The state as the main political institution. Political institutions in modern Russia The main political institution is the institution

In modern science, institute is understood as a set of norms, rules that determine and regulate human activity. Classical in this regard is the definition given by the Nobel laureate D. North: “Institutions are the “rules of the game” in society, or, more formally, the restrictive framework created by man that organizes relationships between people” .

Political institutions emerge as differentiation develops political power as relatively autonomous normative orders regulating separate segments of increasingly complex political relations of power. For example, the institution of parliamentarism is a normative order that determines the nature of people's interactions regarding the creation of a representative body of state power and the performance of legislative and representative functions by it. This is not a building where parliamentarians sit, and not even specific deputies themselves, elected for a certain term, but stable relationships that arise as a result of regulatory regulation.

Should demarcate institutions as sets of normative restrictions, and organizations as groups of people pursuing certain goals, making decisions and creating their own rules to optimize the solution of the tasks set. For example, when we talk about the institution of political parties, we mean the normative order that has developed in society, which determines the rules for creating political parties, the main forms and principles of their activities. When we talk about a political party as an organization, we mean specific associations of citizens pursuing political goals and solving specific problems.

Institutions and organizations have a number of common features, in particular, both of them structure people's relations by establishing certain norms and rules. However, there is a serious difference between them: if institutions are the rules of the game, then organizations are associations of people who are limited in their actions by these rules. “The concept of “organization,” writes D. North, includes political

bodies and institutions (political parties, Senate, city council, control agency)<...>An organization is a group of people united by the desire to achieve some goal together” (for more on organizations in politics, see section IV).

A political institution is a stable normative order that regulates the interaction of people in a certain segment of the relations of political power in society. The sustainability of institutional education is given not only by norms, but also by sanctions that prevent deviation from normative patterns of behavior, as well as the ability of people to learn and accustom established norms and rules. Thanks to this, political institutions acquire objectivity, they are reproduced independently of the will and desire of individual individuals.

The content of political institutions is determined by two types of norms: formal, those. established by special legal acts, and informal that have arisen as a result of the natural habituation of behavior patterns that develop in the political practice of interactions. Politics is an area where formal rules and official regulation are unusually strong. This is primarily due to the special significance of political institutions in society, the place they occupy in the system of power relations in the management of public affairs. At present, practically in all countries there are legal acts that define the basic principles of the functioning of political institutions.

However, the normative space of any political institution is not only the norms that have found formal consolidation in any official documents. There are a number of conventions, rules of interpersonal communication that are not enshrined in laws, but have a strong influence on real relations between participants in political interactions. In reality, there is often a situation of competition between formal and informal rules, when, knowing about formal rules, individuals nevertheless consider informal rules, tested by experience, that give certain advantages in solving specific problems, to be more effective.

In this regard, scientists consider it necessary not to study the content of political institutions on the basis of exclusively formal, official norms, but to include informal rules in the orbit of their research, especially since the latter often deform the officially declared normative institutional order. This approach has found its expression in the methodology of neo-institutionalism, which focuses on taking into account the entire complex of regulatory restrictions.

In a modern space political power relations There are two types of political institutions:

1) institutions of state power and public administration (for more details about the state as a complex institutional formation, see paragraph 4.2);
2) non-state political institutions that regulate the processes of civil responsibility and self-organization, expression and protection of group interests, participation of citizens in the political life of society, including ways of their influence on the adoption of state decisions.

If the emergence of the state coincided with the natural process of the institutionalization of political power, the emergence of a normative order that secures the right of a certain status group to manage public affairs, then the second type of institutions was constituted in the process of citizens' struggle for the right to participate in political decision-making.

Among the political institutions of the second type, a special place is occupied by institute of citizenship regulating the position of an ordinary person in the system of political power relations by determining the mutual obligations of the state and citizen in relation to each other. The normative procedure of this institution determines the rights and obligations of a citizen, the procedure for acquiring citizenship, the conditions for its loss, the citizenship of children when the citizenship of parents changes, etc. This institution brings order to the relationship between the citizen and the state, creates barriers to state arbitrariness, the use of illegal methods of power by the ruling group. Moreover, obtaining citizenship allows a person to count on the protection of his constitutional rights from the state.

Human Rights Institute, on the contrary, it defines zones of freedom of the individual from state interference, where he can make independent decisions, act at his own discretion. Within the framework of this institution, the political rights of the individual are also regulated, related to participation in social and political life, organized pressure on power structures, and participation in the formation of state bodies.

Institute of Universal Suffrage arises in modern societies as a result of the stubborn struggle of the masses for the right to influence the personal composition of state officials who manage public affairs. This institution ensures the establishment of a normative order that guarantees every citizen who has reached a certain age the right to participate in elections to legislative bodies of various levels and presidential elections in those countries where it is provided for by the constitution, and also regulates the procedure for their conduct (for more details about the features of the organization of institutional electoral order, see paragraph 4.5).

Institute of Political Parties ensures the orderliness of relations that develop during the creation of political organizations, and regulates the order of interaction between parties, as well as between parties and other subjects of politics. Thanks to this institution, general ideas are formed in society about what a political party is, how it should act, how it differs from other organizations and associations. The behavior of party activists, ordinary members begins to be built on the basis of these ideas that form the normative space of this political institution (for more details, see Chapter 11).

Institute of public organizations and associations is a normative order that defines the rules for the creation by citizens of structures that allow them to jointly express and defend their interests. This institutional formation, on the one hand, allows to streamline the processes of self-organization of citizens, and on the other hand, to prevent the emergence of organizations that can have a devastating impact on the system of political power relations.

Institute of Interests Representation forms the order of interaction of interest groups with the state. It establishes norms and rules for the articulation of group interests in power structures, ways of reconciling private interests, the interests of business structures with the interests expressed by the state (for more details, see Chapter 10).

In each country, the combination of these institutions, as well as their specific normative content, have their own national characteristics, due to the historical conditions of political development and the specifics of the sociocultural environment. But, despite the national specifics, these political institutions perform an important socially significant function. They structure the field of political power relations, give political interactions a form understandable to members of society, and reduce the possibility of destructive conflicts that can destabilize and even destroy the political system.

2 North D. Institutions, institutional changes and the functioning of the economy. M .: Nachala, 1997. P. 17.
North D. Institutions, institutional changes and the functioning of the economy.S. 19.
March J., Olsen J. The New Institutionalism. Organizational Factors in Political life // American Political Science Review, 1984. Vol. 78. No. 3. P. 734-749.

Political institutions are political organizations that play a certain role in the political life of society.

All political institutions can be conditionally divided into three groups. The first group - proper political - includes organizations whose immediate purpose of existence is the exercise of power or direct influence on it (the state, political parties and socio-political movements).

The second group - non-political ones - includes organizations operating in non-political spheres of life (trade unions, religious, cooperative, corporate organizations, etc.). They do not set themselves independent political tasks, do not participate in the struggle for power. But their goals cannot be achieved outside the political system, so such organizations are forced to participate in the political life of society, defending their corporate interests.

The third group includes organizations that have only a minor political aspect in their activities. They arise and function to realize the personal interests and inclinations of a certain stratum of people (interest clubs, sports societies, amateur groups). They acquire a political connotation as objects of influence on the part of the state, parties, and movements. The main institution of the political system of society is the state.

Its special place in the political system is predetermined by the following factors:

The presence of the broadest social base;
- the possession of a special apparatus of control and coercion, extending its power to all members of society;
- using a wide range of means of influencing citizens;
- a monopoly on law-making, including in the field of functioning of the entire political system;
- possession of huge material resources to ensure the implementation of its policy;
- fulfillment of an integrating role, functions of uniting society around the most significant, national, general civil problems.

Institutions of the political system

The subjects of the political system are the state, political parties, socio-political movements, trade unions, creative associations, lobbying organizations, church associations, the media, etc.

In order for this or that phenomenon or structure to be attributed to the structural elements of the political system of society, it is necessary that they be at least minimally political, i.e. they must:

A) express the political interests of a certain class or any other social community;
b) be a participant in political life and bearer of political relations;
c) have a direct or indirect relationship to state power - its conquest, organization or use, and not necessarily interacting with state bodies, but also opposing them;
d) be guided in their daily activities by political norms or rules that have developed in the depths of the political life of a particular country.

Given the degree of involvement in political life, the exercise of power, the following groups of political organizations are distinguished:

1. Political organizations - directly and directly exercising political power: the state and some public associations. The immediate goal of their creation and functioning is politics. It consists in the formation and implementation of the policy of this or that class, in the political education of various sections of society and in the implementation of the political interests of this or that social group in life.
2. Non-political public associations - develop and arise not due to political reasons, the purpose of their functioning is not politics.

The central element in the political system is always the state. The state is often defined as "a politically organized society". They say about it that it "expresses the political status of a people organized in territorial isolation" and acts "as an organization, a system of institutions that has supreme power in a certain territory."

In historical terms, the state can be considered the first political organization. The state throughout the history of the development of society is modified in its essence, form and content, but unlike other elements of the political system - political parties and public organizations (which may appear at certain stages in the development of the political system of society and, having completed the tasks assigned to them, disappear ) the state is inevitably preserved.

The place occupied by the state in the political and public life of any country is due to the following:

1. The state acts as an alternative to the fruitless struggle between various social groups, strata, classes with their conflicting interests.
2. The state can be viewed as an organizational form, as a union of people united for living together.
3. Among the factors that led to the emergence of the state, an important place is occupied by the social stratification of society. The Marxist characterization of the essence of the state as a political organization of the economically dominant class is most clearly manifested when class tension arises in it, capable of blowing up society, bringing it into a state of chaos. In ordinary normal periods, general social ties prevail in society, more creative than class antagonisms.
4. The state was the first result of the political activity of people, organized in some way and representing the interests of certain social groups and strata. This led to his claims to the universality of the coverage of political phenomena, and the signs of territoriality and public power made the significance of the state as a form of political hostel of various social and national entities, as well as various organizations and parties expressing their interests, real.
5. The state is the most important integrating factor that links the political system and civil society into a single whole. By virtue of its social origin, the state takes care of common affairs.
6. The political system, due to the mobility of economic, social and other relations, the variability of the ideological and psychological spheres, is in constant motion. When emergency social situations arise (natural disasters occur, the form of government or the political regime changes), a special role in resolving them is assigned to the state.

Political parties and movements in the political system of society.

IN modern world political public associations are public associations whose statutes include participation in the political life of the society and in elections to state authorities and local self-government bodies, participation in the organization and activities of these bodies as their main goals. These are political parties, political movements and some public associations.

A significant role in the life of modern Russian society is played by political parties - associations created for the participation of citizens of the Russian Federation in the political life of society through the formation and expression of their political will, participation in public and political actions, in elections and referendums, as well as in order to represent interests citizens in state authorities and local self-government bodies.

Political parties are a special kind of public associations. This approach is generally recognized both in foreign and domestic legal literature and legal practice.

Political parties are the spokesmen for the interests and goals of certain classes and social groups, take an active part in the functioning of political power or have an indirect influence on it. Characteristic of the activities of the parties is their desire to integrate various social forces around their ideals and programs, to have an ideological impact on the population, on the formation of its political consciousness.

The parties operating in the modern world are very diverse, often opposite in their social essence and functions, ideals and program settings, internal structure and place in the political system, etc. For example, conservative, liberal, reformist parties are distinguished based on various typological criteria. and revolutionary; representative and mobilizing; democratic and totalitarian; open and closed, avant-garde and parliamentary, etc.

The goals and objectives of a political party are set out in its charter and program.

The main objectives of a political party are:

Formation of public opinion;
- political education and upbringing of citizens;
- expression of opinions of citizens on any issues of public life, bringing these opinions to the attention of the general public and public authorities;
- nomination of candidates for elections to legislative (representative) bodies of state power and representative bodies of local self-government, participation in elections to these bodies and in their work.

Political (social) movements should be distinguished from political parties. Political parties have state registration, a charter, a program that defines the principles of the political party, its goals and objectives, as well as methods for achieving goals and solving problems, membership and membership fees, a strictly defined procedure for entering and leaving the party, etc. A political movement is a non-membership mass public association pursuing political goals supported by members of the public movement. You can join a political movement at any time, be a member of this movement at any time at your own discretion and leave it at any time at your own will (for example, the political movement "Women of Russia").

Non-partisan political associations in the political system of society.

Public associations can be created both for political, relatively political, and non-political purposes. Non-party associations participate in the development and implementation of state policy, delegate their representatives to a number of state bodies. Many issues of the life of society, its political system are decided by state bodies, taking into account their opinion or together with them.

Public associations build their relations with the state from the standpoint of cooperation, mutual assistance, coordination and leadership by the state of the activities of some public organizations, supervision, etc. At the same time, the internal independence of public organizations is preserved, their relative independence in resolving issues based on the principles of self-government and amateur performance .

It should be noted that public associations operate within the framework of the legal regime established by the state. First of all, this is expressed in granting the constitutional right to citizens to unite in public organizations, to use broad political freedoms: speech, press, meetings, rallies, street processions and demonstrations. The rights and legitimate interests of public organizations are protected by state bodies (courts, prosecutors, etc.), which assist in the implementation of some of their decisions.

Non-political organizations include those that arise and develop not due to directly political, but due to economic and other similar reasons. The direct goal of their creation and functioning, unlike political organizations themselves, is never politics. These institutions, which include trade union, cooperative and other organizations, carry out their main activities, respectively, in the production, social, cultural, commercial and other spheres of society. They do not set themselves the immediate tasks of actively influencing state power for political purposes. The political activity of these organizations does not form the basis of their functioning and acts; in this sense, if not secondary, then, in any case, not of decisive importance for them.

non-political associations.

Among the numerous organizations that have only an insignificant political aspect in their content, there are associations that arise and function on the basis of purely personal inclinations and interests of a particular group of people to engage in certain activities.

Non-political public associations include:

Trade unions, religious, charitable organizations, national-cultural autonomies, public funds, public institutions, bodies of public amateur performance;
- associations whose statutes provide for membership in them only on professional, national, ethnic, racial or confessional grounds;
- associations created for the implementation of amateur and other non-political interests.

They acquire a political connotation in their activities only as objects of influence on them by state and other bodies and organizations that are political in nature, but by no means as subjects, carriers of political power and corresponding political relations.

