The scope of the concept of "transitional law" and its political and legal significance on the example of Russia. Political sphere Political and legal sphere of society

Political and legal sphereis a subsystem of society responsible for the implementation of managerial and regulatory activities. This sphere is a relatively late product of socio-historical development. It arises at that stage of human history when, under the influence of the increasingly complex material, production and spiritual activities of people, the social differentiation of primitive society intensifies. Groups and communities of people appear, whose interests begin not only to differ, but also to enter into irreconcilable contradictions with each other, which, of course, introduced elements of disorganization and increased conflict into human relationships. The traditional mechanisms for the tribal system of distributing material wealth and regulating relationships between people and their groups, based on blood ties, the authority of public opinion, the power of age-old customs and traditions, were unable to effectively resolve social contradictions that primitive society had not previously encountered. With the development and aggravation of these contradictions, an objective need arose to take special measures to preserve the integrity of society. The solution of this problem led to the creation of fundamentally new mechanisms for the normative-power ordering of increasingly complex social ties, new forms of public control over people's behavior and the conclusion of this behavior in a framework that meets the interests of society as a whole.

As modern historical and ethnographic data testify, the formation of new mechanisms for the normative-authoritative regulation of social life did not take place directly on the basis of the social class struggle and class domination, but formed spontaneously in the course of the natural development of the most primitive communal system from complex supra-communal management structures. Over time, these supra-communal organizational and administrative structures become relatively independent social formations - authorities, closed and closed from the society that gave birth to them. The appearance of such formations at the later stages of the evolution of the primitive communal system can be considered a sign of the formation of the rudiments of the first states - proto-states. The emergence of proto-states is a kind of dialectical leap-transition of humanity from one qualitative state to another, from prehistory to civilization. In various regions of the Earth and different peoples due to the unevenness of their historical development, this transition took place in different time stretched for centuries and even millennia. The first civilizations, like the first proto-states, developed in the East in 4-3 millennia BC.

Having appeared at the dawn of human civilization, the political and legal sphere of society has not only been preserved, but, constantly developing and improving, has begun to occupy an increasingly important place in the human community. Today it is already difficult to imagine public life without political and legal mechanisms for its regulation.

Political and legal sphere of societycovers the social space where political and legal relations arise and function and the corresponding institutional forms of organization of public life operate, using the mechanisms of normative-power regulation and management of public life - political and legal institutions.

Political institutions functionally related to the relations between social groups, classes, nations regarding the creation and use of public authorities (the state) to realize their interests and manage public affairs. Legal institutions realize the need of society to regulate and control the behavior of people on the basis of norms and rules established and protected by state power. The managerial and regulatory activities of society, carried out through these institutions, constitute the main content of the political and legal sphere.

The political and legal sphere plays an important role in creating optimal conditions for the functioning and development of the social organism. From the level of development of the political and legal sphere, which is manifested in its ability to adequately reflect in its activities the diversity of interests and goals of various social groups and communities of people, to find forms and methods acceptable to the majority of the population for solving economic, social and other socially significant problems, the stability of society as an integral entity, its well-being and prosperity depend to a large extent.

The issues of managing social life, regulating human relationships with the help of political and legal mechanisms attracted the attention of many well-known philosophers who devoted special studies to them. Evidence of this are such works on political and legal philosophy that have become classics, such as Plato's "State" and "Laws", Aristotle's "Politics", Cicero's "On the State" and "On Laws", Machiavelli's "Sovereign", Hobbes's "Leviathan". , "On State Government" by Locke, "Political Treatise" by Spinoza, "On the Spirit of Laws" by Montesquieu, "On the Social Contract" by Rousseau, "Metaphysical Principles of the Doctrine of Law" by Kant, "Fundamentals of Natural Law" by Fichte, "Philosophy of Law" by Hegel, "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" by Engels and others.

As parts, not only social subjects are singled out, but also other formations - spheres of social life. Society is a complex system of specially organized human life. Like any other complex system, society consists of subsystems, the most important of which are called areas of public life.

Sphere of life of society- a certain set of stable relations between social subjects.

The areas of public life are large, stable, relatively independent subsystems of human activity.

Each area includes:

certain human activities (eg educational, political, religious);
social institutions (such as family, school, parties, church);
established relations between people (i.e., connections that have arisen in the course of people's activities, for example, relations of exchange and distribution in the economic sphere).

Traditionally, there are four main areas of public life:

social (peoples, nations, classes, gender and age groups, etc.)
economic (productive forces, production relations)
political (state, parties, socio-political movements)
spiritual (religion, morality, science, art, education).

Of course, a person is able to live without satisfying these needs, but then his life will not differ much from the life of animals. Spiritual needs are met in the process spiritual activity - cognitive, value, prognostic, etc. Such activity is aimed primarily at changing individual and social consciousness. It manifests itself in scientific creativity, self-education, etc. At the same time, spiritual activity can be both producing and consuming.

spiritual production called the process of formation and development of consciousness, worldview, spiritual qualities. The product of this production are ideas, theories, artistic images, values, the spiritual world of the individual and spiritual relations between individuals. The main mechanisms of spiritual production are science, art and religion.

Spiritual consumption called the satisfaction of spiritual needs, the consumption of products of science, religion, art, for example, visiting a theater or a museum, obtaining new knowledge. The spiritual sphere of the life of society ensures the production, storage and dissemination of moral, aesthetic, scientific, legal and other values. It covers various consciousnesses - moral, scientific, aesthetic,.

Social institutions in the spheres of society

Appropriate social institutions are being formed in each of the spheres of society.

In the social sphere the most important social institution within which the reproduction of new generations of people is carried out is. The social production of a person as a social being, in addition to the family, is carried out by such institutions as preschool and medical institutions, schools and other educational institutions, sports and other organizations.

