1. concept, signs, theories of the emergence of the state.
2. functions of the state.
3. forms of government.
4. form of territorial structure.
QUESTION 1. CONCEPT, SIGNS, THEORIES OF THE ORIGIN OF THE STATE
The essence of the state
The state is the main institution of the political system of society, organizing, directing and controlling the joint activities and relationships of people, social groups, classes and associations. The state represents the central institution of power in society and the concentrated implementation of policy by this power. IN in a broad sense the state is understood as a community of people, represented and organized by the highest authority and living in a certain territory.
From the point of view of modern ideas, the state should act as a power system that organizes society in the interests of people. And, like any system, the state must be integral: both in terms of power and organization, and in territorial terms. The state is a “shell” that preserves the integrity of a particular social community.
The term "state" began to be used in political science around the second half of the 16th century. Until this time, such concepts as “polis”, “principality”, “kingdom”, “kingdom”, “republic”, “empire”, etc. were used to designate the state. N. was one of the first to introduce the term “state” into scientific use. Machiavelli. He interpreted it broadly as any supreme power over a person.
In modern science, the state in in the narrow sense is understood as an organization, a system of institutions that have supreme power in a certain territory, and is often identified with a certain ethnic group, with the administrative apparatus, with justice.
Signs of the state
Most modern authors believe that state is an organization of public power that has sovereignty, operates in a certain territory and subjugates the entire population living in this territory.
Main structural elements states are the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, the protection of public order and state security, the armed forces and partly the media. It is clear from the definition that a state, as a subject of international law, must have at least sovereignty, territory and population.
Also, the characteristics of a state are:
1. Coercion. No one can arbitrarily make decisions about his existence outside the state, about disobedience to state power. Belonging to the state is socially necessary, forced (“You don’t choose your homeland”) and is regulated by state and international law.
From the latter’s point of view, apatritism (statelessness) is seen as an undesirable and abnormal phenomenon. It should be borne in mind that an arbitrary decision by government authorities to deprive a person of citizenship is also a violation of international law, in particular the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN in 1948.
2. The right to use violence – legitimate violence. Considered by many as a key feature of the state. M. Weber wrote about this: “The state is that human community that, within a certain area, claims a monopoly of legitimate physical violence.”
It should be borne in mind that the purpose of legitimate violence on the part of the state is to ensure order, to protect society and citizens from arbitrary actions of individuals (groups) that harm society and citizens.
Legitimization of violence is ensured by the fact that it can only be used:
central government;
those who are given such a right;
strictly within the law;
to establish and maintain order in society.
3. Sovereignty(supreme power). Sovereignty is the independence and independence of the state in its internal affairs and in the conduct of foreign policy.
Thus, the concept of state sovereignty has external and internal dimensions.
From the point of view of the external dimension, sovereignty means non-interference in the affairs of the state of all other states, respect for its independence, and preservation of integrity.
From the point of view of the internal dimension, sovereignty means that the state has supreme power in relation to internal subjects and is best specified by the next attribute of the state - universality.
4. Universality. The state covers with its influence the people located on its territory, including citizens of other states.
In other words, citizens of other states are obliged to obey the laws of the state in whose territory they are located.
5. Right. It is a mandatory attribute of the state. Any state operates within the established legal order. Law gives legitimation to all actions of the state, including the use of violence. The legal system determines the order and technique of state activity, the procedure for regulating relations and the coexistence of citizens, organizations, institutions, etc.
The No. 1 legal document in the state is the constitution, which is not accidentally called the fundamental law of the state.
The Constitution defines:
basic principles of state activity;
structure of the state;
organization of government bodies and their powers;
the nature of the relationship between state and society, state and individual.
The Russian Federation has a Constitution adopted on December 12, 1993 as a result of universal suffrage.
6. Public power. Each state has an extensive system of government bodies and institutions. The main ones include:
representative-legislative;
executive management;
judicial;
state control and prosecutor's office;
bureaucracy (administration).
Bureaucracy, understood in this case as a special layer of people specializing in government, is a mandatory phenomenon in the state. The task of society is to find ways to control the activities of the bureaucracy, to prevent it from turning into a closed caste, living at the expense of society and skimping on its responsibilities to the state.
7. Territory. Each state is “tied” to a certain territory, separated by borders from the territory of other states. In addition, within its internal borders the state has a certain administrative-territorial structure.
8. The people inhabiting the territory of a given state. A historically established national or multinational community of people, which is subject to the law and political power of the state.
9. Taxes. A mandatory attribute of any state. Only it has the right to establish and collect taxes. Through taxes, the sovereignty (supreme power) and universality of the state are demonstrated. This is a strong way to control citizens and an indicator of the influence of the state. Taxes are used by the state:
to perform its functions, social in the first place.
10. Monetary unit. Each state has its own monetary unit. Only it has the right to issue (issue) money. This enables the state to control the economic system of society.
11. State symbols. The most important symbols of the state include the state emblem, flag, and anthem. The coat of arms and flag are the official distinctive signs of the state, the description of which is established by law. They are a symbol of the sovereignty of the state. The state emblem is depicted on flags, seals and coins. The national flag is a single-color or multi-color panel with a coat of arms or other emblems and signs. The national anthem is a solemn song (motif) glorifying a given state.