Political institutions of society

The political institutions of society in the modern world are a certain set of organizations and institutions with their own subordination and structure, norms and rules that streamline political relations between people and organizations. This is a way of organizing the life of society, which allows you to embody certain political ideas, due to a specific situation and requirements. As you can see, the concept is quite broad. Therefore, its features should be considered in more detail.

The political institutions of society are divided into institutions of participation and power. The latter include organizations that exercise state power at different hierarchical levels, and the former include civil society structures. The institutions of power and participation represent a political social system that has a certain integrity and organically interacts with the subjects of politics and other elements of political activity.

The mechanism of political influence is determined through the activities of various subjects, one of which is political institutions. The state is the main power body that exercises full power through the means and methods used by it. It is the state that, through its activities, embraces the entire society and its individual members, is fully capable of expressing the interests of different social groups and classes, forms the administrative apparatus and regulates various spheres of life. Law and order occupy a special place in the exercise of power by the state. And the rule of law ensures the legitimacy of the policy pursued, which is facilitated by the institutions of power.

Another main institution of the political system is civil society itself, within whose framework the activities of parties and other organizations are carried out. During the Modern Age in Europe and the United States of America, both the state and society were formed as such, which happened under the influence of modernization changes. Since that time, the main political institutions of society have been operating. The state here acts as a direct power, which has an absolute monopoly for coercion and even violence in a certain territory. And civil society is a kind of antithesis.

The founder of institutionalism, French law professor Maurice Auriou, considered society as a combination of a huge number of different institutions. He wrote that social and civil mechanisms are organizations that include not only people, but also an ideal, an idea, a principle. The political institutions of society draw energy from their members precisely because of the above elements. If initially a certain circle of people unites together and creates an organization, then by the time all its members are imbued with ideas and awareness of unity with each other, it can be fully called an institution. It is the directional idea that is the hallmark of such a phenomenon.

Institutionalists singled out the following political institutions of society: corporate (which include the state, trade associations and societies, trade unions, church) and the so-called property (legal norms). Both of these types are characterized as peculiar ideal models of social relations. These political social institutions differ in the following: the former are incorporated into social collectives, while the latter can be used in any associations and do not have their own organization.

The focus was on corporate institutions. They share many of the common features that are characteristic of autonomous associations: a guiding idea, a set of regulatory norms and hierarchies of power. The task of the state is to control and direct the economic and social life of society, remaining a neutral nationwide intermediary force, in order to maintain a balance integrated into a single system. Today, Russia's policy follows precisely this progressive direction.

The political institutions of society are the conductor through which power is exercised. They characterize the interaction of associations of the state and citizens, determine the effectiveness of the system of political organization of society. The political system is the totality of all these factors. Its functional characteristic is the political regime. What it is? This is a set of characteristic political relations for certain types of state, the means and methods used, established and established relations between society and state power, existing forms of ideologies, class and social relationships. Depending on the degree of social freedoms of the individual and the relationship between society and the state, there are three main regimes: authoritarian, democratic and totalitarian.

The main institutions of the political system of society and their relationship are best seen in the example of democracy, which is a form of organization of social and political life, which is characterized by the ability of the population to choose various alternatives to social development. The democratic process usually includes all political institutions, since it is this regime that requires maximum social and political activity from all segments of the population, and it is open to any options for social change. Democracy as such does not require a radical change in the ruling political parties, but such a possibility certainly exists. Political parties, social movements and socio-political organizations in this regime are of great number and variety, therefore democratic societies are always characterized by uncertainty, since political and social goals, by their nature and origin, are constantly variable. They always turn out to be extremely controversial, give rise to resistance and conflicts, and are subject to permanent changes.

This term can be found virtually everywhere in political science. But what does he mean? The rule of law is the most important democratic institution. In it, the actions of the authorities are always limited by moral, legal and political frameworks. The political institutions of society in a state governed by the rule of law are focused on human interests, create equal conditions for all citizens, regardless of nationality, social status, status, religion, skin color, and so on. Constitutionalism within the framework of such a state occupies a special place and is a stabilizing factor that ensures a certain predictability of the policy pursued by the authorities. It is the priority of the principle of law, and not such a factor as force, that is the starting point for constitutionality. We can say that the main institution of the political system of a legal state is the law itself, which acts here as the only and main instrument and regulates various aspects of social life.

The political institutions of society often experience a problem in interacting with public opinion, this is especially true during the period of transformation and changes in the system of the power vertical. At this time, the question arises of the need to recognize new and old institutions, and this rarely increases the role of the opinion of the society itself regarding the expediency and necessity of the existence of these institutions in general. Many political parties and social movements fail to cope with these problems.

There are two directions in this problem. First, new institutions do not immediately win the recognition and support of public opinion. Secondly, without conducting large-scale campaigns to explain their activities in the media, without a key factor of support from already established and influential political elites and forces, new institutions cannot make their way. For post-authoritarian countries, in their desire for democratization, the problem of the effectiveness of such phenomena as the political institutions of society is also relevant. This creates a vicious circle. New political democratic forces cannot immediately become effective, since there is no necessary support from the masses and elites, and they cannot receive support and recognition of legitimacy, since in the eyes of the broad masses they are ineffective and unable to help solve the problems that society faces. This is precisely what Russia's policy is "sinning" at this stage.

Analyzing the legal political institutions of society, it becomes clear that they become really effective as a result of a very long process of adaptation and development in accordance with the traditions of society. For example, it is worth talking about the high democracy of Western countries only starting from the twentieth century. The development and approval of new social and political institutions occurs in three main stages. The first is the formation and formation, the second is its legitimization and recognition by society, the third is adaptation and subsequent growth in efficiency. It is the second phase that takes the longest time, and the probability of a rollback to the first phase is high. As the historical experience of "democratic construction" shows, the key problem is giving a social orientation and meeting the interests of the general public.

The sovereignty of the entire people is embodied in the state through a certain representative body that expresses the collective will of all voters. It is the parliament that is the most important democratic institution within the rule of law, without which democracy is inconceivable in general. Characteristic features of the parliament: collegial decision-making and elective composition. The deputies who are elected to its composition are direct representatives of the will of the people and are guided by state and public interests.

Parliament performs a lot of important functions, but the main ones can be called:

Legislative, since only Parliament has the right to make laws that are binding and universal;
- controlling, which is expressed in monitoring the government and regulating its actions (approval of members, listening to reports, etc.).

Political social institution

All political processes are carried out through political institutions. The main function is to regulate a very wide range of political relations between social groups and national communities, as well as between states. The most important political institutions of society include the institutions of political power, law and ideology. They manifest themselves in the activities of state, legislative and executive authorities - parliament, government, local authorities, law enforcement agencies, as well as in the activities of political parties and the media, primarily the press, radio and television.

Non-main political institutions include, for example, the institution of forensic examination, passport registration, legal proceedings, advocacy, juries, judicial control, presidency, etc. Each of these political institutions has its own specific functions, directions for ensuring the activities of one or another link in the political system. Ultimately, the system of political institutions is designed to ensure the normal functioning and development of the entire political life of society and, thereby, the implementation of the political interests of all its social groups and national communities. This requires the flexible activity of the political institutions themselves, their ability to ensure a combination of the political interests of all members of society, to decide political problems based on compromises between various political forces and, when necessary, to show firmness and decisiveness in upholding the fundamental interests of the whole society.

If this happens, it means that political institutions cope with their function. If political institutions this society imperfect, they cannot solve the problems of its development in accordance with the existing social realities, they are unable to manage the ongoing political processes.

Destructive processes damage the interests of large masses of people. In addition, destructive (destructive) processes can lead not only to the loss of the viability of the institution, but also to the destruction of the existing statehood in general and thus to irreversible deformations both in the political, and in the socio-economic and spiritual life of society.

State as a political institution

The state is the main institution of power in the political system of a particular society, a set of institutions and organizations that have supreme power in a certain territory. The forerunners of the state were various forms of social self-regulation and self-organization of people - traditions, norms, customs, clan and tribal formations characteristic of the primitive communal system.

In different theories, a different explanation is given for the reasons for the emergence of the state: in the theological - the will of God; in the contractual - the power of reason, the desire to organize social life; in the materialistic - socio-economic factors; in the theory of conquest - military-political factors, etc.

State signs:

Public authority, materialized in the governing bodies and extending to the entire territory of the country, to all citizens (government, bureaucracy, army, police, etc.);
monopoly right to publish laws and legal acts binding on the entire population;
a system of taxes, taxes, loans necessary for the material support of state policy;
territory - the space to which the jurisdiction of the state extends;
sovereignty, that is, the supremacy of state power within the country and independence in international relations;
monopoly right to coercion and the relevant authorities for its implementation (army, police, security services, court).

The functions of the state are the main directions of activity in solving the problems facing it. They can be classified according to different criteria: depending on the duration - permanent and temporary; depending on the value - on the main and non-main, secondary; depending on the scope of implementation - on internal and external.

Traditionally, the functions of the state are divided into internal and external. The internal ones include: the functions of protecting the existing political system, economic and social system, human rights; economic and organizational function; cultural and educational function; ecological function. External functions - defense of the country, protection of its interests in the international arena, participation in the international division of labor.

Depending on the nature of the structure and ensuring human rights in the development of the state, two global stages are distinguished - traditional and constitutional.

Traditional states arose and existed mainly on the basis of customs. Power over subjects in them was not institutionally limited, and citizens were not equal. Traditional states are primarily monarchies.

The constitutional stage is associated with the appearance of the first constitutions, which were the result of the French Revolution and the United States War of Independence. This stage in the development of the state is characterized by the legal outline of its powers and the presence of institutional guarantees of human rights.

The completeness of the process of forming a constitutional state is characterized by the concept of the rule of law.

The modern model of the rule of law is characterized by:

The universality of law, equally extending to the government and the citizen;
the rule of law;
observance of the rights and freedoms of the individual in accordance with the standards set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948;
mutual responsibility of the state and the individual;
separation of powers and their interaction through a system of "checks and balances";
law-abiding citizens;
the action in society of democratic principles, the most important of which is “everything that is not forbidden is allowed”.

The modern legal state is social, that is, it seeks to provide every citizen with decent living conditions, social security, participation in government, and ideally, equality of life chances and opportunities for self-realization of the individual.

Several tendencies interact in the functioning of modern states - etatist and deetatist, integration and disintegration. The etatist trend is manifested in the increasing role of the state as a regulatory and integration tool of society, the deetatist trend is in the activation of civil society, strengthening its control over the state, expanding the influence of political parties and interest groups on the state. The integration trend is manifested in the creation of economic, political and military associations (NATO, EU, ASEAN, etc.), the disintegration trend is manifested in the collapse of a number of states (USSR, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia).

The possibilities of states in pursuing an independent policy are limited by the processes of globalization - the intensification of interaction between members of the world community, the progressive permeability of interstate borders, the formation of a single and universal society, etc. The growing gap between de jure sovereignty and de facto sovereignty forces states to delegate their powers not only to supranational structures, but also "down" - to regional and municipal structures.

States are traditionally classified according to two criteria - forms of government and forms of territorial structure. The form of government is understood as the organization of the supreme state power, the system of relations between its bodies and each other and the population. The form of government reflects the territorial structure of the state, the nature of the relationship between central, regional and local authorities.

Forms of government according to the method of organizing power and its formal source are divided into monarchies and republics. In a monarchical form of government, the source of power is one person and power is inherited. In the republic, the highest authorities are formed on an elective basis.

There are two types of monarchies - absolute and limited, constitutional. In absolute monarchies, the sole bearer of the sovereignty of the state is the monarch and there are no representative institutions (Saudi Arabia, Brunei). In constitutional monarchies, along with the monarch, other supreme state bodies act as carriers of sovereignty, limiting his power (Great Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Spain, Japan).

Republics are divided into three varieties - parliamentary, presidential and mixed (semi-presidential), depending on who forms the government, to whom it is accountable and controlled. In presidential republics (USA, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia, Syria, etc.), this role is performed by the president, in parliamentary (Germany, Italy, India, Turkey, Israel, etc.) - parliament, in mixed (France, Finland, Poland, Bulgaria, Austria, etc.) - jointly the president and parliament.

Russia is also close to the presidential-parliamentary type of republics. According to the Constitution, the President is elected by the population in a two-round majority system, has the right to issue legislative acts, appoint the Prime Minister (with the consent of the State Duma) and members of the cabinet. At his own discretion, he can dismiss the government and, under certain circumstances, have the right to dissolve the State Duma (Articles 111 and 117 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The Duma may demand the resignation of the government from the President.

Systems of power with the institution of the president, similar to the Russian one, operate in Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan and Armenia.

The main forms of national-territorial structure are unitary, federal and confederal.

A unitary state is distinguished by a single constitution, a single system of higher authorities and legislation, and a single citizenship. From the point of view of the internal structure, unitary states are centralized (mainly small countries - Greece, Denmark, Ireland, Iceland, Portugal, Sweden, etc.) and decentralized, with wide autonomy of the regions within the powers transferred to their jurisdiction by the central authorities ( Italy, Spain, France).

Federation - a stable union of state entities, independent within the limits of competences distributed between them and the center, having their own authorities, often a constitution (along with the union one) and dual citizenship. The current federations include Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Russia, the USA, Germany, and Switzerland. The federation is characterized by the interaction of two opposite tendencies - towards centralization and decentralization.

A confederation is a union of states for the implementation of specific joint goals, most often in the field of military, foreign policy, transport and communications, and the monetary system. This form of state association is fragile and either transforms into a federation (as in the case of the USA and Switzerland), or breaks up, as happened, for example, with the United Arab Republic, which included Egypt and Syria, Senegambia - the union of Senegal and Gambia.

Elements of a confederation are present in the association of European states - the European Union (EU). It has supranational bodies with significant powers (Council of the European Union, the European Parliament), policy is coordinated, there is a common economic space and currency.

In addition to the basic forms of national-territorial structure, there are also specific ones. First of all, these are associations of states around former metropolises (the British Commonwealth of Nations, Francophonie), based on a common language, elements of culture and the presence of a supranational apparatus, and an associated state association - the CIS.

Main political institutions

The term "state" began to be used in political science from about the second half of the 16th century. Until that time, such concepts as “polis”, “principality”, “kingdom”, “kingdom”, “republic”, “empire”, etc. were used to designate the state. One of the first to introduce the term “state” into scientific circulation was N. Machiavelli. He interpreted it broadly - as any supreme power over a person.

In ordinary consciousness, the state is often identified with a certain ethnic group (the Belarusian state, the French state, etc.), with the administrative and managerial apparatus, with justice.