For many people, production and the presence of spiritual conditions of existence are no less important, and for some people even more important than material conditions. Spiritual production distinguishes people from other beings in this world. The state and nature of development determine the civilization of mankind. Main in the spiritual realm institutions act. This also includes cultural and educational institutions, creative unions (writers, artists, etc.), the media and other organizations.

At the heart of the political sphere there are relations between people that allow them to participate in the management of social processes, to occupy a relatively safe position in the structure of social ties. Political relations are forms of collective life that are prescribed by the laws and other legal acts of the country, charters and instructions regarding independent communities, both outside the country and inside it, written and unwritten rules of various . These relations are carried out through the resources of the corresponding political institution.

On a national scale, the main political institution is . It consists of many of the following institutions: the president and his administration, government, parliament, court, prosecutor's office and other organizations that ensure the general order in the country. In addition to the state, there are many organizations in which people exercise their political rights, that is, the right to manage social processes. political institutions Those who seek to participate in the government of the whole country are also social movements. In addition to them, there may be organizations at the regional and local levels.

The relationship of spheres of public life

The spheres of public life are closely interconnected. In the history of the sciences about there have been attempts to single out any sphere of life as defining in relation to others. So, in the Middle Ages, the idea of the special significance of religiosity as part of the spiritual sphere of society dominated. In modern times and the Age of Enlightenment, the role of morality and scientific knowledge was emphasized. A number of concepts assign the leading role to the state and law. Marxism affirms the decisive role of economic relations.

Within the framework of real social phenomena, elements of all spheres are combined. For example, the nature of economic relations can influence the structure of the social structure. A place in the social hierarchy forms certain political views, opens up appropriate access to education and other spiritual values. The economic relations themselves are determined by the legal system of the country, which is very often formed on the basis of the people, their traditions in the field of religion and morality. Thus, at various stages of historical development, the influence of any sphere may increase.

The complex nature of social systems is combined with their dynamism, i.e., mobile character.

Political sphere. This subsystem of society is associated with power relations, the state and the state structure, with the implementation of the organizational and managerial function of the social system.

The political sphere is a complex, developing, historically specific system of state and non-state public institutions, social and legal norms through which political and power relations are implemented.

Power is a form social relations, associated with the ability of some social subjects to subordinate the activities of others to their will with the help of state-legal means and in accordance with their needs and interests.

The main elements of the political system are the state, political parties, public organizations and movements.

The state is the main institution of the political system, endowed with the highest legislative power - the right to establish and regulate the norms of public life within a certain territorial integrity and uses legitimate forms of coercion to comply with them in relation to all members of society. The legitimacy of violence as a specific property of the state is provided by various internal grounds: traditions, leader's popularity (charisma), rational-voluntary recognition of legal norms by citizens.

The state arises objectively, in the process of complicating social life, as a need to regulate relations between social groups and individual subsystems of society. In social philosophy, there are several concepts of the origin of the state:

- Christian-theological, substantiated in the writings of Augustine the Blessed, Thomas Aquinas. Interprets the need for the state as a result of the weakness of man, his need for conciliarity, striving for the highest standards;

– negotiable, developed in the works of G. Grotius, T. Hobbes, J.Zh. Rousseau. The theory of the social contract is based on the understanding of statehood through the individual-rational principle in man. According to this theory, any nation goes through two stages in its development: natural, pre-state, and civil, state. At the first stage, life is regulated by the norms of natural law, at the second - by legal legality and moral norms. The guarantor of the rights, honor and dignity, property and freedom of citizens is the state, to which people transfer part of their rights consciously, on the basis of a collective agreement - a social contract;

- class, presented in the works of K. Marx, F. Engels, V.I. Lenin. Explains the emergence of the state as a result of the division of labor, the emergence of private property and property inequality, the emergence of classes. The state, like the entire political organization of society, is a superstructure on top of the economic basis. In this regard, laws are formulated on the determining role of the base in relation to the superstructure and on the relative independence of the superstructure itself.

The political system presupposes a special type of activity; therefore, each society develops its own political elite, i.e. a ruling group that has access to the instruments of power. The elite is consolidated into special organizations - clubs, cabinets, parties.

A political party is a community of people, organizationally and ideologically connected, expressing the interests of certain social groups and pursuing the goal of realizing these interests through participation in state power.

Actual in modern philosophy is the problem of interaction between the state and civil society. The degree of development of civil society and the nature of its relations with the state significantly determine the vector of development of the social system, the forms of political participation of individuals, the prospects for democracy, freedom, and creativity. The study of this complex of problems was initiated by representatives of neo-Marxism.

Civil society is an integral set of voluntary associations of citizens that independently regulate certain types of activities and social relations. Civil society institutions regulate their activities independently of state institutions, but the state, for its part, is called upon to provide this freedom with the necessary legal guarantees.

Thus, the political sphere is a special kind of activity and therefore forms a certain type of social consciousness.

Specific problems and aspects of the political sphere of the life of society are considered in the content of the discipline "Political Science".

Tasks

1. Determine, with an explanation of the selection criteria, to which social group do you consider yourself, your relatives and acquaintances?

2. What causes of industrial conflicts do you consider the most significant at the present time?

3. Conduct a comparative analysis of the concepts of "social system", "culture", "civilization".

Political and legal sphere of society

Needs. Interests. Goals.

Sources and driving forces of the development of society

As driving forces The development of society in the history of philosophy was called the development of technology (in modern science, representatives of this kind of views are called technocrats), the struggle of culture and religion, the class struggle (in the philosophy of Marxism), the development of higher absolute forces, the activity of the "Absolute Spirit" (religious thinkers).

Needs- need or extreme importance in something.

Interests(interest - important, significant) - a conscious need.