The central institution of the political system is the state. It concentrates the highest powers of power and has the ability to manage and purposefully regulate social relations. The term “state” itself is usually used in two meanings. In a broad sense, a state is understood as a community of people living in a certain territory, represented and organized by a supreme authority. It is identical to the country and the politically organized people. In this meaning they speak, for example, about the Russian, French, Italian state, meaning the entire society it represents.
Around the 11th century. the state was usually interpreted broadly and was not separated from society. A clear distinction between state and society was justified in the theories of the state by B. Spinoza, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and other thinkers. In them, these concepts are separated not only substantively and historically, since it is argued that individuals who initially existed in a free and unorganized state, as a result of economic and other interactions, first formed a society, and then, to protect their security and natural rights, by contract they created a special body - state. In modern science, the state in the narrow sense is understood as an organization, a system of institutions that have supreme power in a certain territory.
The state arose when the reproduction of man himself and the material foundations of his life outgrew the framework of a self-contained community. The origin of the state is not a one-time act, but a long process of disintegration of primitive self-government.
There are various theories of the origin, development and essence of the state. These are: a) theocratic, which interprets the state as a creation of God; b) patriarchal, which removes the state from the family, clan, tribe and interprets its power as tutelary, paternal; c) contractual, which interprets the state as the result of a social contract between citizens and rulers; d) violence, conquest, which explains the emergence of the state by the conquest of some groups and tribes by others; d) idealistic,
For example, for Hegel, the state is a spiritual idea that manifests itself in the form of human will and freedom; f) socio-economic - the emergence during the development of production of private property, classes and exploitation (Marxism).
The state is a product of the internal evolution of society, which objectively needs organizational design. In different eras, in different conditions, it acts as an organization for managing society, as a mechanism of power. The state does not have an eternal nature; it did not exist in primitive society. Thus, the state is a historically established organization political power and management of social processes in society, the main institution of the political system.
The state is a political institution that organizes the joint life of the population in a certain territory and ensures proper social order there, maintaining the appropriate norms and rules of human coexistence.
In general, the state was formed as an institution for organizing common life. It is for these purposes that it forms and supports the norms and rules of social life, controls their implementation by the authorities and subjects. In this sense, the state is a unique value, without whose power-organizing role it is impossible to preserve human coexistence in the modern world.
As a specific institution of political power, the state has a number of characteristics that allow it to be distinguished from other political institutions and organizations.
1. The presence of special public power, which, embodied in state bodies, acts as state power. It is carried out by a special layer of people who perform the functions of management and coercion, constituting the state apparatus, which is endowed with state powers, i.e. the ability to issue binding acts and resort to government influence when necessary.
2. Territorial organization of the population. State power is exercised within a certain territory and extends to all people living on it.
3. State sovereignty, i.e. independence of state power from any other power within the country and outside. Sovereignty gives the state the right to independently and freely decide its affairs, distinguishes it, along with other characteristics, from other organizations of society (for example, from parties, movements, etc.).
4. The state is the only organization that is engaged in lawmaking, i.e. issues laws and other legal acts binding on the entire population. The state cannot exist without law, since the latter legally formalizes state power and thereby makes it legitimate.
5. A state organization necessarily involves collecting taxes from the population.
The state represents the entire society as a whole; it and on its behalf make all government decisions without exception that concern all members of society and are binding on everyone. It is the bearer of power, the jurisdiction of which extends to all members of society and the entire territory of the country. The coercive nature of the state's power, its monopoly on the use of violence, fundamentally distinguishes it from other political institutions and makes it the basis of the political system.
It is impossible to imagine a state without power, domination and subordination. It differs from other forms of human organization in that it has military force and a judicial apparatus. Although violence is not the only means of the state, it is a specific means for it. However, the forms, means, and conditions for his use of violence or threats of violence are strictly defined and regulated by law. That is why they talk about legitimacy or legalized violence on the part of the state.
In modern society, the state concentrates enormous strength. Firstly, it has a monopoly on the adoption of generally binding rules of behavior and the ability to ensure their application through the use of the repressive apparatus (army and police). Secondly, its strength is due to its intervention in the economic life of society. Thirdly, in a certain way it is also the guardian of society, since it performs the functions of social protection. Fourthly, senior government officials independently make decisions on all more or less important issues of social development.
The mechanism of a modern state is distinguished by a high degree of complexity and the diversity of its constituent parts, blocks, and subsystems. The structure of the state mechanism includes government bodies, government agencies and enterprises, government officials, organizational and financial means, as well as coercive force. All this is necessary to ensure the functioning of the state apparatus.
The social purpose of the state, the nature and content of its activities are expressed in functions that are associated with the main areas of activity.
The classification of functions is based on the spheres of activity of the state, i.e. those areas of social relations that it affects. Depending on this, the functions of the state can be divided into internal and external.
Internal functions are the main directions of state activity within a given country, characterizing the internal policy of the state. These include protective and regulatory functions.
The implementation of protective functions presupposes the activities of the state to ensure and protect all social relations established and regulated by law.
Regulatory functions characterize the role of the state in organizing social production, developing the country’s economy, and creating necessary conditions for personality formation. Regulatory functions include economic, social functions, as well as taxation and collection of taxes, environmental, cultural, etc.
External functions are manifested in the foreign policy activities of the state, in its relations with other countries.
The external and internal functions of the state are closely interconnected and interdependent.
Depending on the duration of action, the functions of the state are classified into permanent (carried out at all stages of the development of the state) and temporary (they cease to operate with the solution of a certain task, usually having emergency); depending on the meaning - into basic and non-basic.