Most modern authors define the state as the main institution of the political system and political organization of society, created to organize the life of society as a whole and carry out the policy of the ruling classes, other social groups and strata of the population.

The main structural elements of the state are the bodies of legislative, executive and judicial power, the protection of public order and state security, the armed forces and partly the media.

Common to the state are the following features:

1. The separation of public authority from society, its mismatch with the organization of the entire population, the emergence of a layer of professional managers, which distinguishes the state from a tribal organization based on the principles of self-government.
2. Sovereignty, that is, the supreme power in a certain territory. In modern society, there are many authorities: family, industrial, party, etc. But the state has the highest power, the decisions of which are binding on all citizens, organizations and institutions.
3. Territory delineating the boundaries of the state. The laws and powers of the state apply to people living in a certain territory. It itself is built not on consanguineous or religious grounds, but on the basis of the territorial and, usually, ethnic community of people.
4. Monopoly on the legal use of force, physical coercion. The range of state coercion extends from the restriction of freedom to the physical destruction of a person (the death penalty). To perform the functions of coercion, the state has special means (weapons, prisons, etc.), as well as bodies - the army, police, security services, the court, the prosecutor's office.
5. The most important feature of the state is its monopoly right to publish laws and regulations binding on the entire population. Legislative activity in a democratic state is carried out by the legislature (parliament). The state implements the requirements of legal norms with the help of its special bodies (courts, administration).
6. The right to levy taxes and fees from the population. Taxes are necessary for the maintenance of numerous employees and for the material support of state policy: defense, economic, social, etc.
7. Mandatory membership in the state. In contrast, for example, to a political party, membership in which is voluntary, a person receives state citizenship from the moment of birth.

When characterizing the state, the distinctive features are supplemented by its attributes - the coat of arms, the flag and the anthem.

Signs and attributes make it possible not only to distinguish the state from other social organizations, but also to see it as a necessary form of existence and development of societies in modern civilization.

The main theories of the emergence of the state today are:

A) theological - the state arose by the will of God;
b) patriarchal (author - English scientist of the 18th century Robert Filmer) - the state arose as a result of the mechanical combination of clans into tribes, and tribes into large entities, up to state formations;
c) the theory of social contract (G. Grotius, T. Gobbs, J.-J. Rousseau, N. Radishchev) - the state is the result of an agreement between a sovereign ruler and subjects;
d) the theory of conquest (L. Gumplovich, F. Oppenheimer, K. Kautsky, E. Dühring) - the state was an organization of winners over the vanquished;
e) Marxist-Leninist theory - the state arose as a result of the division of society into classes as a spokesman for the interests of the economically dominant class; an organic part of this theory is the idea of the withering away of the state.

There are theories that explain the origin of the state and other factors, such as the need for the joint construction of irrigation facilities, the influence of other states, etc. It is impossible to single out any one that determines the cause of the emergence of the state. It is clear that these processes were influenced by a variety of conditions and factors, both external and internal.

State functions. The social purpose of the state is determined by the functions it performs. It is generally accepted to divide functions into internal and external.

The main internal functions include:

Regulation of social life; conflict resolution, search for ways of compromise and consensus in society;
- protection of public order;
- development of a legislative framework for the functioning of the social system;
- determination of the strategy of economic development;
- protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens;
- providing social guarantees to its citizens;
- creation of conditions for the development of science, culture, education;
- activities to protect the environment.

External functions are aimed at ensuring the security, integrity and sovereignty of the state, protecting national interests in the international arena, developing mutually beneficial cooperation between countries, solving global problems of human civilization, etc.

Forms of government and government

The state has a complex structure - usually there are three groups of state institutions: bodies of state power and administration, the state apparatus (public administration), and the punitive mechanism of the state.

The structure and powers of these institutions depend on the form of the state, and the functional side is largely determined by the existing political regime. The concept of "state form" is revealed through the categories "form of government" and "form of government".

The “form of government” is the organization of supreme power, characterized by its formal sources, it determines the structure of state bodies (institutional design) and the principles of their relationship. The two main forms of government are the monarchy and the republic and their variations.

Monarchy (classical) is characterized by the fact that the power of the head of state - the monarch is inherited and is not considered a derivative of any other power, body or voters. It is inevitably sacralized, for this is the condition for legitimizing the power of the monarch. There are several varieties of the monarchical form of government: absolute monarchy - characterized by the omnipotence of the head of state and the absence of a constitutional order; constitutional monarchy - involves limiting the powers of the head of state by more or less developed features of the constitutional order. Depending on the degree of restriction of the power of the head of state, there are: dualistic and parliamentary constitutional monarchies.

Dualistic monarchy - the powers of the monarch are limited in the sphere of legislation, but wide in the sphere of executive power. In addition, he retains control over representative power, since he is endowed with the right of a complete veto on parliamentary decisions and the right to dissolve it ahead of schedule (Saudi Arabia and a number of small Arab states).

Parliamentary monarchy - the power of the monarch does not extend to the sphere of legislation and is significantly limited in management. Laws are adopted by parliament, the right of "veto" actually (in a number of countries and formally) the monarch does not exercise. The government is formed on the basis of a parliamentary majority and is responsible to the parliament. The actual administration of the country is carried out by the government. Any act of the monarch requires the approval of the head of government or the relevant minister (Belgium, Great Britain, Denmark, Spain, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden).

Republic - two main forms of republican government are known: presidential and parliamentary republics.

The presidential republic is characterized by the special role of the president; he is both head of state and head of government. There is no post of prime minister, the government is formed by extra-parliamentary means, the president appoints its members either independently of parliament or with the consent of the senate (for example, the United States). Ministers are responsible to the President. The parliament does not have the right to express a vote of no confidence in the government, and the censure of ministers by the parliament does not entail their automatic resignation. The head of state is elected independently of parliament: either by an electoral college elected by the population (USA), or by direct vote of citizens (France, etc.). This election procedure allows the president and his government to act without regard to parliament. The President is vested with the right of suspensive veto on laws passed by Parliament. The most important distinguishing feature of a presidential republic is a strict separation of powers. All branches of power have considerable independence in relation to each other, but there is a developed system of checks and balances that maintains a relative balance of power.

A parliamentary republic: its most important distinguishing feature is the formation of a government on a parliamentary basis and its formal responsibility to parliament. The head of state occupies a modest place in the system of power bodies. Parliament, along with the issuance of laws and the voting of the budget, has the right to control the activities of the government. The head of state appoints the government, but not at his own discretion, but from among the party representatives who have the majority of seats in parliament (its lower house). A vote of no confidence in the government by the parliament entails either the resignation of the government, or the dissolution of parliament and the holding of early parliamentary elections, or both. Thus, the government is the main governing body of the country, and the head of government is actually the first person in the power structure, pushing the head of state into the background (Greece, Italy, Germany).

A mixed, presidential-parliamentary form of government, with even greater dominance of the president, is typical for a number of Latin American countries (Peru, Ecuador), it is also enshrined in the constitution in Russia and the new constitutions of a number of CIS countries.

Its most important features:

Presence of a popularly elected president;
- the president appoints and removes members of the government;
- members of the government must enjoy the confidence of parliament;
The president has the right to dissolve parliament.

The form of government is the territorial and political organization of the state, including the political and legal status of its constituent parts and the principles of the relationship between central and regional state bodies. There are two main forms of government: unitary and federal.

A unitary state is a single state, which is subdivided into administrative-territorial units that do not have political independence. A federal state is a union state consisting of several state entities, each of which has its own competence and has its own system of legislative, executive and judicial bodies.

Previously, there was such a close to federal form of government as a confederation. The difference between a confederation and a federation lies in the fact that a federation presupposes the existence of a center authorized to make decisions on behalf of all members of the union and exercising authority over them. A confederation, on the other hand, is a more or less flexible organization, without any constitutional formalization, a federation of independent states. Each of its members united with others in an alliance, to whose competence a limited number of issues were transferred (for example, defense and external representation) Confederations were: Switzerland from 1291 to 1848, the USA in 1776-1797, the German Union in 1815-1867. Today there are no confederations, although this word is used in the official name of the Swiss and Canadian states.

Political public institution

Politics as a social institution is a set of certain organizations (authorities and administrations, political parties, social movements) that regulate the political behavior of people in accordance with accepted norms, laws, and rules.

Each of the political institutions carries out a certain type of political activity and includes a social community, layer, group, specializing in the implementation of political activities to manage society.

These institutions are characterized by:

1) political norms governing relations within and between political institutions, and between political and non-political institutions of society;
2) material resources necessary to achieve the goals.

Political institutions ensure the reproduction, stability and regulation of political activity, the preservation of the identity of the political community even with a change in composition, strengthen social ties and intra-group cohesion, exercise control over political behavior.

The focus of politics is power and control in society.

The main carrier of political power is the state, which, relying on law and law, carries out compulsory regulation and control over social processes in order to ensure the normal and stable functioning of society.

The universal structure of state power is:

1) legislative bodies (parliaments, councils, congresses, etc.);
2) executive bodies (government, ministries, state committees, law enforcement agencies, etc.);
3) judicial authorities;
4) army and state security agencies;
5) state information system, etc.

The sociological nature of the activities of the state and other political organizations is associated with the functioning of society as a whole.

Politics should contribute to the solution of social problems, at the same time, politicians tend to use state power and representative bodies to satisfy certain pressure groups.

The state as the core of the sociological system provides:

1) social integration of society;
2) safety of life of people and society as a whole;
3) distribution of resources and social benefits;
4) cultural and educational activities;
5) social control over deviant behavior.

The basis of politics is power associated with the use of force, coercion in relation to all members of society, organizations, movements.

The subordination of power is based on:

1) traditions and customs (traditional domination, for example, the power of a slave owner over a slave);
2) devotion to a person endowed with some higher power (the charismatic power of leaders, for example, Moses, Buddha);
3) conscious conviction in the correctness of formal rules and the need to comply with them (this type of subordination is typical for most modern states).

The complexity of sociopolitical activity is associated with differences in social status, interests, positions of people and political forces.

They influence the differences in the types of political power. N. Smelser cites the following types of states: democratic and non-democratic (totalitarian, authoritarian).

In democratic societies, all political institutions are autonomous (power is divided into independent branches - executive, legislative, judicial).

All political institutions influence the formation of state and power structures, form the political direction of the development of society.

Democratic states are associated with representative democracy, when the people for a certain period of time transfer power to their representatives in the elections.

These states, mostly Western, are characterized by the following features:

1) individualism;
2) constitutional form of government;
3) the general agreement of those who are controlled;
4) loyal opposition.

In totalitarian states, leaders seek to retain power, keeping the people under complete control, using a unified mono-party system, control over the economy, the media, and the family, conducting terror against the opposition. In authoritarian states, approximately the same measures are carried out in milder forms, in the conditions of the existence of the private sector and other parties.

The sociopolitical subsystem of society is a spectrum of different vectors of power, control, and political activity.

In an integral system of society, they are in a state of constant struggle, but without the victory of any one line.

Crossing the border of measure in the struggle leads to deviant forms of power in society:

1) totalitarian, in which the military-administrative method of government dominates;
2) spontaneous market, where power passes to corporate groups that merge with the mafia and wage war with each other;
3) stagnant, when a relative and temporary balance of opposing forces and control methods is established.

In Soviet and Russian society, one can find manifestations of all these deviations, but totalitarianism under Stalin and stagnation under Brezhnev were especially pronounced.

State political institutions

The most common functions of political institutions include:

Consolidation of society, social groups in order to realize their fundamental interests through political power;
the development of political programs expressing the aspirations of these social communities, and the organization of their implementation;
streamlining and regulating the actions of communities in accordance with political programs;
integration of other social strata and groups in the field of social relations, expressing the interests and corresponding aspirations of the community that created the institution;
protection and development of the system of social relations, values corresponding to the interests of the communities represented;
ensuring the optimal development and orientation of the political process towards the realization of the priorities and advantages of the relevant social forces. Political institutions usually arise on the basis of certain non-institutionalized communities or groups and differ from previous structures in the creation of a permanent and paid management apparatus.

Each institution as a subject of politics implements political activity through the activities of its leaders, leaders of various levels and ordinary members, interacting with the public environment in order to meet specific and at the same time constantly changing individual and group socio-political interests.

Aggregate subjects play a decisive role in the political process, nevertheless, the primary subject of politics, its "atom", is undoubtedly an individual, a person. In domestic political practice, a person was not always recognized as an independent and free subject of political actions. First of all, the popular masses, political communities, and associations acted as such subjects.

A person, as a rule, could participate in political life as a member of official structures with a certain regulation of political functions. However, in fact, it is the needs of each individual person, his value orientations and goals that act as a “policy measure”, the driving principle of the socio-political activity of the masses, nations, ethnic groups and other communities, as well as organizations and institutions expressing their interests.

The status of the subject of politics does not exist as inherent in any individual or social community. Political qualities are not given to a person initially. Every individual is a potential subject of politics, but not everyone becomes one in reality. In order to become a political subject, a person must find his essence and existence in politics. In other words, he must practically master political experience, realize himself as a subject of political action, develop his position in the political process and consciously determine his attitude to the world of politics, the degree of participation in it.

A person's realization of his political essence is closely related to his individual characteristics and is refracted through the personality structure, in which social, psychological, biological and spiritual substructures can be distinguished as components.

A political system can be called an ordered set of norms, institutions, organizations, ideas, as well as relationships and interactions between them, during which political power is exercised.

The political system is a complex of state and non-state institutions that perform political functions, that is, activities related to the functioning of state power.

The concept of a political system is more capacious than the concept of "public administration", since it covers all persons and all institutions involved in the political process, as well as informal and non-governmental factors and phenomena that affect the mechanism for identifying and posing problems, the development and implementation of solutions in the field of state-power relations. In the broadest interpretation, the concept of "political system" includes everything that is related to politics.

Political institution - more complex element political system, which is a stable type of social interaction that regulates a certain area of the political sphere of society. The Institute performs an important function (or several functions) that is significant for the whole society, while forming an ordered system of social roles and rules of interaction.

Examples of political institutions are parliamentarism, the institution of civil service, institutions of executive power, the institution of the head of state, the presidency, the monarchy, the judiciary, citizenship, suffrage, political parties, etc. The main institution in the political system is the state.

Political institutions are stable types of political relations, the reproduction of which is ensured by the following:

A) the rules governing the nature of interaction;
b) sanctions that prevent deviation from normative behavior patterns;
c) getting used to the established institutional order.