Target- anticipation of the results of activities in the minds of people.

internal source community development is the contradiction between the actual level of development at each individual moment of time and the desired level of development. This contradiction gives rise to needs. Οʜᴎ, becoming conscious, turn into interest. Interests lead to setting goals and activities to achieve them. The goal is achieved through activity, in connection with this, the activity of people is the main driving force for the development of society. The achieved goal leads to the setting of new needs, turning them into interest, setting new goals and activities to achieve them, and so on endlessly ...

Politike - state or public affairs.

Political relations - the political and legal sphere of public life, aimed at regulating the relations of power and control to achieve a stable existence of society (ideal).

The shortest definition of politics: politics is an attitude about power and control. The core of politics, its essence is power.

Power - ϶ᴛᴏ the ability and opportunity (must take place simultaneously) to carry out or impose one's will on another person, group of persons or the whole society.

Power is a backbone characteristic of society. Any power keeps society from disintegration, preserves it as an integral system. Power, as a social phenomenon, is much older than the state, as the main bearer of power over the past 5,500 years. Power also existed in the pre-state society. It was called social power.

Signs of social power:

Social power - power that did not stand out from society and its bearers were all adults of the primitive community.

· Social power is a manifestation of a kind of primitive democracy. These same people made decision, they also bore ʼʼresponsibilityʼʼ for the decision made.

Signs of state power:

· This is the power that has separated from the society. Its carriers are special people, they are called officials, administrators, managers and bureaucrats (bureau - a table for papers, krat - power).

This is a complex structure, in most modern countries it exists and functions on the basis of the principle of division (into legislative, executive and judicial). A large percentage of government officials in relation to the population in the country speaks of the inefficiency of state power.

Policy Goals:

· Maintaining the integrity of society, viability.

· Seizure of foreign territories.

· Protection of own territory.

Establishment of personal domination, personal power (this goal is especially characteristic of early states; such a goal is not excluded in modern political life).

· National unity and prosperity of the nation (a noble but rare goal).

· Distribution and even imposition of a certain ideology (a set of ideas expressing the interests of certain social groups).

Means, methods of policy:

1. Civilized methods to achieve the goal:

diplomacy (the art of negotiating without resorting to force);

· Achieving consensus (agreement) through mutual concessions.

2. Uncivilized ways to achieve political goals:

Violence (physical and psychological);

populism (flirting with the people by giving out promises that are obviously unfulfillable or those that are not going to be fulfilled);

The main types of political power:

1. state power;

2. the power of a political party;

3. the power of local self-government (municium - self-governing community).

Political and legal sphere of society - the concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Political and legal sphere of society" 2017, 2018.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

POLITICAL AND LEGALSPHERE

Introduction

1. Man and politics

4. The role of civil society

Introduction

Power- a political and economic phenomenon that describes a system of domination-subordination and implies the presence of a subject of power, a center and source of power, a certain design of power relations (laws).

State- a community of people united by one territory, common legal laws and public authorities, as well as taxes.

civilstate- the sphere of self-manifestation of free citizens and voluntarily formed associations and organizations protected by relevant laws from direct interference and arbitrary regulation of the activities of these citizens and organizations by the state authorities.

legalstate- the legal form of organization and activity of public political power and its relationship with individuals as subjects of law.

Politics- one of the forms of activity for the management of social relations and connections that arise between people in the process of creating material and spiritual values. Politics includes the following elements: power, political relations, political organizations, political interests and ideas.

1. Man and politics

Modern ideas about the relationship between personality and politics were formed under the influence of two methodological guidelines of political science. The first is institutional analysis, which has its origins in classical political thought. The second is a behavioral approach developed in the second half of the 20th century. Institutional analysis is characterized by an interest in the philosophical, moral, value, cultural and historical elements of politics in their relationship with human nature. This analysis allows us to single out two theoretical models for describing, understanding and explaining the interaction between a person and politics: “subordination” and “interest”. Each of them characterizes various mechanisms for including a person in power. Under the conditions of the functioning of the model of subordination, which operates in a society with a sufficiently high degree of regulation, the mechanism of selection, control and prescription interacts. The need for such a model is motivated by human nature: unreasonable, selfish and, therefore, in need of control. The main elements of this model were noticed by Aristotle, who believed that domination and subordination are not only necessary, but also useful, as they are inherent in the very nature of people, among whom some are born to be subjugated, others to rule.

Its fundamental foundations were developed by T. Hobbes, who believed that the innate human instinct is “an eternal and endless desire for more and more power. Moreover, where there is no power capable of keeping everyone in subjection, people do not experience any pleasure (and, on the contrary, it means bitterness) from life in society ”Hobbes T. Elected. prod. in 2 vols. - M., 1964. V.2. - P.149-155. . Power is the source of all ethical norms. This idea of Hobbes was supported and studied both by elitistists, according to which the normal functioning of society is possible where there is a competent minority power over the majority, and by egalitarians - supporters of democratic traditions, according to which individuals, in the name of general freedom, are obliged to give up "thirst for » power and be guided only in accordance with the «general will» of society. New motives explaining the need for a subordinate position of the individual are introduced by modern political scientists: firstly, by justifying its managerial tasks, since modern society is a mature meritocracy, where power is based on the recognition of merit (D. Bell, S. Lipset, W. Moore); secondly, ensuring constant and stable democracy, which is based on the requirement of “politics for politicians” (R. Dahl, W. Kornhauser, J. Schumpeter); thirdly, the achievement of greater equality (J. Rawls, G. Gans). Thus, the personality in the “submission” model acts as a passive object of control, in need of mechanisms that can curb its imperfect nature.