The most important and initial characteristic of a democratic state
This is democracy. This means that the actual source of state power and its original social subject is the people and only the people.
A democratic state is a state in which strict observance and guaranteed implementation of personal, political and other rights and freedoms of man and citizen are ensured, broad participation of every member and all social strata of society in the management of state and public affairs in order to achieve public harmony, socio-political stability and the common good. The political regime of a democratic state will be discussed specifically in one of the chapters of the textbook.
A rule-of-law state is a state that, in all its organization, functioning and activities, is based on subordination to the law, on strict compliance with its norms that enshrine universal human rights and freedoms. It is based on the desire to protect a person from state terror, violence against conscience, petty tutelage on the part of authorities, to guarantee individual freedom and fundamental individual rights. It is a state limited in its actions by the law that protects the freedom, security and dignity of the individual and subordinates power to the will of the sovereign people. The relationship between the individual and the government will be determined by the constitution, which asserts the priority of human rights, which cannot be violated by the laws of the state and its actions. In order for the people to control the state, there is a separation of powers: legislative, executive and judicial. An independent court is called upon to protect the primacy of law, which is universal and applies equally to all citizens, state and public institutions. The concept of the rule of law in its fundamental terms developed in the 11th - 19th centuries. in the works of Locke, Montesquieu, Kant, Jefferson and other theorists. Various theories of the rule of law are based on the concept of civil society.
The adequate social basis of the rule of law is civil society, which is a society of developed social relations, high general and political-legal culture, socio-political activity of its members, separated and independent from the state and building its relations with it on the basis of recognition of the priority of society and the need to serve him state. Recognition of priority by civil society is a source of legitimacy of state power and the legal system, which, in turn, serves as the most important guarantee of respect for law and order in society. The doctrine of the rule of law, at the same time, proceeds from the inadmissibility of opposing them to each other, from the recognition of the need to achieve their harmonious
Interactions on a legal basis.
Civil society has a complex structure, including economic, family, ethnic, religious and legal relations, morality, as well as political relations not mediated by the state between individuals as the primary subjects of power, parties, interest groups, etc.
In civil society, in contrast to state structures, it is not vertical, but horizontal connections that predominate - relations of competition and solidarity between legally free and equal partners.
Summarizing the experience of the emergence and development of various legal states, we can highlight their following common features:
Presence of civil society;
Limiting the scope of state activity to the protection of individual rights and freedoms, public order, and the creation of favorable legal conditions for economic activity;
Worldview individualism, everyone’s responsibility for their own well-being;
Legal equality of all citizens, priority of human rights over state laws;
Universality of law, its extension to all citizens, all organizations and institutions, including government bodies;
Sovereignty of the people, constitutional and legal regulation of state sovereignty. This means that it is the people who are the ultimate source of power, while state sovereignty is representative in nature;
The separation of the legislative, executive and judicial powers of the state, which does not exclude the unity of their actions based on the procedures provided for by the constitution, as well as a certain supremacy of the legislative power;
Priority in state regulation of the method of prohibition over the method of permission. This means that in a rule-of-law state the following principle applies to citizens: “Everything that is not prohibited by law is permitted.” The method of permission is applied here only in relation to the state itself, which is obliged to act within the limits of what is permitted - formally recorded powers;
The rights of other people as the only limiter on individual freedom. The rule of law does not create absolute personal freedom. The freedom of everyone ends where the freedom of others is violated.
The establishment of the rule of law was an important stage in expanding the freedom of the individual and society. Its creators believed that providing everyone with negative liberty (freedom from restrictions) and encouraging competition would benefit everyone, make private property available to everyone, maximize individual responsibility and initiative, and lead ultimately to the welfare of all. However, this did not happen. Individual freedom, equality and non-interference of the state in the affairs of civil society proclaimed in legal states did not prevent the monopolization of the economy and its periodic crises, harsh exploitation, worsening inequality and class struggle. Deep actual inequality devalued the equality of citizens and turned the use of constitutional rights into a privilege of the propertied classes.
A social state is a state that strives to provide each citizen with decent living conditions, social security, participation in production management, and ideally approximately equal life chances, opportunities for personal self-realization in society.
The activities of such a state are aimed at the common good and the establishment of social justice in society. It smooths out property and other social inequality, helps the weak and disadvantaged, takes care of providing everyone with work or another source of livelihood, maintaining peace in society, and creating a living environment favorable to humans.
The activities of a modern welfare state are multifaceted. This is the redistribution of national income in favor of less affluent segments of the population, employment and security policy, employee rights in the enterprise, social insurance, support for family and motherhood, care for the unemployed, the elderly, youth, development of accessible to all
Education, healthcare, culture, etc.
If the essence of the state as a political institution is uniform, then the forms of the state are diverse. This diversity has fully manifested itself in historical development and takes place in the modern era, when the number of states on our planet has exceeded 200.
States are traditionally characterized through forms of government and forms of territorial (state) structure. They embody the organization of supreme power, the structure and order of relationships between the highest state bodies, officials and citizens. The elements of the form of the state are:
Form of government, which usually refers to the organization of the highest authorities in a particular state;
Form government system, which reflects the territorial structure of the state, i.e. how the territory of a given state is structured, what parts it consists of and what their legal status is;
A political regime, which is a system of methods, means and means of exercising state power and characterized by the degree of political freedom in society, the state of the legal status of the individual.