These properties are usually called the attributes of the institution. It is they who make political institutions objective, self-reproducing social formations that do not depend on the will and desire of individual individuals, encouraging people to focus their behavior on prescribed patterns of behavior, on certain norms and rules. At the same time, what has been said means that it is possible to speak about the existence of this or that institution only if in the actions of people there is a reproduction of the behavior patterns prescribed by this institution. Political institutions exist only in the actions of people, reproducing the corresponding type of relations, interactions. What political institutions can be identified in modern society?

The Institute of Parliamentarism, which performs the functions of regulating relations regarding the creation of basic legal norms - laws that are binding on all citizens of the country; representation of the interests of various social groups in the state. The normative regulation of the institution of parliamentarism concerns, first of all, the issues of the competence of the parliament, the procedure for its formation, the powers of deputies, the nature of their interaction with voters and the population as a whole.

The institutions of executive power are a complex system of interactions that develop between the bodies of officials who carry out the current management of public affairs and the population of the country. The main subject making the most responsible decisions within the framework of this type of political power relations is either the head of state and the government (Egypt), or only the head of state, the president (USA), or only the government (Italy).

The dispersal of the public affairs management system required the unification of the requirements for persons working in state institutions. Thus, the institution of public service began to take shape in society, regulating the professional activities of people belonging to a special status group. In our country, this regulation is carried out on the basis of the Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of the Public Service of the Russian Federation". This law defines the legal status of civil servants, the procedure for performing civil service, the types of incentives and responsibilities of employees, the grounds for termination of service, etc.

The institution of the head of state also acquired independent significance in the system of executive power. It ensures sustainable reproduction in society of relations that allow the leader of the state to speak on behalf of the entire people, to be the supreme arbiter in disputes, to guarantee the integrity of the country, the inviolability of the constitutional rights of citizens.

Institutions of judiciary regulate relations that develop in connection with the need to resolve various conflicts in society. Unlike the legislative and executive authorities, the court (with the exception of judicial precedent) does not create normative acts and does not engage in administrative and managerial activities. However, the adoption of a judicial decision becomes possible only in the field of political power, which ensures the strict obedience of specific people to this decision.

Among the political institutions of modern society, a special place is occupied by those that regulate the position of an ordinary person in the system of political power relations. This is primarily an institution of citizenship, which determines the mutual obligations of the state and citizen in relation to each other. The regulations state that a citizen is obliged to abide by the constitution and laws, pay taxes, in a number of countries there is also universal military duty. The state, in turn, is called upon to protect the rights of a citizen, including the right to life, security, property, etc. Within the framework of this institution, the procedure for acquiring citizenship, the conditions for its loss, the citizenship of children when the citizenship of parents changes, etc. is also regulated.

An important place in the creation of an orderly system of relations of influence on the subjects of political power is occupied by the institution of electoral law, which regulates the procedure for holding elections to legislative bodies of various levels, as well as presidential elections in those countries where this is provided for by the constitution. The institution of political parties ensures the orderliness of relations that develop in the course of the creation of political organizations and in relations between them. Some general ideas are being formed in society about what a political party is, how it should act, how it differs from other organizations and associations. And the behavior of party activists, ordinary members begins to be built on the basis of these ideas that form the normative space of this political institution. We have listed only the most significant political institutions of modern society. Each country develops its own combination of these institutions, and the specific forms of the latter are directly affected by the socio-cultural environment. The institution of parliamentarism in the United States, India, Russia and South Korea, with similar principles of functioning of the legislative assembly, will have its own special national flavor. Political institutions structure the field of political power relations, they make the interactions of people fairly certain, stable. The more stable the institutional relations in a society, the higher the predictability of the political behavior of individuals.

Development of political institutions

To identify the origins of political science, many researchers turned to the history of ancient thought. Thus, such prominent philosophers as Plato, Aristotle, Cicero showed close interest in the political world. They created fundamental treatises: "Politics", "State", "Laws", "Republic", "Sovereign", popular with modern political scientists.

The American political philosopher L. Strauss tried to substantiate the idea that ancient thinkers raised political science to the level of an independent discipline and thus "became the founders of political science in the exact and final sense of the word."

Political science, as an independent science, became possible as a result of the isolation of the political sphere from an integral human society, the separation of the political world from the economic, social and spiritual subsystems, which coincided in time with the New and Recent periods of history, or rather with the periods of formation of capitalist society. It is important to emphasize that the political world in the proper sense of the word is a historical phenomenon, its formation and separation from the integral human society took place at a certain stage of historical development and is closely connected with the processes of formation and isolation of civil society. The history of political science is, in fact.

The process of constant renewal and enrichment of its theoretical, methodological and methodological arsenal. Political science is unthinkable without the tradition within which it develops. Tradition in this case refers to the forms of organization of science, systems of theories and ideas, methods of argumentation, methodologies, techniques, etc.

In the history of the West, the formation of political knowledge was distinguished by a high degree of development. This is especially true for the periods of modern and modern times. In general, the formation of political knowledge was closely connected with the processes of formation and change of specific political systems, regimes, relations. An important role was played by political knowledge, which, to one degree or another, was then reflected in the development of political practice.

Such a relationship is well traced in the history of Western countries in the periods of modern and modern times, in the formation and development of their state system. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine the formation and establishment of the modern Western state-political system without the ideas of Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Montesquieu, etc.

There are three major stages in the history of the formation and development of political science.

The first period is prehistory from antiquity to modern times. Its main significance lies in the accumulation and transmission from generation to generation of political and political-philosophical knowledge. This period is represented by Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, F. Aquinas and other thinkers of antiquity and the Middle Ages.

The second period - from the beginning of the New Age to the middle of the nineteenth century. - is characterized by the formation of the most important ideas about the political world, about politics, political activity, the state, power, political institutions in the modern sense and, accordingly, the source of their scientific analysis.

In the third period, covering the 1880-1890s. and the first decades of the twentieth century, political science has finally formed and established itself as an independent discipline with its own subject of study, methodology, methods, having taken its rightful place in the research and curricula universities and research institutes.

Role of political institutions

Political institutions in modern times are understood as a set of institutions, organizations with a certain structure and subordination, reproduced over time by a set of norms and rules that streamline political relations, both between organizations and between people. Thus, political institutions are "a triune integrity - organization, norms, relations."

Political institutions are divided into institutions of power and institutions of participation. The former include institutions exercising state power at various hierarchical levels, while the latter include institutions of participation, structures of civil society. The totality of political institutions make up the political system of society, which is a certain integrity, organic interaction of political subjects, other elements of political reality.

The mechanism of political power is determined by the nature of the activities of political institutions, the means and methods they use. The main power institution is the state, which exercises the fullness of public power. The state encompasses by its activities all members of society, expresses the interests of all classes and social groups to the fullest extent, forms an extensive administrative apparatus that regulates various spheres of life. In the exercise of power by the state, a special place belongs to law and order. The law provides the legal force of the policy pursued.

Another important political institution is civil society, within which the activities of non-state political institutions are carried out. The state and civil society as political institutions are formed in Europe and the USA around the period of the New Age under the influence of ongoing modernization changes. Since that time, the main institution of power in society has been formed, which has a monopoly on coercive violence in a certain territory - the state. At the same time, under the influence of this process, the formation of a kind of antithesis of the state - civil society.

The French law professor Maurice Auriou, one of the founders of the theory of institutionalism, considered society as a collection of a huge number of institutions. He believed that social mechanisms are organizations or institutions that include people, as well as an idea, an ideal, a principle that serve as a kind of crucible that extracts the energy of these individuals. If initially one or another circle of persons, having united for joint actions, forms an organization, then from the moment when the individuals included in it are imbued with the consciousness of their unity, it already appears as an institution. The French lawyer considered the guiding idea to be the distinguishing feature of the institute.

M. Oriou singled out two types of institutions: corporate (state, trade unions, trading companies, associations, church) and real (legal norms). Both types were characterized by him as original ideal models of social relations. The difference between them was seen in the fact that the former are incorporated into social collectives, while the latter do not have their own organization and can be used within any associations.

The main attention in the theory of M. Oriou was given to corporate institutions. As autonomous entities, they have common features, namely: a certain guiding idea, organization of power and a set of norms that regulate the internal order. The concepts of power, control, law in his doctrine were extended to all corporate institutions. Social formations were thus equated to each other and were depicted as phenomena of the same order.

Like other ideologists of neoliberalism, M. Oriou argued the need to recognize state intervention, which is political intervention in order to maintain order and does not pretend to turn the state into an economic community. The state, according to his concept, should become a public service of the liberal order. Its task is to direct and control the economic life of society, while at the same time remaining a national institution, i.e. neutral intermediary. No matter how different and even opposite the aspirations of social collectives, society turned out, according to the meaning of this concept, to be integrated into a single system of economic and political equilibrium.

The question of the relationship between the state and other social institutions M.Oriu solved according to the formula "first among equals". The time has come, he wrote, "to view the state not as a sovereignty, but as an institution of institutions."

The nature of the interaction between public associations of citizens and the state determines the effectiveness of the political system of society, through which political power is fully realized. The functional characteristic of the political system is the political regime, which is understood as “a set of political relations characteristic of a certain type of state, means and methods used by the authorities, established relations between state power and society, dominant forms of ideology, social and class relationships, and the state of political culture”. Depending on the degree of social freedom of the individual and the nature of the relationship between the state and civil society, as a rule, three types of regimes are distinguished: totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic. The American political scientist Juan Linz supplements the generally accepted classification with two more types of political regimes: post-totalitarian and sultanist.

Democracy is a form of organization of political life, reflecting the free and competitive choice by the population of one or another alternative of social development, the inclusion of all political institutions in the democratic process; providing conditions for political activity for all members of the political community, regardless of their political preferences. Due to the complicity in power of all sections of the population, democracy is open simultaneously to all options for social choice. Democracy does not require a mandatory change of ruling parties, but the possibility of such a change must exist. In a democracy, the problem of interaction between the state and society is solved in favor of society, taking into account the various requests of citizens.

The democratic goals of the state require appropriate ways of exercising power, namely, a democratic regime, since democratic results are possible only when using democratic methods and techniques for exercising power.

In democratic societies, the foundations of the socio-political system are characterized by constant instability. Having sharply weakened the significance of norms - the legitimacy of which depends either on transcendental criteria (God) or on the natural order (cultural tradition), - democratic societies of the modern era, even in conditions of insufficient development of democratic mechanisms in them, begin to feel the need to acquire their own sociopolitical identity. The processes of democratization lead to the denial of personalized definitions of life's means and ends. Actors in modern democratic systems are beginning to realize that the old criteria of ultimate certainty are crumbling. It becomes clear to them that nothing indisputable exists and that they are doomed to determine their own way of life again and again.

Democratic societies are characterized by uncertainty, which consists in the fact that socio-political goals and means, in their origin, in their essence, are not at all immutable. These goals and the technical means they choose are always controversial, give rise to conflicts and resistance, and therefore are subject to constant changes in time and space.

That is why, according to J.Kin, one can never fully accept the institutions that exist within entirely democratic systems, and the decisions made within these systems - as if all disputes about power, justice or law could be resolved once and for all with the help of some kind of universal metalanguage . Totally democratic systems can never reach a perfect state. They will be inherent in the consciousness of the need to make judgments on certain issues, because. they will retain the understanding that they cannot know and control everything. Fully democratic systems will have a certain modesty in the matter of knowing the world. They will not be flattered by claims of their ability to directly know the world as a whole, for in all spheres of life they will be involved in the risky and often ambiguous activity of self-creation.

The most important democratic institution is the rule of law, in which the actions of the authorities are limited by legal, political and moral frameworks. The rule of law in its activities focuses on the interests of man and society, creates equal conditions for every citizen, regardless of his position in society. Within the framework of the rule of law, a special place belongs to constitutionalism, which is a stabilizing factor that ensures the predictability of the policy being implemented. The initial beginning of constitutionality is the recognition of the priority of the principle of law, and not the factor of force. The law becomes the main instrument regulating various aspects of public life, defining the boundaries of power. The rule of law is a necessary condition for the normal functioning of each person and the whole society. The rule of law, the triumph of law in inseparable unity with the priority of man - the most important thing in understanding the nature of the rule of law.

The rule of law is based on the principle of separation of powers, which in modern interpretation has three accents: social, political and legal. From a social point of view, the separation of powers is determined by the division of socially necessary labor for the implementation of power functions, its specialization and professionalization. The political meaning of the separation of powers lies in the demonopolization of power, its dispersal in various areas and rational organization. The legal aspect of the separation of powers is realized through the constitutional consolidation of the most important provisions of the idea itself, the constitutional separation of the branches of power.

Democracy, like the rule of law, is not possible without human freedom, the implementation of which is served by political institutions, provided that they are not only legal, but also legitimate. Freedom flourishes only if society manages to create institutions that ensure its stability and continued existence. According to Ralf Dahrendorf, “Institutions are the framework within which we make our choices, such as economic prosperity. Institutions guarantee us the observance of our rights, hence social justice. If we want as many people as possible to have the best chances in life, we must achieve this through institutions, constantly honing and improving these structures.

It should be emphasized that blind copying of foreign experience in the organization and functioning of political institutions is unacceptable. The effectiveness of their activities in the context of established democratic norms and rules is not a guarantee of successful functioning in countries that are in the process of democratization. Of no small importance are national characteristics, practical experience and culture of each people, established customs and historical traditions of the political life of society and public administration. The main criterion for the effectiveness of the activities of political institutions is the quality of life of a particular person - the ultimate goal of all state power.

The rule of law, directing its activities to the realization of the interests of each person, his rights and freedoms, inevitably becomes social. A welfare state is a state that strives to provide every citizen with decent living conditions, social security, participation in the management of production, and ideally, approximately the same chances in life, opportunities for self-realization of the individual in society. The activity of such a state is aimed at the common good, the establishment of social justice in society. It smooths out property and other social inequalities, helps the weak and disadvantaged, takes care of providing everyone with a job or another source of subsistence, of maintaining peace in society, and creating a living environment favorable for a person.