A different model of "interest" was originally developed in the works of A. Smith and G. Spencer, in which the relationship between the individual and power is viewed indirectly, through the prism of personal interest as a source of social activity. In this model, social and political order is possible as a result of a combination of interests of various groups of society. Therefore, it is not the power of suppression that is important, but the rational awareness of people's personal benefits from combining common efforts. There are two types of this model:

at the heart of the "concept of prudent interests" any power is a source of human oppression;

the "concept of competing interests" is based on order as an unintended consequence of the interaction between individuals.

The most important thing in the model of "interest" is the consideration of the individual as a subject of political activity.

Supporters of "behavioral orientation" in the analysis of the relationship between man and power believe that the desire for power is one of the natural signs of a person, his emotions and instincts, reproducing relations of domination and subordination (S. Freud, Adler, Reich, E. Erickson, K. Jung, M. Block, G. Lasswell, S. Moscovici, F. Greenstein and others).

The transformation of an individual into a social being speaks of the emergence of his need for status, including such an incarnation as “the instinct for power” or “the need for power”. The need for power has a long tradition of research in political psychology. Currently, there are many concepts of the need for power: A. Adler, E. Fromm, Yu. Kozeletsky, P. Kuusi, G. Lasswell, D. McLelland, J. Atkinson, L.Ya. Gozman, E.B. Shestopal, etc. So, E.B. Shestopal deduces three reasons why power can be desirable: to dominate others and limit the actions of others, to create a certain deprivation for them; so that other people do not dominate him and do not interfere in his affairs; in order to carry out a political achievement Gozman L.Ya., Shestopal E.B. Political psychology. - Rostov-on-Don, 1996. - P.108. .

But the psychological concept of S.B. Kaverin, who, from the classification of personality needs he built, which he called basic, derives the need for power as a quasi-need, consisting of at least five basic ones: the need for freedom, the hedonistic need, the need for self-affirmation, the need for self-expression, the need to be a person. As a result of the analysis of the above needs, he argues that when combining certain needs, personality types are formed, each of which is characterized by its own vision of power, “determined by the dominant need” Kaverin S.B. The need for power. - M.: Knowledge, 1991. - P.18. .

All data was summarized in a table. From it, five conditional types of personality can be distinguished, striving for power according to one or another criteria: a nonconformist, a conformist, a dictator, an adventurer and a democrat. The desire for power varies from person to person. Sometimes it is reduced in representatives of a weak type of nervous system, with their characteristic timidity and self-doubt. This need is not clearly expressed in people who are completely involved in other activities, as well as in incapacitated individuals, neurotics who have difficulties in communicative communication. A critical need is a complex of a person's aspirations to gain influence on individuals and communities, using such means of power as coercion and privileges, etc. Kozeletsky Yu. Man is multidimensional. - Kyiv: Lybid, 1991. - P.83. Yu. Kozeletsky believes that “in the event of a discrepancy between the claims to leadership and the actual power opportunities, motivational tension is born and a person tries to increase the level of control he has had over other people, seeks to increase his economic and political influence” Ibid. P.85. . Hence, the critical need is most often formed on the basis of selfish interests. So, McClelland came to the conclusion that this need manifests itself in two forms: 1) egocentric - a person strives for power because the possession of it gives him satisfaction; 2) sociocentric - power allows you to achieve certain social goals. In life, these two forms are interconnected, however, often individuals with various anomalies come to powerMcClelland D.C., Burnham D.H. Power as the Great Motirator//Harvard Business Pewiew, 1976, P.54. .

Attitude to power	Dominant need	Personality type symbol
Power as a desire for independence and independence	Need for freedom	Nonconformist
Power as a source of material well-being or other personal benefits	hedonistic needs	Conformist
Power as predominance, dominance over others, a source of prestige, high status, fame	The need for self-assertion	Dictator
Power as a game	The need for self-expression	Adventurer
Power as a service to people, society	The need to be a person	Democrat

The life form of a person manifests itself in all value spheres and therefore it can be described as the ability to inspire other individuals with their own value orientation, either constant or as an incoming motive for activity. Thus, in the opinion of E. Spranger, all manifestations of power relations can, in general, be defined as political. Hence, a powerful man is a political man. All life thoughts of a powerful person are aimed at serving their aspirations. Knowledge for him is a means of exercising power. For the ruler, the sciences of society and man usually come first; from them he tries to extract the benefit that will help him achieve power, and therefore the cratic person focuses on those areas of theoretical knowledge that help manage people in accordance with his life plans. The economy for a politician, in the sense of wealth (both material and purely financial) is always a powerful political tool. Aesthetic - for a cratic person is just a link in the chain of means for achieving his goals. But often the imperious and the aesthetic touch. This takes place only when a cratic person begins to be driven not so much by rational calculation and knowledge of circumstances, but by limitless fantasy, resulting in gigantic projects for the design and reshaping of the world whole. It is these fantasies that many of the great conquerors in the history of world civilization have possessed. Spranger singles out two types of personalities in social terms: a pure politician who is busy only with the realization of his goals, even if this does not correspond to the will of everyone else; a type of socially founded power, where the ruler makes the people happy by the very fact of his rule. At the heart of a cratic person is the desire to dominate others. But at the same time, this is a very abstract definition, since the ruler is defined regardless of law and community. In the system of political relationships, according to Spranger, the following statement is true: “Only one who obediently follows the demand for higher values living in his own soul has the ability to lead others and subordinate them to the influence of his own value direction” Spanger E. Lebensformen. Geisteswissenschaftliche Psychologie und Ethik der Personlichkeit. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer, 1914. S. 132-157-230. .

B.A. Levi writes that any doctrine of human existence encounters the phenomenon of power. Power is a symbolic embodiment of being, created by an individual and society, for a Western person, and for an Eastern person, power is recognized as a value, as an expression of the very mystery of being. In this case, power appears independently of man, as a reflection of the spirit of the universe. Therefore, a person is obliged to consciously submit to this authority, without even thinking about its meaning Levy B.-H. Barbarie a visage humane. P., 1977. P.225. . Thus, power is an integral part of everyday worldview. The formation and functioning of the modern everyday worldview is a complex and contradictory process that is influenced by both modern science and various forms of consciousness and activity. Understanding the nature of everyday worldview should be based not only on psychological, but also on socio-cultural foundations.