Forms of government are divided according to the method of organizing power and its formal source into monarchies and republics.
In a monarchy, supreme power is fully or partially concentrated in the hands of the sole head of state - the monarch (king, czar, shah, etc.). This supreme power is usually hereditary. At the same time, a distinction is made between an absolute monarchy, in which there are no representative institutions of the people and the power of the monarch is not limited in any way (for example, Saudi Arabia, Brunei, etc.). A limited monarchy is when, along with the head of state (monarch), there is another supreme authority (for example, Parliament). Modern form limited monarchy - parliamentary monarchy. The role of the monarch in it is nominal; the leading role in governing the state is played by the government formed by parliament. The most typical example of a parliamentary monarchy is modern Great Britain, Japan, Spain, Sweden, Norway, etc.
A republic where all the highest authorities are elected or formed for a certain period of time. Depending on who forms the government, to whom it is accountable and controlled, republics are divided into presidential, parliamentary and mixed.
In a parliamentary republic, the head of state is an elected official. The role of the president in forming the government, as well as in running the country, is purely nominal. The government, headed by the Prime Minister, is formed by parliament, to which it is politically responsible. Currently, parliamentary republics exist in countries such as Italy, Germany, Austria, India and others.
A presidential republic is characterized by the fact that the head of state is the president, who has the powers of head of state and head of government. The government in such a republic is appointed by the president himself and is not responsible to parliament. Such republics are the USA, the Russian Federation and others.
In some countries there is a mixed form of government, i.e. combining the features of a presidential republic, where the head of state is elected by the population and appoints the government; and a parliamentary republic, where the government is responsible to parliament, early dissolution of parliament by the president is possible. Such countries with a mixed form of republican government include, for example, France, Finland and others.
The form of the state is the external manifestation of the organization of territorial and class-political power, which includes three elements: territorial structure, form of government and political regime. The territorial structure of the state reflects the connection between central and local government bodies, the relationship of individual parts of the state among themselves and with the state as a whole. On this basis, two main forms are distinguished - a unitary and federal state, as well as a transitional form - a confederation.
A unitary state is a simple, unified state that does not include other state entities with the rights of its members. In such states there is a unified system of supreme bodies and a unified system of legislation. Most states in the world (more than 85%) are unitary. These include states such as Spain, China, Italy and others.
A federal state is a complex, union state, parts of which are state entities and have a certain political independence and other signs of statehood. Unlike a unitary state, a federation has two systems of supreme authorities - federal bodies and the corresponding authorities of members (subjects) of the federation. Along with federal legislation, there is also legislation of the constituent entities of the federation. 24 states are federal in nature. Among them are the largest countries by territory - the USA, Russia, Canada, India, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, as well as Mexico, Pakistan, Nigeria, Switzerland, UAE, Belgium, etc. Constituting only 3% of the total number of countries on our planet, federal states cover a total of approximately a third of the population and half of the globe's territory.
A confederation is a temporary union of states formed to achieve political, military, economic and other goals. This is a less durable association of states compared to a federation and has existed for a relatively short time. Confederations either disintegrate or transform into federal states. The Confederation does not have sovereignty, because there is no common territory for the united subjects, a unified system of legislation, and no common citizenship. Confederations existed in the USA (1776 - 1787), Switzerland (until 1848), Germany (1815 -1867) and some other countries. Within the framework of the confederation, union bodies can be created, but only on those problems for the sake of which they united and only of a coordinating nature. Subjects of the confederation have the right to freely secede from the union.
Thus, the union of several states into a confederation (as opposed to a federation) does not lead to the formation of a new state.
There is also a classification of states by type, carried out mainly from the perspective of two approaches: formational and civilizational. Within the first, the main criterion is socio-economic characteristics (socio-economic formation). In accordance with this, the following types of state are distinguished: slave, feudal, bourgeois, socialist. Within the second approach, the main criteria are cultural, religious, national, psychological and other characteristics. Depending on them, the following civilizations are distinguished: Egyptian, Chinese, Western, Byzantine
Introduction
Questions:
1. Origin, essence and main features of the state as a “special organization of power”
2. Institutional forms of government and forms of government
3. Features of the structural and functional organization of state power in the Russian Federation
4. Elections as an institution for the reproduction and renewal of state power
As a result of successfully studying the topic, you will learn:
· basic concepts of the origin and essence of the state as a universal organization designed to produce the minimum of regulation and order necessary for society
· the structure and functions of the state as an extensive system of institutions and institutions, embodying three branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial
· the essence and substantive meaning of parliamentarism as a basic institution of democracy, in which the principle of popular sovereignty is most directly manifested
· main types of state, classified on such grounds as form of government, form of government
· the essence and foundations of the rule of law as an institution that ensures the supremacy of law and law in public life
· the essence and foundations of the welfare state as an institution that guarantees its citizens a certain level of social security and safety
· place and role in the system of government bodies of the institution of presidency and parliamentarism: common features and features of presidential and parliamentary republics
· the role and significance of the institution of free democratic elections in the organization and functioning of state power: the main types of electoral systems
· features of the structural and functional organization of state power in modern Russia and the implementation of the principle of “separation of powers”
and acquire the following competencies:
· formulate fundamental differences in approaches to analyzing the origin and essence of the state, characteristic of Marxism and liberal Western tradition
· reveal the content of the principle of separation of powers as a system of checks and balances in the organization of state power, ensuring freedom and democracy
· give a comprehensive description of the mechanisms for the formation of each branch of government, as well as their functional and purposeful purpose
· distinguish (using the example of specific countries) the features of state building in the conditions of unitary states, federations and confederations
· prove the direct dependence of the emergence and development of civil society on the form and method of government existing in a given state
· correlate concepts such as “parliamentary republic” and “presidential republic”, “absolute monarchy” and “parliamentary monarchy”
· conduct a comparative analysis and formulate differences between the system of organization of government in the USA and in the Russian Federation
· reveal the content of the election campaign as a complex legislatively regulated process, breaking down into a number of successive stages
· see the “pros” and “cons” of majoritarian and proportional electoral systems and the features of their use in organizing elections in our country
As you master the topic, focus on the following concepts:
State- an organization of public political power that extends to the entire society, acts as its official representative and, if necessary, relies on means and measures of coercion
Legislature- one of three powers that balance each other in the state. It is a set of powers to issue laws, as well as a system of government bodies exercising these powers
Executive branch– represents a set of management powers state affairs
Confederation- a form of union of states in which the states included in the union retain their sovereignty in full. Combines the features of both international legal and government organization
Majoritarian electoral system- one of the two main types of electoral systems, in which the candidate who receives the most votes is elected
Monarchy- a form of government in which the head of state is the monarch. His power (with rare exceptions) is for life and is inherited.
