industrial countries of the Western world. This nature of the relationship between these political systems will inevitably increase the contradictions between them, in particular, the regional nature of interstate confrontation, the expansion of territorial claims of peoples separated by state borders, etc.
8.3.2. Integration typology of political systems
The most popular and widespread classification of political systems in modern political science was proposed by the American scientist G. Almond, who based his typology on a complex, integration criterion. It includes taking into account not only the degree or forms of centralization (decentralization) of power, but also the type of values and political culture common in states and societies. In other words, as a basic, synthetic characteristic of political orders, he considers the degree of correspondence of the political ideals towards which society was oriented with the basic forms of organization of power that have developed in it. On this basis, the scientist identified political systems of the Anglo-American (USA, UK, Canada, Austria) and continental European types (France, Germany, Italy), in addition, the political systems of pre-industrial and partially industrial countries (Mexico, Brazil), as well as totalitarian political systems.
Political systems of the Anglo-American type are distinguished, first of all, by the integrity and certainty of a political culture, the norms and values of which are shared by the vast majority of society and supported by state institutions. Such ideals and beliefs include personal freedom, the promotion of citizens, the growth of individual and public well-being, as well as the high value personal safety. Contradictions between groups are openly stated here, and the actions of the authorities are disputed by their opponents. Political interaction constructed in this way determines a clear differentiation and functional certainty of the political roles of parties and interest groups, elite and non-elite layers. In political systems of this type, the complete dominance of legal forms is ensured political struggle, anti-extremism, which not only gives organization to the political process, but also predetermines high stability of the regime and political order as a whole.
The features of the political system of the continental European type are associated with the presence of less homogeneous political cultures, which include not only modern democratic orientations, but also elements of old beliefs, traditions, and stereotypes. In this sense, societies of this type are more segmented; in them, despite the full rule of law, the operation of powerful traditions of civil liberties and self-government, processes take place in a more acute form ideological struggle, inter-party competition, political rivalry for power. In these countries, typical forms government structure are coalition governments and intense inter-bloc competition. Therefore, political stability is achieved in them through a more acute and complex interaction of subjects.
Countries with a pre-industrial and partially industrial level of development in the political sphere are distinguished by a very high eclecticism of political culture. In such countries, the traditions most revered by the population are sometimes directly opposite, which gives an extremely contradictory character to the political process, causing the coexistence of almost mutually exclusive trends in the structure of state power. Views that imply that citizens are oriented toward the leader rather than toward the programmatic goals of the government have a strong influence. Individual executive structures (army, bureaucracy), in conditions of poorly differentiated separation of powers, constantly exceed their own powers, often taking control of even legislative functions and openly interfering in judicial procedures. At the same time, the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens and the real possibilities of influencing public opinion are significantly limited. It is not surprising that this nature of political relations often leads these countries to authoritarian forms of organization of power that practice harsh, forceful methods of regulating social relations.
Totalitarian political systems (hard hegemonies) express the ideological and administrative monopoly of power over society. Power is extremely centralized, political roles are forced, and violence is essentially the only way of interaction between the state and society. The political participation of citizens here is more of a ritual and decorative nature. The stability of political orders achieved in this way exists only in the interests of the ruling strata.
Literature
Anokhin M.G. Political systems: adaptation, dynamics, stability. – M., 1996.
Zerkin D.P. Fundamentals of Political Science. – Rostov n/d., 1999.
Kamenskaya G.V., Rodionov A.N. Political systems of our time - M., 1994.
Makeev A.V. Political science. – M., 2000.
Political system of society: institutions, modes of functioning, methods of change. – Samara, 1997.
Fundamentals of political science. Ed. V.P. Pugacheva. – M., 1993.
Political science. Workbook for teacher and student / Ed. A.V. Mironova. – M., 1998.
Pugachev V.P., Soloviev A.I. Introduction to Political Science. – M., 2000.
Soloviev A.I. Political science: Political theory, political technologies. – M., 2000.
Being an independent organism, the political system has its own capabilities, or relatively speaking, abilities. American political scientists D. Easton and G. Almond name four main abilities:
1) regulatory, relating to the management of the behavior of groups and individuals (maintenance of norms, action of administration, etc.);
2) extraction, associated with the extraction of economic and other resources necessary for its functioning;
3) distributive - the ability to distribute and redistribute resources, goods, services, insignia, etc.;
4) reactive, associated with the need to constantly respond to the demands of the social environment and adapt to its changes. P. Sharon quite rightly adds a fifth, no less significant, and perhaps the most important ability: self-regulation, which characterizes internal, self-directed controllability.