2. Origin and nature of the state

The concept of "state" was introduced into political and legal use relatively recently. Until the Renaissance, more specific concepts were used to designate the state: principality, kingdom, tyranny, republic. Plato's famous work "State" does not refute what has been said, because a more accurate translation of its name into Russian corresponds to the concept of "Constitution" or "City-State". A special generalizing term "state" (from Italian - stato), applicable to any of its specific forms, was introduced by N. Machiavelli. From Italian, this word passed into all European languages: (English state, German to staat, French etat, Spanish estado). Later, thinkers (Rousseau and others) began to distinguish between "civil society" within the framework of society, and Hegel finally delimited the concepts of society, civil society and the state.

Civil society and the state were not always legal, although the latter always adopted laws, systems of legal norms to regulate the relations of its citizens. The Roman Empire was by no means a legal state, although it operated the famous system of "Roman law", which was then called "written reason" and which had a huge impact on the subsequent development of Western culture as a whole.

It took considerable efforts of philosophers, political thinkers, lawyers to streamline, humanize relations between the state and society. Why did the state come into being? As you know, the primitive society of people did without a state. The power of the elder of the clan, the rural community, the tribal leader was quite enough for society to somehow live without a state.

So, according to psychological theory, the emergence of the state is associated with a brilliant idea that suddenly illuminated the mind of a single person. Close to the starting positions of such an explanation is the well-known theory of the “social contract”, the meaning of which is as follows: people belonging to different communities were constantly at enmity with each other, raided, captured and killed strangers. And when they finally realized the danger of this, they agreed to establish the state as a kind of supra-communal body of power and control, transferring to it part of their "natural rights" in exchange for protecting common and individual interests. There were and are many supporters of the class theory of the emergence of the state, developed by Marxism: “The state arises there, then and insofar as where, when and insofar as classes arise with opposite, irreconcilable interests” (V.I. Lenin). And so that these classes do not “devour” each other and society in a fruitless struggle, the state arises as a force that stands above society, if not reconciling class contradictions, then at least moderating them, i.e. placing them within the boundaries of a certain order (F. Engels).

It should be said that this theory comes mainly from experience. Ancient Greece and it can explain the rise of the Greek city-states. However, in a number of cases, this logical connection is not traced: first, the state arises, due to certain non-class reasons, and then classes arise with their opposite interests. The variant of the "parallel" formation of classes and the state is quite common.

So, for example, the fact that Ancient Egypt was the “homeland of the state” is largely due to the specific conditions of the geographical environment and, consequently, the life and livelihoods of the local population. It is one thing when a rural community can take ready-made foodstuffs (fruits) from nature, when it is enough to throw grain into fertile soil and without much difficulty get a good harvest, then the formation of a state can wait. In Egypt, waterless sandy and rocky deserts stretch for hundreds of kilometers. For the earth to bear fruit, enormous labor efforts of people were required. Land for sowing in the Nile Valley had to be won from the sands, swamps and thickets. The main occupation of the Egyptians was agriculture, and they dug canals, built dams and other irrigation facilities. To maintain these structures, the forces of the clan or even the rural community were not enough. A power was needed that could tell and order all farmers what, how and when to do. Over time, this power took shape as a state, and people associated with organizational and managerial activities isolated themselves into a dominant social group. Not only internal, but also external factors, in particular the threat of invasion, can act as an incentive for the formation of a state. On the part of other tribes and peoples, the conquest of some by others. Thus, in China, the emergence of the state in the XVIII century. BC. associated with the conquest of the Xia tribe by the Shan tribe.

The formula “classes arise - a state arises” is not entirely applicable to the history of the emergence of the state among the “barbarians”, against whom mighty Rome fought for centuries and who, in turn, fought against it and, finally, in 476 AD. conquered. The barbarians did not have a state, although slaves, in particular, among the Germans in small numbers, were used. The Germans had their own kings and commanders, but they had pre-state, tribal power. The kings of the Germans were chosen by nobility, and military leaders by valor. At the same time, the kings did not have unlimited or arbitrary power, and the leaders dominated rather because they were an example. Execute, shackle and expose corporal punishment was not allowed to anyone except the priests, and even then not in the form of punishment and by order of the leader, but as if at the behest of the gods.

In the last centuries of the existence of the Roman Empire, many barbarians, especially from among the Germans, were in the military civil service of Rome, adopting Roman customs, decorating themselves with various Roman titles. As the French historian Jacques Le Goff emphasizes, these barbarians “acted not as enemies, but as admirers of the Roman political system. They could rather be mistaken for usurpers of Roman power.” In other words, the barbarians, in addition to rich trophies, borrowed from the Romans many principles of state organization. It is no coincidence that the later German monarchs called their political structure the "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation."

As you can see, there were many reasons for the emergence of the state, and they were different for different peoples.

Is the state a monster or a miracle? The state is a multifaceted, multifunctional structure and its essence cannot be expressed by any one figurative comparison or definition. On the one hand, any state carries coercion, violence. On the other hand, it somehow streamlines and stabilizes people's lives. Hence his different assessments: “The state? What is it?... The coldest of all cold monsters is called the state. It lies coldly; and this lie creeps out of his mouth: "I, the state, make up the people." If there is still a people somewhere, it does not understand the state and hates it as an evil eye and a violation of customs and rights,” said the ancient Iranian prophet Zarathustra, if you follow the presentation of F. Nietzsche.