Proportional electoral system– one of the two main types of electoral system, in which the distribution of mandates is carried out in accordance with the received share of the vote
Republic- form government, in which all supreme bodies of state power are either elected or formed by representative national institutions (parliaments), and citizens have personal and political rights
Judicial branch– represents a set of powers to administer justice, i.e. powers to consider and resolve criminal, civil, administrative and constitutional cases (disputes)
Unitary state- one of two forms of territorial organization of the state. A state is unitary (merged, simple) if the majority of parts of this state do not have the status of a state entity
Federation- a form of government, which is a complex (union) state consisting of state entities that have legally defined political independence
To study the topic:
Read:
O.Z.Mushtuk. Political science. Tutorial. – M.: Market DS. 2006. Section 4. The state as the central institution of the political system. Chapters: 4.1. Origin, essence and main features of the state as a “special organization of power” (pp. 259 – 275); 4.2. Institutional forms of government and forms of government (pp. 276 – 291); 4.3. Features of the structural and functional organization of state power in the Russian Federation (pp. 292 – 317); 4.4. Elections as an institution for the reproduction and renewal of state power (pp. 318 – 345).
Pay attention to:
On the importance of this topic in acquiring the necessary skills to rationally and critically analyze political phenomena and processes related to the organization and functioning of state power in various countries and political systems, the mechanisms for the formation of political power institutions and structures in them, the distribution of spheres (and volumes) between them. competence and responsibility, etc.
Moreover, we are talking about the skills and abilities to identify in this analysis (using comparative political science methods) not only what is common and similar, but also what distinguishes, what gives rise to national specificity and is associated not only with differences in historical experience and traditions , but also with the subjective side of politics, including the ideological attitudes and value orientations of those in power, the degree of their commitment to democratic forms and methods of government, attitude towards the possibility (and necessity) of control by the public, etc.
“Any government can afford exactly as much as the people allow it” - this normative ideal of democracy is an ideal because, like any other ideal, it has no end. But getting closer to it to one degree or another is a completely feasible task (as the experience of Western countries shows). But this requires both solid knowledge of through what channels and by what means it is possible to retain power and rulers within the framework of the obligations imposed on them by society, as well as practical skills in the reasonable (rational) use of these mechanisms.
If we in Russia want a truly democratic and socially responsible government, then we must accustom our “rulers” (big and small) to perceive themselves not as “shepherds of the flock” sent by God, i.e. of the people, but only and exclusively in the role of its “trained servants”, professionals who are hired (and maintained) by the people to conduct common affairs, authorized by them to govern the country according to legal (i.e. fair) law in the name of neither private nor corporate, but the common good.
And who are removed (expelled) by the people if they do not comply (or unprofessionally fulfill) the obligations assumed under the social contract. If, instead of caring about promoting common state interests, they act only and exclusively to please their personal egocentric ambitions and plans.
And for this there is only one way - to learn to really (effectively) use (among other things) such an accessible tool for control and rotation of those in power as free (alternative) elections. Only through this ability to choose “leaders” and “stewards” worthy of ourselves, and having chosen to cope with them, can we truly come to real democracy, a democracy of rationally conscious and responsible participation, in which power will be exercised (and constantly renewed) by those who freely express themselves by the majority.
Check out the following additional resources:
1. Constitution of the Russian Federation. Official publication. – M.: Publishing house “Legal Literature”, 1997
2. O.Z.Mushtuk, E.A.Kiselev. Modern electoral systems and election technologies - M.: Publishing house MESI, 1999 - p. 4 – 77 (Introduction, chapters 1 – 5)
3. Mushtuk O.Z. Breaking is not building. The next tasks of the authorities. – M.: Observer-Observer. 2002. No. 2 – p. 69 – 76
Pay attention to:
Contained in these publications is an analysis of the structural and functional organization of power in the Russian Federation within the framework of its transition to a market and the implementation of political modernization “in the image and likeness” of what exists in developed Western democracies, including factors that “pull” the country back, and what determines the constant reproduction in political practice of what we are trying to escape.