The social state implements its goals and principles in the form of legal statehood, however, it goes much further along the path of humanization of society - it seeks to expand the rights of the individual and fill legal norms with fairer content. There are both unity and contradictions between the legal and social principles of the state structure. Their unity lies in the fact that both of them are designed to ensure the good of the individual: the first is the physical security of citizens in relation to power and to each other, individual freedom and fundamental, mainly civil and political rights of the individual by establishing clear boundaries for state intervention and guarantees against despotism. , the second - social security material conditions of freedom and worthy existence of each person. The contradictions between them are manifested in the fact that the rule of law, according to its plan, should not interfere in the distribution of social wealth, ensuring the material and cultural well-being of citizens, while the welfare state is directly involved in this, although it seeks not to undermine such foundations of the market economy as private property. , competition, enterprise, individual responsibility, etc., do not give rise to mass social dependency. Unlike socialism of the Soviet type, which tried to establish the well-being of all with the help of an egalitarian distribution of benefits, the welfare state focuses on providing everyone with decent living conditions, primarily as a result of increasing production efficiency, individual responsibility and activity. Today, democratic states seek to find a measure of the optimal combination of legal and social principles.

In modern democratic processes, the role of public opinion in the development of political institutions, which is carried out through the channels of their interaction and mutual influence, is of great importance. Domestic scientists V.V. Lapkin and V.I. Pantin draw attention to the “transparency” of these channels, i.e. on the ability to adequately convey the requests of public opinion to political institutions, without distorting them and not replacing them with narrow group requests. Here we are talking about how objectively the moods and expectations of the majority of people are conveyed by the media, how free elections are, whether political actions are followed by a quick reaction from the authorities, etc. Researchers note the close connection of this problem with another, with the problem of the legitimacy of the political institutions themselves. Legitimacy is a form of support, justification for the legitimacy of the use of power and the implementation of a specific form of government, either by the state as a whole or by its individual structures and institutions. The legitimacy of a particular political institution is largely determined by the understanding of the need for this institution by a significant part of the population and awareness of its activities, which is impossible without channels of interaction between this institution and the general population.

The problem of the dynamic interaction of public opinion and political institutions is actualized during periods of transformation and change in the system of political institutions, since it is during such periods that the issue of recognition by the majority of the population of the legitimacy of both new and old, changing political institutions is especially acute, which increases the role of public opinion regarding the necessity and expediency of these institutions. There are two trends in this problem: first, new political institutions do not immediately win the support and recognition of public opinion; secondly, without large-scale explanatory campaigns in the media, without the support of influential political forces, new political institutions are not able to make their way.

For post-authoritarian countries in the process of democratization, the problem of the effectiveness of political institutions is topical. At the same time, according to V.I. Pantin, a vicious circle arises: “new democratic political institutions cannot become sufficiently effective, since they do not enjoy the necessary support from the mass and elite groups of society, and these institutions cannot receive support and legitimacy, since in the eyes of the majority of the population are not effective, able to help in solving the problems that society faces. Therefore, the well-known domestic political scientist considers democracy combined with efficiency to be the main issue in the transition period. This thesis is especially important for Russia and some other post-communist and post-authoritarian countries, where there is a widespread opinion about the fundamental inefficiency of democratic institutions that do not correspond to the national traditions of the state. An analysis of the effective formation of democratic regimes suggests that democratic political institutions become really effective only as a result of a long process of development and adaptation to the conditions and traditions of a given society, as evidenced by the experience of democratic construction in Western countries. Thus, a high degree of democracy in Western states should be spoken of only from the second half of the 20th century. Consequently, modern difficulties in the formation of democratic political institutions, both in Russia and in a number of other countries, are explained not by the problem of the compatibility of democracy and its institutions with national traditions and norms, but by the fact that they can become effective only by gradually adapting to political realities. “To come to democracy,” says the American political scientist Danquart Rastow, “it requires not copying the constitutional laws or parliamentary practice of some already existing democracy, but the ability to honestly look at one’s specific conflicts and the ability to invent or borrow effective mechanisms for resolving them.”

The establishment and development of new political institutions goes through three main phases. The first phase is the formation and establishment of this institution, the second phase is its legitimization, rooting in society and public consciousness, adaptation to traditions and norms, and the third is the growth of its effectiveness. The second phase is usually the longest and may be accompanied by rollbacks to authoritarianism, followed by new attempts to reassert democratic institutions. As the experience of democratic construction shows, the key problem, on the solution of which the effectiveness of political institutions depends, is to give these institutions a social orientation in the interests of the general population. In those countries where it was possible to combine democratic institutions with a strong social policy these institutions acquired the necessary legitimacy and stability.

The most important democratic institution, without which democracy is unthinkable, is the parliament. The sovereignty of the people is embodied in state sovereignty precisely through a representative body of power that expresses the collective will of the voters. The characteristic features of the parliament are electivity and collegiality in decision-making. It is assumed that deputies elected to the legislative body are representatives of the people and are guided, first of all, by public and state interests.

Among the main functions of the Parliament are the following:

Legislative, the essence of which lies in the fact that only the parliament passes laws that are universal and prevail over all other legal acts;
- control over the government, which can be expressed in various forms - the approval of members of the government, hearing reports on the work of the government, the adoption of a vote of no confidence in the government, etc.

The powers and functions of the parliament differ depending on the national characteristics of the state, the form of government and the territorial structure. In parliamentary republics, the government is formed by the political party or coalition of parties that won the parliamentary elections and essentially (formally, this is done by the head of state) approves the chairman of the government. In presidential republics, the president forms the government and leads it. In this case, the constitution enshrines a system of checks and balances that prevent the usurpation of power by any power. In mixed republics, the president forms the government, taking into account the alignment of political forces following the results of parliamentary elections.

Parliaments are either unicameral or bicameral. In federal states, the upper chamber realizes the interests of the subjects of the federation, in unitary states the second chamber is considered as a tribute to traditions and expresses the interests of administrative-territorial entities. The main meaning of parliamentary activity lies in the maximum representation of not only the interests of individual citizens, but also the interests of society as a whole (the interests of the subjects of the federation, territories, social groups).

The principle of forming the upper house of parliament is also different: it can be elected or formed in a different way. In most countries where there is a bicameral parliament, the significance of the lower house is more significant than the upper one. In particular, the following trend can be traced: strong chambers with real power are elected by direct universal suffrage, therefore, the “closer” the chamber is to the population, the wider and fuller its competence, and vice versa, the “farther” the chamber is from voters, the less significant it is in practical matters.

The bicameral parliament performs another important task: it demonopolizes the legislative power and minimizes the danger of parliamentary diktat. If the power of parliament is not limited, it can become a destructive force, since decision-making based on the opinion of the majority is not a guarantee of the constructiveness and democracy of the decision being made. The English philosopher Herbert Spencer warned against the “sins of legislators”: “... that legislator who does not know or knows poorly the mass of facts that he is obliged to consider before his opinion about the proposed law could receive any value, and which, nevertheless, however, promotes the adoption of this law, does not deserve forgiveness if this law increases poverty and mortality, just as the apothecary's student should be punished if the medicine prescribed by him out of ignorance causes the death of the patient.

In the Russian Federation, legislative power is exercised by the Federal Assembly. Thus, Article 94 of the Russian Constitution states: "The Federal Assembly - the Parliament of the Russian Federation - is the representative and legislative body of the Russian Federation." This definition characterizes the essence, legal nature and functions of this public authority.

From the definition of the Federal Assembly as a parliament, it follows that this body should act as a collective spokesman for the interests and will of the Russian people, which is the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the country. Based on the principle of separation of powers, the Russian parliament represents the legislative branch of state power in Russia.

The Federal Assembly consists of two chambers - the Federation Council and the State Duma. The Federation Council includes two representatives from each constituent entity of Russia: one each from the representative and executive bodies of state power. The State Duma consists of 450 deputies elected on the basis of a proportional electoral system. Each of the chambers has its own powers, which basically correspond to the prerogatives of foreign parliaments.

In particular, the jurisdiction of the Federation Council includes:

Approval of changes in the borders between the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
- approval of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation on the introduction of martial law and a state of emergency;
- resolving the issue of the possibility of using the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation;
- appointment of elections of the President of the Russian Federation;
- removal of the President from office;
- appointment to the position of judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, Supreme Court the Russian Federation, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation;
- appointment and dismissal of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.

Among the powers of the State Duma, enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, we can distinguish:

Giving consent to the President of the Russian Federation for the appointment of the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation;
- resolving the issue of confidence in the Government of the Russian Federation;
- appointment and dismissal of the Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation;
- declaration of amnesty;
- bringing charges against the President of the Russian Federation to remove him from office.

From a political point of view, it is very important to give consent to the President of the Russian Federation for the appointment of the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, which is associated with certain conditions. In particular, the decision by the State Duma must be made no later than one week from the day the President made a proposal on the candidacy of the Prime Minister. In addition, it is established that after the three-fold rejection of the submitted candidates for the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, the President appoints the Chairman of the Government, dissolves the State Duma and calls new elections.

The State Duma may also be dissolved by the President in the event of repeated expressions of no confidence in the Government within three months and in the event of a negative answer to the question of confidence in the Government.

Obviously, some functions and powers related to the relationship of the Federal Assembly with the President and the Government require clarification. Thus, the dissolution of the parliament can be provoked by a number of circumstances: a knowingly unsuitable candidate for the post of Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation may be nominated, and the Constitution does not stipulate that each time the President should propose a new candidate for the Chairman of the Government. In connection with such uncertainties, the parliament is turning into a dependent body, over which hangs the threat of its early dissolution. This affects the behavior and legal consciousness of deputies, pushing them to populist activities. In a situation of political instability, this parliamentary model, even with the enhanced powers of the President, can be accompanied by frequent state crises, which suggests an increase in authoritarian tendencies in public administration.

The institution of executive power in the context of the constitutional principle of separation of powers is characterized by the largest volume of subjects of jurisdiction. This is the most efficient and effective power structure, its characteristic feature is the presence of power elements - the army, police, security services, etc., whose activities are determined by law. Executive power is exercised by the government, which is a collegial body headed by the president, prime minister, chairman, chancellor, depending on the form of government. The real role of the government is determined by the relationship with other branches of power, with the head of state, with political parties represented in parliament.

People employed in the structure of the government, having a certain set of powers, act not as private individuals, but as official representatives of power, officials authorized on behalf of the state. These powers are assigned to the position, and not to a specific person. In a democratic state, these rights are balanced by the corresponding range of duties, therefore, the responsibility for the effective implementation of the opportunities inherent in the powers of senior officials - the president, prime minister, ministers, etc.

As the main functions of the government, it is necessary to single out the execution of laws adopted by parliament, and the implementation of the administrative function in the form of management using such means as issuing by-laws and organizing organizational work. The executive power can be monocratic, when it is concentrated in one person, who is both the head of state and the head of government, and dualistic, when, regardless of the head of state (monarch, president), who is not responsible to the legislature, the government is headed by prime minister and accountable to parliament.

For the democratic development of society, it is fundamentally important to establish control over the activities of the government, as a state institution capable of usurping power to a greater extent. To do this, there are various mechanisms depending on the form of government and national characteristics of the country: the adoption of the budget by the parliament and control over the spending of finances by the representative body of power, the announcement of a vote of no confidence by the parliament, public control over the activities of law enforcement agencies, and others.

However, in order to conduct an effective state policy, the coordinated activity of the parliament and government is necessary. To this end, the legislature corrects and supports all the efforts of the executive branch to implement the tasks facing society, through the adopted laws, ensures the legitimization of the domestic and foreign policy pursued by the government.

Executive power in the Russian Federation is exercised by the Government of the Russian Federation, which consists of the Chairman of the Government, Deputy Chairmen of the Government of the Russian Federation, federal ministers, heads of federal services and agencies.

The Government of the Russian Federation is a collegial executive body of the state and subjects of the Federation, which exercises state power throughout the Russian territory.

Among the powers of the Government of the Russian Federation are the following:

Development and submission to the State Duma of the federal budget and ensuring its execution; submission to the State Duma of a report on the execution of the federal budget;
- ensuring the implementation of a unified financial, credit and monetary policy in the Russian Federation;
- ensuring the implementation in the Russian Federation of a unified state policy in the field of culture, science, education, healthcare, social security, and ecology;
- management of federal property;
- implementation of measures to ensure the country's defense, state security, the implementation of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation;
- implementation of measures to ensure the rule of law, the rights and freedoms of citizens to protect property and public order, the fight against crime;
- exercising other powers assigned by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws.

In Russia, the federal government bears political responsibility to the Federal Assembly, primarily in terms of developing and executing the federal budget. In Russia, lack of confidence in the Prime Minister, in essence, entails significant reshuffles in the composition of the Government. Instead of resigning, members of the Government may apply to the President to use his constitutional right to dissolve the State Duma and call new parliamentary elections.

In order to increase efficiency, the activities of the Russian government apparatus were reorganized. Changed the structure of the government, which became a three-level. Ministries are called upon to develop state policy in specific areas; Federal services - to implement the policies of the ministries and monitor the results; Federal agencies are called upon to provide public services. It is assumed that such a structure will increase the personal responsibility of the heads of various departments for the final result and lead to the improvement of the activities of the executive authority, which will positively affect the conduct of state policy.

The Russian thinker R.I. Sementkovsky wrote: “... if it is true that every nation has the government it deserves, then it is no less true that every social class enjoys the influence in the state that it deserves, or, summarizing this idea, we say that the political forms of a given country are the less objectionable, the more fully the citizens are able to satisfy the immediate requirements of life, the more fully they fulfill their public duty. In any case, only this condition gives the political form a certain content, and at the same time stability.

The third branch of state power is the judiciary, which is an institution whose main activity is the strict observance of laws, their protection from encroachment by both individuals and official structures of the state and society. It is in the judiciary that the democratic essence of the state is most clearly embodied.

The judiciary ensures strict observance of the country's Basic Law - the constitution, the improvement of current legislation, the protection of the legitimate interests of the individual and society, the competence of government institutions. In a democratic state, the judiciary is independent, which ensures impartial, fair justice. The criterion of independence is the possibility for every citizen to win a case in court against any political institution, including the court itself.

Cases of violations of the law are considered only by the court, whose decisions take the status of law and are subject to strict implementation. An important moral aspect of the functioning of the judiciary is to ensure the triumph of justice through the administration of justice, i.e. affirmation of the priority of law, law, and, consequently, truth.