"Leviathan", i.e. T. Hobbes called the state a biblical monster that humiliates a person in modern times. For Plato and Aristotle, the main thing in the state was not the “monstrous” principle associated with coercion and violence, but the principle that makes it possible for people to live together to achieve happiness. Hegel generally deified the state, calling it "the image and reality of reason", "moral idea".

Therefore, to the question: what is a state - a monster or a miracle? - there can be only one answer: the state is both a monster and a miracle. These two images deserve not a divisive union "or", but a connecting "and". The famous Russian lawyer P.I. Novgorodtsev (1866-1924) wrote that "the state is not only class domination, it is primarily a public legal regulation of private and public life." It can also be said that the state is a product of the emergence and development of human civilization. Together with the state, cities, trade, writing, the first scientific knowledge, philosophical, political and legal ideas and doctrines - despite the fact that it involves the domination of one class or social group over others. Political characteristics of the state. In the language of political science, the state can be defined as a special type of social relations and phenomenon, which (type) is characterized by the following essential features: a) the relationship of power and subordination; b) the monopoly use of violence by those in power; c) the presence of a legal order; d) relative constancy; e) institutional dimension.

In this definition, given by the Latin American political scientist L.S. Sanisteban, "captured" in principle important point: the state assumes a certain type of social behavior of people, legally regulated by those who have power, maintain the normative order in society and have the opportunity, if necessary, to use coercion for this.

The French sociologist P. Bourdieu, correcting the well-known formula of M. Weber (“The state is an organization that has a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical violence in a certain territory”), writes: “The state is X (to be determined), which has a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical and symbolic violence in a certain territory and against the population concerned”. This means that the state exists both objectively - as a set of institutions and mechanisms - and subjectively - as a complex of structures and categories of thinking and perception. The formation of the state is accompanied by the formation of a field of power, i.e. space in which various political forces are fighting among themselves for power in the state. In society, the sphere of politics, political relations, stood out as an independent one.

3. Legal and welfare state

Among the most significant political ideas, designed to overcome the alienation of the majority of the population from power and control, to transfer the rights and freedoms of the individual from the field of declarations to the field of life realities, the first place belongs to the ideas of a legal and social state and civil society. The movement towards a legal and social state, towards a civil society is similar to the movement of knowledge towards absolute truth, to which people, realizing that the time is unlikely to come when they say “we know everything,” nevertheless strive. The development of Western civilization, which led to the establishment of a liberal-democratic political and social order, is largely determined by the desire to create a legal and social state and civil society.

Let us preface the further exposition with a few remarks about law in general and its role in the life of society and the state.

Law as a regulator of human behavior. "Law", according to a strictly legal characterization, is a criterion of "legal legitimacy", a kind of social sign that a person has the right or not the right to do, as he has the right or not the right to act. The life of society and the state would be simply impossible if people could not distinguish what is permitted from what is not permitted. Law, in its broadest sense, consists in the fact that it gives this society and the state, their practical life validity, justification of a certain behavior of people freedom (possibility) of such behavior. Moreover, validity, justification, which are given one way or another, must be recognized in society and the state.

What and who establishes certain norms, rules of behavior of people, guided by which they, people, know: it is possible to do this, but it is impossible to do this, it is not supposed to? Not allowed by what and by whom? Even in the ancient Greek myths about the deeds and relationships of the supreme god Zeus, his wife Themis, the goddess of law and legal order, and their daughters, the idea that there is law by nature, i.e. natural law, and human law, i.e. "positive" or "positive" law.

Natural law is a set of rules, principles, rights and values that are determined by the very nature of man and, therefore, do not depend on legislative recognition or non-recognition of them in a particular state. What comes from human nature comes from nature in general, and therefore acquires the same force and obligation as, say, earthly attraction.

Positive law is a real, existing in laws, other documents, actually tangible (and therefore “positive”) regulatory regulator, on the basis of which legally permitted and legally prohibited behavior is determined and legally binding, imperative-powerful solutions.

If natural law is the property of mankind from the moment of its birth, then positive law takes shape and develops in the conditions of civilization, one of the main features of which is the state-political existence of people as peoples and nations. Natural law is provided by the very nature of man. Positive law, the guarantee of the operation of its norms and regulations, is ensured by the state power, which organizes it by its nature and, for the most part, by coercive force in terms of methods.

If until the second half of the XVIII century. in Europe, the traditional, statist understanding of law dominated. According to this understanding, law was defined as a set of generally binding norms (rules of conduct) of people established or sanctioned by the state. Moreover, the state was often personified with the sovereign (recall the pompous and proud phrase of Louis XIV: “The state is me”), and the right and the law, the law and the sovereign's decree were actually identified. Then from the second half of the XVIII century. law is no longer understood as a set of norms established or sanctioned by the state and expressing the will of the ruling classes, but something completely different - a normative system that expresses the will of the citizens of the state and stands guard over the rule of law and legality. An important role in this was played by I. Kant, who correlated the concept of law with the concept of morality, which regulates the ruler, and the concept of freedom in its real, life expression. He noted that “the civil state, considered only as a legal state, is based on the following a priori principles: the freedom of each member of society as a person; his equality with every other as a subject; independence of each member of the community as a citizen.

Based on the understanding of law developed in the second half of the 18th century, we can say that the rule of law is a state in which the rule of law over power is exercised. The rule of law must correspond to the rule of law society and vice versa. In a legal state and a legal society, the state serves its citizens. But there are no rights without duties. Therefore, in a legal state and a legal society, a citizen is equally obliged to the state: just as the state is obliged to protect the rights and legitimate interests of its citizens, to ensure social security, honor and health, so the citizen is obliged to comply with the laws of the state even in cases where he is with them for some reason. or disagree.