Answer the following questions:
1. Structure and functions of the political system and mechanisms of its interaction with the environment
2. Capabilities of political systems as determinants of effectiveness
3. Basic criteria for the classification of political systems and their typological plurality
4. The concept of a political regime as a functional side of the political system
5. Initial features and “generic characteristics of totalitarianism as a regime of “all-consuming rule”
7. Democracy as a value and political form of social progress
8. Basic principles and attributes of pluralistic (representative) democracy
9. Human rights and freedoms and international standards in this area
10. Main directions and effectiveness of political modernization (democratization) of Russia
Theoretical material on this topic:
Theoretical material of question 1:
When studying the first question – Origin, essence and main features of the state as a “special organization of power” – you should, first of all, familiarize yourself with the various theories of the origin of this institution. Understand the content of such theories as:
· theocratic theory(within which the emergence of the state is interpreted as the result of a contract between man and God)
· patriarchal theory(within the framework of which the state crowns the process of inter-tribal and inter-tribal integration and appears as the highest (ultimately developed) form of patriarchal power)
· social contract theory ( within which the state acts as the resulting product of a voluntary agreement between people)
· theory of violence(in which the emergence of the state is associated with the conquest and enslavement of some tribes by other tribes)
· class theory(within the framework of which the state arises where and when the division of society into antagonistic (socially irreconcilable) classes occurred).
It must be borne in mind that all these theories cannot be assessed unambiguously. Each of them contains a rational grain and in its own way (taking into account the knowledge accumulated by that time) reveals one or another side (or manifestation) of the genesis and development of the state - processes that were generally objective in nature, being an institutional expression of the social need to streamline the joint life and centralization.
In legal terms The main features of a state are: coercion(obedience to the mechanism of government under compulsory laws); sovereignty(supremacy of state power within the country and independence in relations with other states); universality(the state acts on behalf of the entire society and extends its power throughout the entire society).
On a social level– population (a community of people living within the borders of a given state and who are its citizens or subjects), as well as institutions such as the ruling political elite(carries out the function of strategic management of the company) and administrative apparatus(a special layer of government officials and employees involved in direct government administration).
In a geographical sense– clearly delineated by state borders territory as the physical (material) basis of the state, which is characterized by: indivisibility, inviolability, exclusivity and inalienability. A state that has lost its territory ceases to be a state.
At the organizational and institutional level– an extensive network of institutions and institutions that represent three branches of government– legislative, executive and judicial, which in democratic systems are built on the principle of separation, i.e. are autonomous and independent of each other, having (each) a constitutionally established scope of powers and prerogatives.
Regarding the main functions of the state as the supreme manager of public affairs, then among them it is necessary to distinguish between the functions internal(related to the management of individual areas public life and ensuring social stability in society, protecting the constitutional order) and functions external(aimed at ensuring national security and protecting the country’s interests in the international arena).
The study of the first question should be concluded by understanding what is behind the concepts "constitutional state" And "welfare state".
Theoretical material of question 2:
When studying the second question – Institutional forms of government and forms of government - You should first of all understand what these concepts mean. Concept "form of government" indicates the method of organizing the supreme state power, the principles of relationships between its individual constituent institutions and institutions, the degree of participation of the people in the formation of government bodies and control of their activities. Concept "form of government"– on the national-territorial organization of the state and the nature of the relationship between central and regional (local) administrative and managerial structures.
From point of view forms of government One should distinguish between states in the form of a monarchy (hereditary power) and in the form of a republic (elected power). Monarchies there are two types: absolute and constitutional. IN absolute monarchies Unlimited power by anyone or anything is concentrated in the hands of one person (king, czar, sultan, etc.). There are no representative bodies, as well as political parties and organizations.
IN constitutional monarchies The power of the monarch is no longer comprehensive and is limited in the sphere of legislation by a representative body, i.e. parliament (dualistic, or dual, monarchy), or is “purely” symbolic (formal) power, when the monarch seems to “reign” but does not rule, real power is concentrated not in the hands of the monarch, but in the hands of the popularly elected parliament and the government formed by it on a party basis, headed by the prime minister -minister – leader of the party (or bloc of parties) that won the elections (parliamentary monarchy).
Among the republics one should also distinguish republics with a presidential form of government and republics with a parliamentary form of government. But it must be borne in mind that in their “pure form” these two types of republics are rare and most of them that currently exist belong to the category of mixed (presidential-parliamentary or parliamentary-presidential republics).
In this regard, it is advisable to compare the order of formation and status powers of the legislative and executive powers in republics of different types. What in this regard is typical for the United States as a presidential republic of the classical type, France as a semi-presidential republic, and Germany as a parliamentary republic. And also for different types of monarchies: Saudi Arabia - as an absolute monarchy, Jordan - as a dualistic monarchy, Great Britain - as a parliamentary monarchy.
One should also distinguish between the typological heterogeneity of states in terms of forms government system. According to this criterion they are divided into states unitary,federal And confederate. The former predominate, the latter are rare and, as a rule, short-lived. It is important to take into account that one or another form of government is determined by countless factors (social, political, economic, historical, cultural, geographical, etc.). The more diverse the living conditions of individual countries and peoples, the greater the likelihood of not a unitary, but a federal or confederal form of state, the more between them specific features even within the same type. And in order to understand the differences between unitary states and federations in terms of centralization and decentralization of power and prerogatives, it is necessary to conduct a comparative analysis using the example of the USA or Germany (federal republics) and Great Britain or France (unitary states).