The democratic nature of the third branch of power is realized through public control, a characteristic feature of which is open judiciary. The objectively critical view of the public is an effective form of democratic control. The court is obliged to proceed not from the principle of expediency, but from the strict priority of the law. A democratic court is characterized by the following rules generally accepted in the practice of legal proceedings: the presumption of innocence, the irreversibility of the law, doubts in favor of the accused, a voluntary confession of guilt needs evidence, one witness is not a witness, one cannot be a judge in one's own house. An important prerequisite for the triumph of legality is the right of citizens to judicial protection. Every citizen has the right to count on the assistance of the court in protecting his rights, honor and dignity. Illegal actions of the authorities can be challenged in court.

The system of law enforcement institutions includes prosecutorial supervision, investigative bodies, the bar, and other structures that ensure law and order. But the central element of this system still remains the court.

In the Russian Federation, judicial power is exercised through constitutional, civil, administrative and criminal proceedings. Courts are independent and subject only to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal law. Judges are irremovable and inviolable. Financing of courts is made only from the federal budget.

Judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation are appointed by the Federation Council on the proposal of the President of the Russian Federation. Judges of other federal courts are appointed by the President of the Russian Federation in the manner prescribed by federal law.

The judiciary as a whole is one and indivisible, but conditionally justice can be divided into constitutional, general and arbitration. In accordance with this, there are also three highest judicial bodies of the Russian Federation: the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation decides cases on the compliance with the Constitution of federal laws and other normative acts, normative acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, international treaties, treaties between state authorities of Russia, and also gives interpretation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is the highest judicial body in civil, criminal, administrative and other cases, within the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction; supervises their activities; gives clarifications on issues of judicial practice.

The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation is the highest judicial body for resolving economic disputes and other cases considered by arbitration courts, exercises judicial supervision over their activities.

Another important institution of state power is the institution of the presidency, which exists in various forms and is a democratic attribute of the political system. The United States of America became the first presidential republic in 1787. Subsequently, this institution was in demand in many countries of Europe, America, Asia and Africa. However, the presidential power is not a guarantor of democracy, since, with imperfect balances, it can cause a turn towards authoritarian rule.

As the most important requirements for modern political systems, one should single out a combination of democratic and effective government, the implementation of which can be ensured by the institution of the presidency, which determines its popularity. As priorities for this institution, one should single out such features of presidential power as efficiency, effectiveness, balance in the development and implementation of domestic and foreign policy, and personal responsibility for decision-making.

The position of the president is not the same in different countries. So in parliamentary republics, he acts as the head of state with representative functions that do not affect the real course of political events. In the presidential and semi-presidential republics, the president acts as a key figure in the real state power, which has enormous opportunities for the effective implementation of its political course. We can distinguish the following trend that affects the importance of the president in the structure of state power: the more representative the elections, the more democratic the path of a presidential candidate, the more independent and stronger he is in resolving issues of real politics.

The President, as a leading figure in the system of state power, is not unambiguously assessed, which is mainly due to the successes and political guidelines of states in domestic and foreign policy. The presidency should neither be idealized nor belittled. The determining factor in the assessment is the material well-being of citizens and the social stability of public life in general.

The institution of presidential power in Russia has a relatively short history. The post of the popularly elected President of the RSFSR was established in accordance with the results of an all-Russian referendum. The first President of the RSFSR was elected through direct popular elections. The Constitution of the Russian Federation has made significant changes regarding both the status of the President and the procedure for his election, competence, and the procedure for dismissal from office. The Constitution proceeds from the leading position of the President in the system of state authorities. The president, as the head of state in Russia, is not included in the system of separation of powers, but rises above it, exercising coordinating functions.

The President is the guarantor of the Constitution of Russia, the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. He represents Russia within the country and in the international arena, determines the main directions of the state's domestic and foreign policy. He is elected for four years by the citizens of Russia on the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot. A citizen of Russia, at least 35 years old, who has been permanently residing in the country for at least 10 years, can be elected president. The same person cannot be President of Russia for more than two consecutive terms.

The President of Russia, in accordance with the Constitution, calls elections to the State Duma, dissolves the State Duma, calls a referendum, submits bills to the State Duma, signs and promulgates federal laws, appoints the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation with the consent of the State Duma, and has the right to preside at meetings of the Government. He also has the right to decide on the resignation of the Government.

The President submits to the State Duma candidates for the positions (appointment and dismissal): Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation; Chairman of the Accounts Chamber and half of its auditors; Commissioner for Human Rights.

The President considers the decision of the State Duma on no confidence in the Government; coordinate with the Federation Council the appointment and dismissal of: the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation; judges of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Arbitration Court.

The President of Russia, exercising leadership of Russia's foreign policy, signs international treaties and letters. He is the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Russia, introduces martial law on the territory of the country, and under certain circumstances, introduces a state of emergency, resolves issues of Russian citizenship and pardons.

The President of Russia has immunity. He may be removed from office by the Federation Council at the initiative of the State Duma. However, the withdrawal procedure is extremely complicated.

A significant difference in the status of the President of the Russian Federation lies in his dominant position in relations with other branches of power. Democracy cannot become consolidated if political power is ineffective, as unfulfilled hopes for a rapid improvement in the quality of life can give rise to many ambiguities about the legitimacy of the chosen path. Therefore, the interaction of all branches of government should meet the main goal - the solution of social and economic problems of society, the creation of conditions for the realization of the material and spiritual needs of a person. This is possible only if an effective policy of the authorities is carried out, which harmoniously combines the powers and responsibilities to society and the citizen.

Such a policy is facilitated by a system of "checks and balances" established by the constitution, laws and representing a set of legal restrictions on specific state power - legislative, executive, judicial.

Thus, in relation to the legislature, a rather strict legal procedure of the legislative process is used, which regulates its main stages, the procedure for implementation: legislative initiative, discussion of the bill, adoption of the law, its publication. In the system of balances, an important role is played by the president, who has the right to apply a suspensive veto in case of hasty decisions of the legislator, to call early elections if necessary. The activities of the Constitutional Court can also be considered as law-retaining, because it has the right to block all anti-constitutional acts. The legislator in his actions is limited by the time frame, the very principles of law, the constitution, other legal and democratic norms and institutions.

In relation to the executive power, the restrictions of departmental rule-making and delegated legislation are used. This also includes certain terms of presidential power established by law, a vote of no confidence in the government, impeachment, and a ban on senior officials of executive bodies from being elected to legislative structures and engaging in commercial activities.

The judiciary has its own limiting means established in the constitution, procedural legislation, expressed in its guarantees, principles: the presumption of innocence, the right to defense, equality before the law and the court, publicity and competitiveness of the process, removal of a judge, etc.

The institutions of political participation include political parties, socio-political movements, interest groups. The direct or direct form of participation of citizens in resolving power issues is elections to representative structures of the state, to local governments, participation in referendums in resolving issues of national, regional and local significance.

The development, adoption and implementation of political and administrative decisions, the selection of political and state leaders, the formation of a political elite should be singled out as the main goals of political participation. Achieving these goals is possible only if citizens realize the need to defend their interests, influence political power, and exercise control over its activities. Important factors of democratic participation are the political conditions conducive to the realization of rights and freedoms; legal and material and economic foundations that form a person's desire for a decent life; accessibility of mass media providing political communication of society and authorities.

Such prerequisites are most possessed by a rule of law state, which is characterized by the presence of a civil society and in which a person acquires appropriate opportunities for political participation.

Functions of political institutions

The essence of the political system is manifested in its functions. Functions are certain types of activities that satisfy the needs of the system for self-preservation and directed organization. The functions of the political system can be analyzed at the macro, media, micro levels.

At the macro level, the most general requirements are identified that govern the functioning of the political system as a whole.

At the media level, the most characteristic areas of ensuring the legitimacy, stability and dynamism of the political system are distinguished.

At the micro level, the characteristic elements of political technology or political process are analyzed.

At the macro level, I highlight the following functions:

1. Program - that is, the definition of common collective goals and objectives for the development of society. The goals can be global in nature and openly declared (Program for building communism), or they can only be present in the statements of candidates in the elections.
2. Integration - ensuring links, coordination between all elements of the political system in achieving some goals.
3. Adaptation is a function of adaptation to the environment, its capabilities and partial subordination of the environment to one's interests. That is, the support of the general population is being ensured. The weakness of adaptation is a sign of the closed system, the loss of legitimacy.
4. The function of self-preservation is reduced to the suppression and prevention of violent changes in government, system, and policy. It is achieved by ensuring the stable loyalty of citizens towards the authorities, their constant wide support existing system.

Macro functions are instantiated in middle-level functions (media functions):

1. The function of socialization is aimed at including new young generations in political life.
2. The function of recruiting is reduced to the constant reproduction of the masses that actively support the system. The presence in the country of the required number of officials, policemen, politicians, the activity of voters - all this is the result of recruitment.
3. Regulatory function - the policy of regulating prices, taxes, conflicts and more - all these are forms of the regulatory function.
4. The mobilization function is the collection of financial, material, human resources, providing support for the ongoing policy.
5. The distributive (distributive) function is the distribution of resources, goods, services and statuses based on strategic or tactical considerations.
6. The response function is manifested in the ability to respond to impulses coming from individual groups, to respond to diverse requirements, to suppress contradictions.

The microfunctions of the political system include: identifying and integrating interests, translating them into decisions or answering the question “what to do?”, making decisions, providing support.

All functions are interconnected and seem to complement each other. But in various political systems, it is possible to absolutize some functions to the detriment of others, and hence the deformation of the entire political system.

Modern political institutions

The main institutions of the political system of modern Russian society are: the institution of the presidency; the institute of parliamentarism, represented in Russia by the Federal Assembly; the institution of executive power represented by the government; institutions of the judiciary; institute of citizenship; institution of universal suffrage; institute of political parties and public organizations; institution of local government. Political institutions, in turn, include relevant organizations, institutions that solve specific problems within the framework of institutional relations.

Political institutions are also divided into institutions of power and institutions of participation. The former include institutions exercising state power at various hierarchical levels, while the latter include institutions of participation, structures of civil society. The totality of political institutions make up the political system of society, which is a certain integrity, organic interaction of political subjects, other elements of political reality.

Another important political institution is civil society, within which the activities of non-state political institutions are carried out.

Summing up, I would like to start with the fact that the search for a formalized model of political power capable of reproducing and maintaining an ideal society originates in ancient philosophy. Plato, Aristotle and other ancient Greek philosophers tried to answer the question of what kind of political institutions are able to provide the best type of society and personality. Comparative analysis legislation (constitutions), typology of political regimes, identification of various forms of government, possible combinations of political institutions, terminological identification of political phenomena and facts - such is the range of studies of political philosophy of that period. However, it should be recognized that institutional analysis (using modern terminology) was quite limited and descriptive by all authors and did not pretend to build a strict normative-conceptual apparatus. Nevertheless, it should be recognized that the beginning of institutional research was laid in the era of antiquity.

The transformation of the Russian political system can be divided into three main periods related to the priorities in the development of the country:

1. The transition from the authoritarian Soviet regime of perestroika to a free society with a market economy and democratic methods of power formation.
2. Transition from oligarchic to state capitalism, strengthening of statehood.
3. The formation of political institutions designed to ensure Russia's claims to the status of a "great power" and the implementation of the idea of sovereign democracy.

Those states that, following historical ambitions, seek to act independently or have a dissenting opinion on certain issues, are still forced to adjust their behavior, based both on their priorities and consolidated international influence.

The vertical of power pushes back democracy, but as a result of rising living Russian citizens that form civil society, there will be an increasing need to influence political processes, which, in the end, can become a guarantee of the formation of democratic political institutions.

And modern Russia strives for this.

Set of political institutions

Currently, its most generally accepted definition is the following: a political system is a set of political institutions, norms, values, ideas and relations that ensure the implementation of political power in society. In modern science, it is interpreted in a narrow and broad sense. In a narrow sense, this is the name of any artificially created entity, whether it be material as a state, a party, a trade union, or ideal as a right, political culture, whether it is real, for example, as a means of mass communication or spiritual, say, political ideas and values. All these formations are considered as integral structures that are in complex interaction with environment and play certain roles in it. They are political to the extent that they are included in power relations and power activities.

In a broad sense, the political system is seen as a real mechanism for the organization and functioning of power in society. The main element of this mechanism, its social basis, is made up of living, acting people, the social communities and groups of interests they form, and the political institutions they create. It is these political subjects that form the conditions and determine the nature of the political system. Its existence, development and functioning are connected with their existence and activity.

The subjects of politics are not a mechanical sum of homogeneous and one-order values. They have different political power and are in a state of permanent conflict, the subject of which is the power of the state and power in the state, the ability to dispose of it or be independent of it. In political science, there are different views on the correlation and role of political subjects in the system of political-power relations. So, L.S. Sanisteban believes that in any political system there is an unequal distribution of power between the elite (relatively organized minorities exercising political power in society as a whole), the counter-elite (all those who oppose the elite and actively fight for their inclusion in her or for the creation of a new elite), the bureaucracy (bureaucratic administration, professionally and constantly engaged in the conduct of state policy), and the masses (the vast majority of the population, alienated from power in everyday life). From this it follows that the political system is the process and result of the interaction of parties, associations, leaders, elites and the masses, which perform different roles in the system of political relations. According to the Marxist-Leninist theory, the main subjects of politics are the masses - classes - parties - leaders, and the only driving force of political change is the class struggle. Today, however, class confrontation (“class antagonism,” in Marxist language) is a real and effective factor in politics by no means in every society. Ethnic, religious, territorial and other differences can be the basis for the political division of society and political struggle.

The political stratification of society becomes the cause of multidirectional aspirations and wills of political subjects, as a result of the interaction of which a political system is formed. D. Easton believed that the political system is designed to prevent conflicts arising from the authoritarian distribution of values inherent in politics. This effect is achieved by the fact that, unlike politics, the decisions of which are always unambiguous, the political system is pluralistic. Not only group but also individual subjects of politics have different values, interests, positions. Their coordination in one form or another is carried out by the political system, the components of which are: political relations, political organization, legal and political norms, political consciousness.

Political relations are the interconnection and interaction of subjects of political life regarding the formation, organization and functioning of state power. Political relations are concentrated around questions of the composition and structure of power bodies, the mechanisms of their formation, the goals of power, methods of ruling, etc. At the same time, citizens, by their position and actions, send impulses-demands to power and impulses-support for it into the system. The subjects of power, in turn, react to them in one way or another, suppressing or satisfying the demands of citizens with their decisions, stimulating mass support for their course with real deeds or demagogic promises. Political relations can be of a different nature: social partnership, interethnic harmony, civil peace, or, conversely, sharp rivalry, hostility and confrontation, the extreme manifestations of which are rebellion, uprising, Civil War.