The main differences between a legal state and a non-legal state

Illegalstate	legalstate
State power is not limited by any laws	State power is exercised on the basis of the rule of law
There is no separation of powers or it is formal	Separation of powers is real
The rights and freedoms of man and citizen are not protected	Real protection of human and civil rights and freedoms
Everything that is not allowed by the government is prohibited	Everything that is not prohibited by law is allowed
An accusatory understanding of the tasks of justice, the presumption of innocence is absent in the legislation or is not observed in practice	The legislation provides for the presumption of innocence and the right of the accused to testify only in the presence of a lawyer
National legislation does not recognize or denies the priority of international legal acts and norms	Priority of international legal acts and norms over national legislation, bringing the second in line with the first
In international relations, there is a stake on force in accordance with the principle "the end justifies the means"	In international relations, the stake is on the peaceful political and legal settlement of disputes, following the Principle “righteous goals are not achieved by unrighteous means”

It is interesting to note that the rule of law formula in most constitutions Western countries missing. At the constitutional level, this formula was first recorded in the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany (1949) and in the Spanish Constitution (1978), i.e. countries previously dominated by fascist regimes. Unlike modern Germany, where the term "rule of law" (Rechtsstaat) is widely recognized, in France the corresponding term (L "Etat de droit) does not have such recognition. French lawyers prefer to solve the issue of the rule of law in practical terms in relation to individual state institutions, not theoretically.

social state. One of the most important functions of the state should be to provide all people with a guaranteed minimum income. Thus, in Sweden more than 30% of the gross national product is spent on social needs (the minimum pension is about 7 thousand dollars a year, and the full pension that can be received after working for 30 years is approximately 60% of the salary), in Germany - 24 , in the USA - 14%.

social state can define how democratic state, based on the wide social basis And conductive active And strong social politics, directed on the promotion or stable security vital level population, protection And implementation rights And freedom citizens, on the creation contemporary systems healthcare, education And social security, on the maintaining the poor And the poor layers, on the prevention And successful permission social conflicts.

4. The role of civil society

The well-known Western political scientist A. Arato instead of the traditional dualism "state - civil society" offers a five-sided ("five-part") structure, which includes: 1) an economic society distinguished on the basis of forms of ownership; 2) purely economic associations and unions; 3) a political society, allocated on the basis of suffrage and political parties; 4) civil society, distinguished on the basis of rights in the field of communication; and 5) civic associations and movements.

With any approach, civil society is a relatively independent public entity both in form and in the content of its functions. The main thing in this regard is that civil society is called upon to control the state, which in turn is called upon to serve society.

What is civil society? We can say that civil society is a non-state part of society based on the autonomy of individuals. These are the family, the school, voluntary organizations and unions, the spiritual expression of whose interests is public opinion.

Until the XVII-XVIII centuries. civil society in most European states was in the fold. As if responding to Rousseau’s call “to find a form of association that protects and protects with all its common strength the person and property of everyone”, various political and religious corporations, merchant guilds, cooperatives and, finally, trade unions appear. Civil society, in accordance with common interests, enters into special relations with the state. I. Fichte saw the essence of the latter in the fact that a kind of agreement is concluded between the state and the individual, according to which the individual agrees to a certain restriction of his freedom and undertakes to obey the general provisions of the state, and the state in response to this guarantees the security of the individual and his property. By the way, it is private property, according to the classical ideas of Western thinkers, coming from J.Zh. Rousseau and G. Hegel, is the economic foundation of civil society.

The well-known English proverb “My house is my fortress” has not only a literal, but also a deep generalizing meaning. If a person has his own "home", i.e. property, and if this property is reliably protected by law, then he gains confidence, holds himself with dignity in front of power at any level, up to the state. Here civil society acts as an education, the main actor which is the "man-owner". No, this is not an elite Forsyte society, not a closed aristocratic club, but a democratic society of those who own something: means of production, money capital, stocks, information that people need, intelligence that generates ideas, and finally, just a labor force. Every person has the right to his own business. The participants in such a society separated from state power are independent and independent of each other (or dependent within the limits of an agreement reached between themselves). They decide all their affairs themselves, take risks themselves and reap the rewards of risk.

In the process of development, civil society embraces ever wider sections of the population - not only the haves, but also the poor and the have-nots. In a slave-owning society, a slave was completely powerless, he could be sold, bought, killed. The feudal peasant also did not enjoy civil rights. But, remaining in a number of cases the object of sale, he has already acquired the right to life. With the emergence and development of capitalism, the worker, being included in the structures of civil society, became a citizen of the state with an unprecedented and previously impossible scope of rights and obligations. The state in that part of it that is characterized as a “tool”, “machine” of the ruling class elites, was forced not only to reckon with the emerging social associations, but also to embark on the path of legal ordering of its relations with the entire population, to significantly rebuild its own power structures.

civil society - system non-state public relations And institutions, guaranteeing man implementation his natural And social rights And expressing various needs, interests And values free, relatively independent members societies.

The idea of civil society is represented in the public consciousness and in science in various senses, of which three can be distinguished as the main ones:

1) as a normative concept of an ideal social order;

2) as an analytical scheme for interpreting modern social reality;

3) as an ideological construct.

The central idea of civil society is the problem of correlation between private and public spheres of public life. From the point of view of personal interests, such principles of civil society as personal freedom, inviolability and security of citizens, the right to property, the right to free existence and functioning of independent associations can be singled out as system-forming. Moreover, the realization of civil rights and freedoms of the individual is guaranteed not only with the help of law, but also the entire set of norms that regulate the relationship between the individual and society. The area of personal autonomy is quite wide and the intrusion by state authorities into the sphere of private interests is unacceptable. We can say that the principle of self-worth of the individual, its autonomy in relation to the state, lies at the foundation of civil society.