Abilities are realized in the functions of the political system, or otherwise, in its main types of activity. The latter are determined by the role that the political system is objectively called upon to play in society. Namely: to ensure the existence of a given society as a single self-governing social organism.
The functional approach to the analysis of a political system includes three levels: consideration of the interaction of the system with society as a whole" in its internal functioning and in its preservation and adaptation. Of course, they are interconnected, moreover, they interpenetrate and in real life they rather represent aspects (sides) of different types activities of political institutions.
Functions of the political system, addressed to a greater extent to other subsystems of society:
First. Ensuring political power of a certain social group or the majority of members of a given society or country. The political system is an institutional (ordered, fixed by norms) form of existence of power. Through the institutions that form the political system, the legitimation of power is carried out, the monopoly on the publication of laws of a generally binding nature and the use of coercion for their implementation is realized. A political system, according to G. Almond’s definition, is a legitimate, order-maintaining or transforming system in society.
The political system establishes and implements certain forms and methods of government: violent and non-violent, democratic and authoritarian. One or another subordination and coordination of political institutions is used.
The institutionalization of the political system is carried out through the Constitution - a set of legally approved models of institutions, laws and political and legal practice.
Second. The political system is a governing system. It regulates social relations, manages various areas life activities of people in the interests of certain social groups or the majority of the population. The scope of management functions, scale, forms and methods of management activities of political institutions depend on the type of social systems. Thus, the sphere of influence of political institutions in modern developed capitalist countries on the economy is much narrower than in countries with a socialist orientation.
This feature is explained by two circumstances. On a positive note: socialism ideally presupposes the conscious creativity of the masses. Politics as a form of organizing mass activity is intended here to become the most important factor in historical progress. In fact, the negative role of politics and its institutions in countries that have made a socialist choice has become excessive and deformed. Political institutions largely absorbed society, since its social organizations were not sufficiently developed and lost their roles to state structures.
The action of the political system as a manager includes setting goals and developing political projects of activity on their basis social institutions. This function, called political goal-setting, cannot be absolute. The process of social life for all historical conditions and systems cannot be globally targeted. The conscious is always combined with the elemental. The dramatic pages of the development of our country refute the stereotypical characterization of Soviet history, which has been propagated for many years, only as a practical embodiment of the scientific theory of Marxism-Leninism.
Third. The political system performs an integrative function in society: it ensures a certain unity of all social groups and segments of the population, as this is necessary to maintain the status quo of society. She brings these together social groups and layers around common socio-political goals and values, which makes it possible to realize both the interests of the system as a whole and the interests of individual groups. The political system, writes P. Sharan, is a system of interaction found in all independent societies, which performs the function of their integration and adaptation through the use or threat of use of more or less legitimate coercion.
Fourth. One of the most important functions of the political system is the creation of the necessary political conditions for the functioning and progress of the economy (legal consolidation of forms of ownership of the means of production, ensuring a single economic space, implementing tax policy, regulating the financial system, etc.).
Fifth, the protection of a given society and its members from various kinds of destructive (internal and external) influences. We are talking about protection from destructive elements, including criminal groups that are acquiring an international character in our time, from external aggressions (military, economic, ideological, informational), and finally, from environmental disaster.
In a word, the political system implements the function of goal setting and goal achievement, ensures order in society, keeps under control the processes of social tension in relations between people, ensures its unity, creates conditions for security (physical, legal, professional and others), distributes material and spiritual values ( directly or indirectly) between members of society, mobilizes resources to meet social needs.
The transition to the next one - the internal level of functional analysis of the system - is a consideration of the types of its activities associated with the implementation of the noted functions. R. Almond and with him R.-J. Schwarzenberg and P. Sharan combine them into a group of conversion functions (transforming). We are talking about those transformative actions that are carried out by institutions at the “input” and “output” of the system:
a) articulation and aggregation of interests, which means the process of presenting, expressing and generalizing social interests in the development of political decisions;
b) rule-making (development of norms and rules);
c) application of rules and regulations;
d) monitoring compliance with norms and rules;
e) political communication.
The last three functions are the sphere of activity of government institutions. Function "d" is largely implemented by non-governmental organizations, including parties.
As for the functional level of preservation and adaptation of the system, this includes the following activities:
a) for the training and selection of personnel, for the formation of an elite called upon to fulfill the main political roles;
b) on the implementation of political socialization, i.e. the process of introducing political culture into the consciousness and behavior of individuals and masses.