Theoretical material of question 3:
When studying the third question – Features of the structural and functional organization of state power in the Russian Federation – we should, first of all, turn to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, popularly adopted in 1993, as the main Law of the country, according to which the Russian Federation is a democratic, federal, legal state with a republican form of government. And on this basis it is necessary to consider:
· Legal status of the President of the Russian Federation as the head of state and guarantor of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the rights and freedoms of man and citizen and the functions arising from this status of the first official in the state to represent the country in the international arena and determine the main directions of foreign policy, his powers and prerogatives related to the organization and functioning of the executive branch, relationships with other branches of government (legislative and judicial)
· Place and role in the system of organization and functioning of state power Federal Assembly The Russian Federation is an institution that embodies parliamentarism as a system of leadership based on the principle of separation of powers, acting as a representative body designed to express and implement the will and sovereignty of the multinational people of Russia, playing the role of a legislative institution endowed with the exclusive right to pass laws
· Differences in the order of formation and status powers between the two chambers of the Federal Assembly– the upper one, represented by the Federation Council, designed to express the interests of all subjects of the Russian Federation, and the lower one, represented by the State Duma, representing the interests of the population of the country as a whole. The question of the possibilities and channels of influence of both chambers on the executive branch at the stage of formation, as well as the forms of control over current activities deserves special attention.
· The procedure for the formation and status powers of the Government of the Russian Federation as the highest executive body, as well as the possibility of his resignation by the State Duma, given that the Government of the Russian Federation is not born from parliament (the latter’s participation in the process of government formation comes down only to the approval of the candidacy of the prime minister). The key figure in this process is the President of the Russian Federation
· Legal status and differences in areas of competence three constituent authorities of the judicial system of the Russian Federation at the federal level - the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Arbitration Court and the Supreme Court.
Particular attention should be paid to issues related to federal structure Russian state , and understand that the republics that are part of the Russian Federation do not have the status of sovereign and independent. The sovereignty of the Russian Federation is indivisible and extends to its entire territory, which is manifested (among other things) in the fact that throughout the entire territory of the Russian Federation it is not republican constitutions and republican legislation that have supremacy, but rather the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws. And the first (i.e., republican constitutions and laws) should not contradict the second (i.e., federal laws and the federal Constitution).
Theoretical material of question 4:
When studying the fourth question – Elections as an institution for the reproduction and renewal of state power – it should be borne in mind that, although there is no democracy without elections, not every election is a manifestation of it, but only those that are based on:
· freedom of voting, i.e. universal and equal suffrage according to the principle: “one person, one vote”
· freedom of nomination and the associated alternativeness and fair competition of elections
· freedom and equality all registered participants in the election race in rights to information and election campaigning
· freedom of self-determination each potential voter regarding personal participation in elections (at the level of both active and passive voting rights)
· obligation and frequency, when elections are held not occasionally, but regularly - within the time limits specified by law.
Elections are a rather complex legally regulated process, which includes a whole a series of sequential stages. In this regard, it is necessary to distinguish and clearly understand the content:
· initial stage associated with the announcement of the date of elections and the formation of their institutional infrastructure
· nomination and registration of candidates to representative bodies and elected government positions
· organizing and conducting an election campaign(campaigning) by candidates and electoral associations
Particular attention should be paid to financial side of elections and the existing legal regulations and “taboos” in this area with regard to the formation of election funds and their sources, limiting the circle of legal and individuals, vested with the right to voluntarily donate to these funds, rules and principles for the use of received funds, etc.
The question of electoral systems. Here it is necessary to clarify the essence of two of the most widely used systems, namely: majoritarian systems (or majority systems) and proportional systems (or systems of proportional representation), as well as the “pros” and “cons” of each of them with regard to the possibilities of real representation of the political forces operating in the country and reflection of the will of the majority, the creation of capable governments, the development of certain types of party-political systems, etc.
To conclude the study of the topic should be considered practices of organizing and conducting elections in the Russian Federation by referring to the relevant legislation. And, above all, to Federal laws: “On the basic guarantees of electoral rights and the right to participate in referendums of citizens of the Russian Federation” dated June 12, 2002, “On the elections of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation” dated December 20, 2002 and “On the elections of the President of the Russian Federation” dated January 10, 2003
To prepare for the seminar:
Consider your response to the following questions for discussion:
The state does not exist to turn earthly life into paradise, but to prevent it from finally turning into hell.” (V.S. Solovyov - Russian philosopher). “The state structure is first and more important than the economy, because it is a condition for one to be able to live at all.” (A.I. Solzhenitsyn - Russian writer). “Even a bad state is better than anarchy” (Kirill – Metropolitan of Smolensk and Kaliningrad). Taking these statements into account, think about your answer to the following questions:
1. What factors objectively determine the need for the state as a political institution?
2. What is behind the definition of the state as a “special organization of force”?
3. What functions does the state perform as the supreme “manager-manager” of public affairs?
4. Does democracy deny the need for a strong state and how should this strength be manifested?
Write a short essay (2-3 pages) on one of the following questions:
Short Essay Questions:
1. What are the main postulates of Marxism on the issue of the origin and essence of the state?
2. What characterizes parliament and parliamentarism as the basic institutions of representative democracy?
3. What factors determine the need for a federal structure of the state
5. What is the functional purpose of the administrative apparatus of the state and how do the concepts of “bureaucracy” and “bureaucracy” relate?