The consideration of civil society as a set of self-organized and self-governing social ties and relations that allow expressing the interests of various social strata and groups implies activity in the public sphere. Through civil society, organized, institutionally represented in the political process, the economic and political interests of the majority, primarily of various non-elite strata and groups, are carried out. The institutionalization of interests as a system of representation of interests at different levels is carried out through various kinds of associations and unions, defined as “interest groups”. Thus, along with civil and territorial representation, the activity of various organizations united by a common interest, regardless of their location and relationship to state structures, is being activated. A multi-level system of representation of interests presupposes the presence of horizontal integration links, and also provides the possibility of the existence of a wide range of political and non-political actors that ensure the satisfaction of various needs of the individual.

When recognizing as the main social basis of a civil society of the middle class, consisting of highly productive, highly qualified, enterprising and enterprising workers with a fairly high level of income, it should be agreed that a certain type of personality is necessary for the adequate functioning of civil society. In particular, civil society in the West is based on the principle of individualism, through which the individual expresses his rights and expresses himself as a person in the activities of numerous parties, associations, movements and other public organizations.

Civil society makes it possible to moderate the claims not only of the authorities to citizens, but to restrain a person's desire for rebellion - both conscious and unconscious, spontaneous, purely destructive. This is not about social revolutions. They say that in the West the time for such revolutions has passed. We are talking about rebellion as one of the "essential dimensions of a person", a person who says: "I rebel, therefore we exist." An example is the riots of football fans against everyone and everything - if their football team lost, they “out of grief” overturn and set fire to cars, smash shop windows to smithereens, throw stones at policemen. If their football team has won, they do the same - but this time out of happiness. Civil society largely contributes to the normal course of the political process in the state, which is especially important for states where, for various reasons, there is a frequent change of governments (as, for example, in Italy). Being a non-state part of society, civil society nevertheless serves as a stabilizing factor for both the state and society as a whole.

In turn, the modern state is directly interested in mobilizing the potential of civil society, given its mass democratic nature. Moreover, in a number of cases it deliberately renounces some of its functions (or limits them) in favor of civil society organizations and associations created on a voluntary basis. Through their network, the state mobilizes and attracts significant material and labor resources, which make it possible to relieve state structures, compensate for the shortcomings of their activities, and solve specific problems.

The established forms of political and legal life in different Western countries are not identical. In England, for example, there is no "written" constitution, but there is a huge number of constitutional acts. The English judiciary, unlike the American one, does not control the government and Parliament. Governments are formed on a party basis. Perhaps this somehow goes beyond the ideal framework of civil society and the rule of law, but nevertheless does not call into question the democratic principles of power and government in the British Isles.

The rule of law, civil society, human rights, to the extent and in the forms in which all this exists, are the great achievements of Western civilization. However, they should not be included in the category of universal human values. In the conditions of other civilizations - Chinese, Japanese, Islamic - other standards and other values are no less great for their peoples.

Now Russia, the Russian Federation, according to the Constitution, there is a democratic legal state (Article 1), a social state (Article 7); a person, his rights and freedoms are the highest value; recognition, observance and protection of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen is the duty of the state (Article 1).

How true is all this? These definitions are more a statement of the future than of the present. In today's Russia, the basic principle of a democratic legal state has not been implemented - the priority of human rights and freedoms in relation to any power structures, state institutions and institutions.

The public opinion of today's Russia perceives the idea of a legal state in the most general formulation and does not understand its essence. This is evidenced by the data of a sociological survey conducted by the Russian Independent Institute for Social and National Problems during 1995-1997.

As for civil society in contemporary Russia, it exists and outwardly looks quite convincing.

5. Political structure of society

politics state regime legal

political structure societies in action, in dynamics, then eat functional, received characterize how political mode. Firstly: basis political regime is functional subsystem political systems, And activity his directed on the security functioning, transformations And protection mechanism implementation authorities in society. Secondly: on the our sight, category "political mode" shows how in reality operate political institutions, in aggregates constituents political system, from taking into account connections various (external) external And (internal) internal disturbances in system. So, Aristotle on the basis analysis modes functioning Greek policies, created my classification three right, major modes: monarchy, at which supreme power belongs one; aristocracy, at which power belongs several; polity, at which power belongs everyone; And three wrong - tyranny, oligarchies And democracy, on opinion Montesquieu, republic possible only in small policies, monarchy, founded on the honor, - characteristic for states medium sizes, when same states become too much big, despotism nearly inevitable.

Can designate main approaches in understanding political modes: political and legal(institutional)an approach, for whom characteristically identification concepts "mode" from notion "the form board" or "the form state building" (typically for French schools, where monarchy And republic varied how forms board); sociologicalan approach , in accordance from which the main thing Attention given consideration connections between society And state, connections, established in real life And divergent on the the moment from prescribed constitution And laws norms political behavior. Mode at this considered in wide meaning, how regulator in relationships social And political, but not only how structure authorities from inherent to her methods implementation political will, or how the form board or state devices. Supporters sociological approach think, what modes not may to be transformed through changes determining them Existence legal procedures. Every mode determined relevant system social grounds.

Modern politicalthe sciencehighlightsfivemajorpoliticalmodes:democratic,authoritarian,totalitarian,post-totalitarian,sultanic(despotic)INreality,meaningcategories"politicalmode"isbeforeTotalAndmainwayinvolume,whatsheallowsto answeron thequestion,howingivensocietyfunctioningpoliticalsystem,howcarried outpoliticalpower.Politicalmodeis anmeaningfulcharacteristicpoliticalsystemssociety.Politicalmodeis ancharacteristicallpoliticallifesociety,includingstate.

...

The scope of the concept of "transitional law" and its political and legal significance on the example of Russia. Political sphere Political and legal sphere of society

Social institutions in the spheres of society

The relationship of spheres of public life

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

politics state regime legal

Similar Documents