Political actors, interacting about power, in an effort to increase the effectiveness of their own efforts, take measures to institutionalize their activities. The result of institutionalization is the formation of a political organization, which is a combination of various institutions, bodies, associations, corporations and other institutions specially created to articulate, protect and implement the political interests of certain communities and groups. The political organization consists of the state, political parties, mass public associations and movements, pressure groups, others supporting the dominant political force of civil society structures, the media, the church. At the same time, it distinguishes: institutions created for purely political purposes; organizations that are called upon to protect the economic, professional, environmental, cultural and other interests of various social groups, based on an active dialogue with state authorities; associations in whose activities interest in politics is manifested only sporadically.

The issue of inclusion in the political organization of formations created in circumvention or in violation of existing legal norms and pursuing narrowly selfish, and sometimes openly antisocial goals, is debatable. It is generally accepted that the political system is a constituted (provided by the Constitution and laws of the country) formation, all elements of which ensure the implementation of legal political power. At the same time, there is an opinion that the actual political system of society should also include those social institutions and entities that are focused on combating the existing government, for example, organized crime, international terrorism, drug trafficking. However, such an opinion is controversial, since, in fact, their activities are related to anti-systemic factors, and in certain cases its results (corruption of power, criminalization of politics, etc.) destabilize the functioning of the political system.

A specific institution of political organization is armed formations. This is the most common name for groups and units equipped with technical means of physical violence (weapons), under the command of a person responsible to the institutions or communities that created them and subject to an internal disciplinary system. Armed formations may belong to state, national, religious or other socio-political structures. They are divided into two most general types - legal and illegal. Lawful armed formations are created by the state or non-state socio-political formations in accordance with the current national legislation and requirements international law. These include the regular army created by the state, others, including irregular troops, as well as paramilitary formations (special rescue teams, fire departments, police and police, military construction teams, etc.). In addition, sometimes non-state structures are created, but operating under the auspices of the state and in its interests (Cossacks in pre-revolutionary Russia, the partisan movement during the Great Patriotic War, detachments of the people's militia in modern Dagestan, etc.).

Illegal armed formations refer to formations that are illegal in nature and can conduct military operations against official political power and state structures. As a rule, they are created by a class, a nation, a people that has risen to fight in defense of its interests. Illegal armed formations also include formations created by extremist movements and terrorist forces, mafia, criminal groups. These formations sometimes reach a significant number, have modern weapons, large materiel and international connections.

Another component of the political system of society are legal and political norms. They are a set of various kinds of institutions that determine the order and rules for the functioning of the political system, the life of people in the political sphere. We are talking about written and unwritten demands, a kind of “rules of the political game”, which determine the permitted and permissible forms, methods of political activity and struggle. Of course, these rules are not absolute. History knows many facts when both the authorities (the state) and the opposition use illegitimate and even illegal means of fighting their opponents. Legal and political norms include: norms of national legislation and international law, statutory norms of socio-political associations, national morality, political traditions and ethics, religious canons and other rules and regulations governing political relations. In the system of state law, a special place is occupied by military law - a set of legal norms and rules established by the state that are generally binding on state institutions, public organizations, officials and citizens, regulating relations in the field of ensuring military security, defense and military construction, as well as the life of the armed forces.

An integral part of the political system of society is political consciousness. This is a form of ideal reflection of the processes and phenomena of the surrounding world through the prism of real political and power relations in society, a way of understanding and explaining them in people's thinking. As such, it covers a set of ideas and feelings, views, assessments and attitudes, ideas and concepts that express the attitude of people to the implemented and desired policies, as well as determining the ability and readiness of a person to participate in managing the affairs of society and the state, his political behavior.

Part of the public consciousness is military ideology. It is a system of views and ideas that expresses the attitude of political subjects to war and other forms of armed violence, as well as to the army as the main instrument for implementing military policy. This is a reflection and comprehension by people of military-political life and a value attitude towards it. They are formed in the form of ordinary views and ideas, formed on the basis of everyday human experience, and scientifically based ideas and principles, which are the product of the theoretical activity of scientists, politicians, and publicists.

Political consciousness includes political ideals and values, political ideas and beliefs, theoretical and empirical knowledge - political ideology and political psychology, including the collective unconscious. These components of political consciousness are formed and manifested at the individual, group and mass levels. As a result, in the spiritual life of any society there is always a pluralism of opinions and positions. This is due to the fact that political facts are not neutral, they are difficult to calm and objective presentation. Moreover, as K. Schmitt wrote, “all political concepts, ideas and words have a polemical meaning; they presuppose a specific opposition, are tied to a specific situation, the last consequence of which is the division of people into friend-foe groups. In military ideology, this polemic is manifested in the coexistence and struggle of pacifist and militaristic attitudes.

In the scientific literature there is another approach to revealing the structure of the political system of society.

In accordance with it, it is represented by the following subsystems:

- a communicative subsystem, which is a set of relations and forms of interactions that develop between nations, classes, social groups and individuals, political institutions and organizations regarding their participation in state power;
- institutional subsystem, including political institutions and institutions;
- ideological subsystem, covering the theoretical (political ideology) and empirical (political psychology) levels of political consciousness;
- a normative (regulatory) subsystem that combines legislative acts, political rules and moral principles that determine and regulate the political life of society;
- a cultural subsystem that acts as an integrating factor, capable of stabilizing the political system as a whole with the help of cultural values, traditions and customs. As G. Almond believed, any political system has a certain pattern of orientations (cognitive, affective and evaluative) of the subject to political action, which he calls political culture;
- a functional subsystem, as a set of roles and functions of political subjects, forms and directions, methods and means of their political activity.

In addition, sometimes value, information and other subsystems are singled out, which, strictly speaking, are a detail of the already named subsystems.

The political system, along with the economic, social, spiritual and ideological, informational, etc., is one of the systems of society. It, in comparison with other systems, occupies a leading position in society, which is determined by its properties and functions.

Formation of political institutions

External influences on the formation and functioning of political institutions. The main source of external influence in Suriname was the Dutch metropolis. At the time of granting independence under the "accelerated" scheme, copying the Western political model seemed the only way to provide the emerging statehood with an effective functioning mechanism, since the local elite did not have a holistic concept of the new statehood.

Subsequently, the copied model underwent a significant transformation, colliding with the realities of a society formed by ethnic groups - carriers of traditional political cultures. Many concepts and phenomena have acquired a content that is fundamentally different from the Dutch "sample" (this situation is most clearly visible in the party system).

The legacy of the Dutch rule is even the territorial and economic structure of the country, which largely influences the course of socio-political processes and conflicts in the country. In particular, the development of coastal areas, where the majority of the population of Suriname still lives today, was carried out using technologies developed during the development of the coastal areas of the Netherlands. conflicts and splits. The existing disproportions in territorial development are capable of giving rise to noticeable conflict situations, as has already happened in the past.

Since the majority of Suriname's population is concentrated in a limited space, residents of vast areas suffer from underdeveloped infrastructure and other consequences of a generally weak state presence in places of permanent residence. The leadership's inattention to their problems creates the conditions for an equally disdainful or even hostile attitude towards state institutions on the part of this category of citizens.

Despite the peace treaty concluded by the government with the "forest negroes" living on the semi-periphery between the relatively developed coast and the undeveloped hinterland, and the Indians inhabiting the least developed regions of the country, these ethnic groups retain a very high conflict potential, which can manifest itself in the event of increased activities of foreign companies in the rainforest zone.

The unwillingness of the authorities and foreign investors to compensate for the damage caused to the ecosystem of Suriname in the form of paying deductions from profits to local residents can give rise to public discontent, including provoking violent actions against company personnel and government officials. At the same time, populist demands for autonomy and the involvement of various criminal structures in potential conflicts cannot be ruled out.

Institutes of political management

Management - a systematic, purposeful impact of the subject of management activity on the managed object in order to streamline, preserve and develop it. But the process of control is not limited to the “impact” of the subject on the object, but also implies feedback or, in other words, the “response” of the controlled system to the impact of the controlling subject. Thus, there is an interaction between the subject and the object of control.

Society (political system), like any system, is subject to various regulators, including spontaneous ones. Management is the highest form of conscious regulation of the processes of functioning and development of the system.

The management structure consists of the following main elements:

The subject of management is an individual, group, organization, social (political) institution, which are the bearers of managerial influence on the object.

The object of management is a social (political) system (society, social community, organization, individual, etc.), to which all types of managerial influence are directed.

Management resources are everything that can "force" a managed object to carry out orders (instructions, orders) of the subject. It can be: material reward, physical coercion, charisma and authority of the subject of management, moral and legal norms, traditions, ideas, and more.

The purpose of management is to maintain the stable functioning of the managed object, its further development or transfer of the object to a new qualitative state (reform).

Politics is only one of the types of management of social relations in society. In addition to political, there are other types of governance: administrative, legal, economic, socio-cultural, etc. Political governance, due to the fact that it has a monopoly on political power in society, dominates all other types of governance. Therefore, where all other types of management in solving emerging social problems and conflicts are ineffective, there is a need to use political methods based on the power of power. It is the attribute of power and the possibility of its application that distinguishes political management from all its other types.

Political management is one of the forms of interaction between subjects in connection with the development, adoption and implementation of political decisions. It is based on such key concepts as management, politics, state, power.

Each of them gives political management its own specifics and limits of competence:

1) being one of the varieties of management, political management in solving functional problems "uses" many principles and methods of the general theory of management;
2) from the position of the state, political administration is one of the types of public administration along with such types as administrative, economic, social and others;
3) from the point of view of politics, political management is not only the prerogative of the state, but falls within the competence of the entire political system. In this sense, political administration in a democratic political system is much broader than state administration;
4) the concept of power in political management involves relations of domination and subordination that arise between the subject and object of management.

There are several approaches to the definition of the concept and essence of political management.

The first approach proceeds from the fact that political control is based on antagonistic class contradictions, and the essence of control itself lies in the organized violence of the ruling class against the enslaved classes. This approach is called class or Marxist.

The second approach assumes only subject-object relations in the system of political management, when the main subject of politics (the ruling party, certain state bodies) develops and makes political decisions, and the executive and administrative structures execute decisions made.

With this approach, management has a political character only for the institutions of political power that dominate in society and the state, and executive and administrative activity is only a means of realizing political will.

The third approach is based on the fact that in totalitarian and authoritarian political systems there is an absorption of political relations by administrative ones and the transformation of political control into an administrative one, which implies the state's monopoly on power and control. In the history of Russia, administrative management often took the form of uncontested political coercion and direct physical violence.

The fourth approach assumes that for political management the most characteristic are subject-subject relations, while subject-object relations are not excluded. This is a special area of interaction between the subjects of politics and management regarding the development, adoption and implementation of political decisions, when none of the positions is unconditionally dominant, when there is a constant need for dialogue and compromise, when management decisions are aimed at resolving socially significant problems.

Each of the above approaches to the definition of the concept and essence of political management has theoretical justifications and practical examples in the history of various countries. But to the greatest extent modern ideas about political management corresponds to the fourth approach, which involves both subject-subject and subject-object political relations. For example, during the election of representatives to legislative and executive bodies of power, social groups (voters) function as subjects of political management. Their political will (political choice) largely determines the staffing of elected authorities and their policy.

After the election, elective institutions function as subjects of political management, and the objects of their management are, in particular, large and small social groups of society. But this does not exclude the participation of civil society and its individual structures in the development and adoption of political decisions, both directly (elections, referendum, rallies, demonstrations, public opinion, and others), and indirectly, through their representatives in state bodies and civil society institutions.

This approach to political governance is most characteristic of democratic countries that have a rule of law state and a developed civil society. In addition, political governance presupposes the existence of an effective regulatory and legal system (“rules of the game”), which does not allow any subject to take a dominant position and impose its will on others. After all, political management must take into account the diversity of public interests; possess civilized methods of resolving emerging conflicts and the art of compromise and consensus.

The democratic system of political governance is a continuous process of mutual consideration and coordination of public interests at all stages of the development, adoption and implementation of managerial decisions. This is such a system of political relations in which subjects and objects of management are in constant interdependence from each other, when direct and feedback balance each other, as it were.

But if the country does not have a developed civil society and the rule of law, then the democratic version of political governance is impossible in principle.

political institution- a system of institutions and organizations that streamline political and other social relations with the help of material and ideal means and on the basis of certain norms. Political institutions include the state, state and political bodies and political institutions, political parties. Political institutions operate in the sphere of political relations, ensure the exercise of political power. They are designed to meet the political needs and interests of individuals or their groups.

Elements of political institutions: goals, functions and roles arising from goals, means, institutions, sanctions. The goals of political institutions are issues that constitute the scope of their activities. This can be control over public and political life, the development of methods for retaining, seizing and strengthening power, the formation of the political consciousness of citizens, their political choice. Means of political institutions constitute material, ideal and symbolic forms of government that have social and political significance.

Political institutions change along with the change in the social structures with which they are connected by political relations. Political institutions are permeated political values(a type of social values recognized not by individuals, but by large groups, entire communities). The objective basis of political values is the common vital needs and long-term interests of large social groups and individuals. Political values mainly have a subjective meaning, therefore forms of their objectification are necessary. Political symbols serve as one of the forms of objectification of values.

political symbols– values and socially recognized attitudes that they express. Embodiing socio-historical experience, values act as objective elements of political institutions. Through values, a certain relation of individuals to political institutions is established. The commitment of citizens to these political values is a necessary condition for the stable operation of political institutions and the ability to fulfill their roles.

10. The essence of the state and its main features.

The state is the central institution of the political system. State- the territorial organization of society, which is characterized by its socio-political space. Social in the sense that the territory occupied by the state is the environment for the life of this society. Political - in the sense of the boundaries of the action of state power. The existence of a modern state is associated with the presence of a single economic, as well as legal and information space. A political state union is characterized by a common cultural environment, a common language, and in many cases a single religion.

State is a system of political and legal connections and relations between people that regulate socially significant types of their behavior and activities. State is a political and legal institution, or rather a system of a special type of social institutions that form the organization of political power. As a political and legal institution, the state is not identical to society as a whole, but is an organized group of people exercising public power and managing people on behalf of society.

State is a very multifaceted phenomenon. The reasons for its appearance are explained by many objective factors: biological, psychological, social, economic, national, religious, etc. Their cumulative understanding is almost impossible within the framework of a separate theory individual and social life. Here the main task is not to deny the diversity of scientific approaches to the subject of research, but to be able to integrate their objective conclusions into a general theory that explains the essence of the phenomenon not one-sidedly, but in all the variety of its manifestations in real life. State is a product of the internal evolution of society and acts as an organization for managing society. Thus, it is a single political organization of society, which extends its power to the entire population within the territory of the country, issues laws, has sovereignty, a special apparatus of control and coercion.

In all concepts, there are two trends in the interpretation of the essence of the state. On the one hand, the general social significance of the state is emphasized: the state is called upon to represent the general interest, must serve the interests of society and the individual; on the other hand, the state is considered an instrument for defending private interests, acts as a means of suppressing the strong by the weak, by the haves of the have-nots. The state stands out from the social whole when the elements of the state acquire the ability to develop autonomously and the social nature of a person finds its expression in state formations.

Political institutions are institutions or a system of institutions that organize and serve the process of exercising political power, ensuring its establishment and maintenance, as well as the transfer of political information and the exchange of activities between power and other areas of political life. Such institutions are the state, political parties and politicized social movements. The most common functions of political institutions include:
consolidation of society, social groups in order to realize their fundamental interests through political power;
the development of political programs expressing the aspirations of these social communities, and the organization of their implementation;
streamlining and regulating the actions of communities in accordance with political programs;
integration of other social strata and groups in the field of social relations, expressing the interests and corresponding aspirations of the community that created the institution;
protection and development of the system of social relations, values corresponding to the interests of the communities represented;
ensuring the optimal development and orientation of the political process towards the realization of the priorities and advantages of the relevant social forces. Political institutions usually arise on the basis of certain non-institutionalized communities or groups and differ from previous structures in the creation of a permanent and paid management apparatus.
Each institution as a subject of politics implements political activity through the activities of its leaders, leaders of various levels and ordinary members, interacting with the public environment in order to meet specific and at the same time constantly changing individual and group socio-political interests.
Aggregate subjects play a decisive role in the political process, nevertheless, the primary subject of politics, its "atom", is undoubtedly an individual, a person. In domestic political practice, a person was not always recognized as an independent and free subject of political actions. First of all, the popular masses, political communities, and associations acted as such subjects. A person, as a rule, could participate in political life as a member of official structures with a certain regulation of political functions. However, in fact, it is the needs of each individual person, his value orientations and goals that act as a “policy measure”, the driving principle of the socio-political activity of the masses, nations, ethnic groups and other communities, as well as organizations and institutions expressing their interests.
The status of the subject of politics does not exist as inherent in any individual or social community. Political qualities are not given to a person initially. Every individual is a potential subject of politics, but not everyone becomes one in reality. In order to become a political subject, a person must find his essence and existence in politics. In other words, he must practically master political experience, realize himself as a subject of political action, develop his position in the political process and consciously determine his attitude to the world of politics, the degree of participation in it.
A person's realization of his political essence is closely related to his individual characteristics and is refracted through the personality structure, in which social, psychological, biological and spiritual substructures can be distinguished as components.

The political system can name the ordered set of norms, institutions, organizations, ideas, as well as the relationships and interactions between them, during which political power is exercised.

Political system - a complex of state and non-state institutions that carry out political functions, that is, activities related to the functioning of state power.

political institution- a more complex element of the political system, which is a stable type of social interaction that regulates a certain area of the political sphere of society. The Institute performs an important function (or several functions) that is significant for the whole society, while forming an ordered system of social roles and rules of interaction.

Thus, political institutions are stable types of political relations, the reproduction of which is ensured due to the following:

a) the rules governing the nature of the interaction;

b) sanctions that prevent deviation from normative behavior patterns;

c) getting used to the established institutional order.

Institute of Parliamentarism, performing the functions of regulating relations regarding the creation of basic legal norms - laws that are binding on all citizens of the country; representation of the interests of various social groups in the state. The normative regulation of the institution of parliamentarism concerns, first of all, the issues of the competence of the parliament, the procedure for its formation, the powers of deputies, the nature of their interaction with voters and the population as a whole.

Executive Institutions represent a complex system of interactions that develop between the bodies of officials who carry out the current management of public affairs and the population of the country. The main subject making the most responsible decisions within the framework of this type of political power relations is either the head of state and the government (Egypt), or only the head of state, the president (USA), or only the government (Italy).

The dispersal of the public affairs management system required the unification of the requirements for persons working in state institutions. So in society began to take shape institute of public service, regulating the professional activities of people belonging to a special status group. In our country, this regulation is carried out on the basis of the Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of the Public Service of the Russian Federation". This law defines the legal status of civil servants, the procedure for performing civil service, the types of incentives and responsibilities of employees, the grounds for termination of service, etc.

It also acquired independent significance in the system of executive power. institution of the head of state. It ensures sustainable reproduction in society of relations that allow the leader of the state to speak on behalf of the entire people, to be the supreme arbiter in disputes, to guarantee the integrity of the country, the inviolability of the constitutional rights of citizens.

Judicial institutions regulate relations that develop in connection with the need to resolve various conflicts in society. Unlike the legislative and executive authorities, the court (with the exception of judicial precedent) does not create normative acts and does not engage in administrative and managerial activities. However, the adoption of a judicial decision becomes possible only in the field of political power, which ensures the strict obedience of specific people to this decision.

Among the political institutions of modern society, a special place is occupied by those that regulate the position of an ordinary person in the system of political power relations. This is first of all institute of citizenship defining the mutual obligations of the state and the citizen in relation to each other. The regulations state that a citizen is obliged to abide by the constitution and laws, pay taxes, in a number of countries there is also universal military duty. The state, in turn, is called upon to protect the rights of a citizen, including the right to life, security, property, etc. Within the framework of this institution, the procedure for acquiring citizenship, the conditions for its loss, the citizenship of children when the citizenship of parents changes, etc. is also regulated.

An important place in the creation of an orderly system of relations of influence on the subjects of political power is electoral institution, regulating the procedure for holding elections to legislative bodies of various levels, as well as presidential elections in those countries where it is provided for by the constitution. Institute of Political Parties ensures the orderliness of relations that develop in the course of the creation of political organizations and in relations between them. Some general ideas are being formed in society about what a political party is, how it should act, how it differs from other organizations and associations. And the behavior of party activists, ordinary members begins to be built on the basis of these ideas that form the normative space of this political institution. We have listed only the most significant political institutions of modern society. Each country develops its own combination of these institutions, and the specific forms of the latter are directly affected by the socio-cultural environment. The institution of parliamentarism in the United States, India, Russia and South Korea, with similar principles of functioning of the legislative assembly, will have its own special national flavor. Political institutions structure the field of political power relations, they make the interactions of people fairly certain, stable. The more stable the institutional relations in a society, the higher the predictability of the political behavior of individuals.

The term "state" began to be used in political science from about the second half of the 16th century. Until that time, such concepts as “polis”, “principality”, “kingdom”, “kingdom”, “republic”, “empire”, etc. were used to designate the state. One of the first in scientific circulation was the term "state" was introduced by N. Machiavelli. He interpreted it broadly - as any supreme power over a person.

In ordinary consciousness, the state is often identified with a certain ethnic group (the Belarusian state, the French state, etc.), with the administrative and managerial apparatus, with justice.

Most modern writers state that state - this is the main institution of the political system and the political organization of society, created to organize the life of society as a whole and carry out the policy of the ruling classes, other social groups and sections of the population.

Main building blocks states are the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, the protection of public order and state security, the armed forces and partly the media.

Common to the state are the following features:

2. Sovereignty, that is, the supreme power in a certain territory. In modern society, there are many authorities: family, industrial, party, etc. But the state has the highest power, the decisions of which are binding on all citizens, organizations and institutions.

3. Territory delineating the boundaries of the state. The laws and powers of the state apply to people living in a certain territory. It itself is built not on consanguineous or religious grounds, but on the basis of the territorial and, usually, ethnic community of people.

4. Monopoly on the legal use of force, physical coercion. The range of state coercion extends from the restriction of freedom to the physical destruction of a person (the death penalty). To perform the functions of coercion, the state has special means (weapons, prisons, etc.), as well as bodies - the army, police, security services, the court, the prosecutor's office.

5. The most important feature of the state is its monopoly right to publish laws and regulations binding on the entire population. Legislative activity in a democratic state is carried out by the legislature (parliament). The state implements the requirements of legal norms with the help of its special bodies (courts, administration).

6. The right to levy taxes and fees from the population. Taxes are necessary for the maintenance of numerous employees and for the material support of state policy: defense, economic, social, etc.

7. Mandatory membership in the state. In contrast, for example, to a political party, membership in which is voluntary, a person receives state citizenship from the moment of birth.

When characterizing the state, the distinctive features are supplemented and its attributes - coat of arms, flag and anthem.

The main theories of the emergence of the state today are:

but) theological- the state arose by the will of God;

in) social contract theory(G. Grotius, T. Hobbes, J.-J. Rousseau, N. Radishchev) - the state is the result of an agreement between a sovereign ruler and subjects;

G) conquest theory(L. Gumplovich, F. Oppenheimer, K. Kautsky, E. Dühring) - the state was an organization of winners over the vanquished;

e) Marxist-Leninist theory, - the state arose as a result of the division of society into classes as a spokesman for the interests of the economically dominant class; an organic part of this theory is the idea of the withering away of the state.

State functions. The social purpose of the state is determined by the functions it performs. It is generally accepted to divide functions into internal and external.

To the main internal functions relate:

Regulation of social life; conflict resolution, search for ways of compromise and consensus in society;

Public order protection;

Development of a legislative framework for the functioning of the public system;

Definition of economic development strategy;

Protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens;

Providing social guarantees to its citizens;

Creation of conditions for the development of science, culture, education;

Activities for the protection of the environment.

External functions aimed at ensuring the security, integrity and sovereignty of the state, protecting national interests in the international arena, developing mutually beneficial cooperation between countries, solving global problems of human civilization, etc.

Forms of government and government

The structure and powers of these institutions depend on the form of the state, and the functional side is largely determined by the existing political regime. The concept of " form of state» is revealed through the categories « form of government" And "form of government".

"Form of government"- this is the organization of the supreme power, characterized by its formal sources, it determines the structure of state bodies (institutional design) and the principles of their relationship. The two main forms of government are monarchy And republic and their varieties.

Monarchy(classical) is characterized by the fact that the power of the head of state - the monarch is inherited and is not considered a derivative of any other power, body or voters. It is inevitably sacralized, for this is the condition for legitimizing the power of the monarch. There are several types of monarchical form of government: absolute monarchy- characterized by the omnipotence of the head of state and the absence of a constitutional order; a constitutional monarchy- involves limiting the powers of the head of state by more or less developed features of the constitutional order. Depending on the degree of restriction of the power of the head of state, there are: dualistic and parliamentary constitutional monarchies.

Dualistic monarchy- the powers of the monarch are limited in the sphere of legislation, but wide in the sphere of executive power. In addition, he retains control over representative power, since he is endowed with the right of a complete veto on parliamentary decisions and the right to dissolve it ahead of schedule (Saudi Arabia and a number of small Arab states).

parliamentary monarchy- the power of the monarch does not extend to the sphere of legislation and is significantly limited in management. Laws are adopted by parliament, the right of "veto" actually (in a number of countries and formally) the monarch does not exercise. The government is formed on the basis of a parliamentary majority and is responsible to the parliament. The actual administration of the country is carried out by the government. Any act of the monarch requires the approval of the head of government or the relevant minister (Belgium, Great Britain, Denmark, Spain, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden).

Republic- two main forms of republican government are known: presidential and parliamentary republics.

Presidential republic characterized by a special role of the president; he is both head of state and head of government. There is no post of prime minister, the government is formed by extra-parliamentary means, the president appoints its members either independently of parliament or with the consent of the senate (for example, the United States). Ministers are responsible to the President. The parliament does not have the right to express a vote of no confidence in the government, and the censure of ministers by the parliament does not entail their automatic resignation. The head of state is elected independently of parliament: either by an electoral college elected by the population (USA), or by direct vote of citizens (France, etc.)

Such an election procedure enables the president and his government to act without regard to parliament. The President is vested with the right of suspensive veto on laws passed by Parliament. The most important distinguishing feature of a presidential republic is a strict separation of powers. All branches of power have considerable independence in relation to each other, but there is a developed system of checks and balances that maintains a relative balance of power.

Parliamentary republic: its most important distinguishing feature is the formation of a government on a parliamentary basis and its formal responsibility to parliament. The head of state occupies a modest place in the system of power bodies. Parliament, along with the issuance of laws and the voting of the budget, has the right to control the activities of the government. The head of state appoints the government, but not at his own discretion, but from among the party representatives who have the majority of seats in parliament (its lower house). A vote of no confidence in the government by the parliament entails either the resignation of the government, or the dissolution of parliament and the holding of early parliamentary elections, or both. Thus, the government is the main governing body of the country, and the head of government is actually the first person in the power structure, pushing the head of state into the background (Greece, Italy, Germany).

Mixed presidential-parliamentary the form of government, with even greater dominance of the president, is typical for a number of Latin American countries (Peru, Ecuador), it is also enshrined in the 1993 constitution. in Russia and the new constitutions of a number of CIS countries.

Its most important features:

Presence of a popularly elected president;

The president appoints and removes members of the government;

Members of the government must enjoy the confidence of parliament;

The president has the right to dissolve parliament.

Form of government- this is the territorial and political organization of the state, including the political and legal status of its constituent parts and the principles of the relationship between central and regional state bodies. There are two main forms of government: unitary and federal.

Unitary - it is a single state, which is subdivided into administrative-territorial units that do not have political independence. Federal- is a union state, consisting of several state entities, each of which has its own competence and has its own system of legislative, executive and judicial bodies.

Previously, there was such a close to federal form of government as confederation. The difference between a confederation and a federation lies in the fact that a federation presupposes the existence of a center authorized to make decisions on behalf of all members of the union and exercising authority over them. A confederation, on the other hand, is a more or less flexible organization, without any constitutional formalization, a federation of independent states.

Each of its members united with others in an alliance, to whose competence a limited number of issues were transferred (for example, defense and external representation) Confederations were: Switzerland from 1291 to 1848, the USA in 1776-1797, the German Union in 1815-1867. Today there are no confederations, although this word is used in the official name of the Swiss and Canadian states.