6. How is the government of the Russian Federation formed and who plays a key role in this process?
7. What structural elements and technologies make up the election campaign of the candidate and the electoral association?
8. From what sources of funds are candidates’ election funds formed and what legislative prohibitions and “taboos” exist in this regard?
Complete self-assessment tests
· Control test section 4. The state as the central institution of the political system from the book: O.Z. Mushtuk. Political science. Tutorial. – M.: Market DS. 2006. – p.331 – 339
To prepare for the consultation:
· Write down the questions the answers to which caused you difficulty and require additional consultation from the teacher
· Review the virtual consultation class for a list of frequently asked questions. Perhaps you will find answers to your questions there
1. The concept of the state and its nature.
1.1. Factors determining the emergence of the state.
1.2. Signs of the state.
1.3. Functions of the state.
2. Forms of government and territorial structure of the state.
2.1. Forms of government. Monarchies. Republic.
2.2. State-territorial structure. Unitary state. Federal State. Confederation.
1. The central institution of the political system is the state, since the main content of politics is concentrated in its activities. The term “state” is used in two meanings. In a broad sense, a state is a country, society, people, located on a certain territory and represented by the highest authority. Niccolò Machiavelli introduced into literary circulation the special term “stato” to designate the state, regardless of its specific forms as a special political organization of society. In a narrow proper meaning the term "state" is an organization that has supreme power over a certain territory.
1.1. The state appears as a result of the decomposition of the tribal system, the gradual separation from society of a layer of leaders and their associates and the concentration of administrative functions and social privileges in them under the influence of a number of the following factors:
1) development of the social division of labor, allocation managerial work in order to increase its efficiency in a special industry;
2) the emergence of private property, classes and exploitation (Marxist approach);
3) the conquest of some peoples by others (F. Oppenheimer, L. Gumplowicz);
4) demographic factors (growth in population, population density, transition of peoples from nomadic to sedentary lifestyles, ban on incest);
5) psychological factors (the state is considered as a fruit of the human mind, ripened under the influence of certain needs and emotions);
6) anthropological factors ( state uniform organization is rooted in the very social nature of man);
7) geographical factors (natural boundaries, landscape, waterways);
8) environmental factors (climatic conditions, soil fertility);
9) external factors (threat of attack, war, experience of other countries).
Numerous studies of the state have shown that it arises and develops under the influence of a number of factors, among which it is hardly possible to single out any one as determining.
1.2. Main features of the state:
· separation of public authorities from society and the allocation of a layer of professional managers;
· sovereignty, that is, supreme power in a certain territory. The highest power, the decisions of which are binding on everyone, is possessed only by the state;
· territory that is delineated by the borders of the state. The laws and powers of the state apply to all people living in a given territory;
· monopoly on the legal use of force and physical coercion. The range of state coercion is from restriction of freedom to the physical destruction of a person (since 1999, the death penalty has been prohibited in Ukraine);
· exclusive right to issue laws and norms binding on the entire population;
· the right to collect taxes and fees from the population.
The above characteristics of the state distinguish it from other organizations and numerous associations.
1.3. Functions of the state. The most general classification of state functions is their division into internal and external.
Internal:
· consolidation of society based on the common interests of citizens;
· adoption, improvement, implementation of laws mandatory for all;
· necessary regulation of the economy and economic activities of society;
· protection and strengthening of the existing political system;
· provision general order, public safety, maintaining citizen discipline;
· regulation of social relations, ensuring social security of citizens;
· spiritual-ideological, educational activities, formation of political consciousness of citizens.
· protection of state interests in the international arena, ensuring the country's defense;
· development of mutually beneficial cooperation with other countries and international organizations;
· participation in solving global problems of humanity, in integration processes and peacekeeping actions.
2. The structure of the state is characterized by its forms. They embody the organization of supreme power, the structure and order of relationships between the highest state bodies, officials, and citizens.
The forms of the state traditionally distinguish between forms of government and forms of territorial structure.
2.1. Forms of government.
Based on the method of organizing power and its source, states are divided into monarchies and republics.
Monarchy. The source of power is one person. The head of state receives his post by inheritance, regardless of voters and representative bodies of government. There are several types of monarchical form of government:
1) absolute monarchy – omnipotence of the head of state (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman);
2) a constitutional monarchy– the powers of the monarch are limited by the constitution and parliament. 2 varieties:
· dualistic monarchy, in which the monarch is vested primarily with executive power and only partially with legislative power (Jordan, Morocco);
· parliamentary monarchy, in which the monarch, although considered the head of state, actually has representative functions and only partially executive power.
The vast majority of modern democratic monarchies are parliamentary monarchies. The government in them is formed by a parliamentary majority and is accountable to parliament, not to the monarch. For example, Great Britain, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, etc. Modern parliamentary monarchies, paying tribute to political tradition and thereby supporting the respect of citizens for the state, actually differ little from republics - the second main form of government.
Republic. The source of power is the popular majority; the highest bodies of the state are elected by citizens. In the modern world, there are 3 main types of republics: parliamentary, presidential and mixed.
Home distinctive feature parliamentary republic is the formation of a government on a parliamentary basis and the responsibility of the government to parliament. Parliament performs a number of functions in relation to the government: forms the government, issues laws, votes (approves) the state budget, exercises control over the government. If necessary, parliament can express a vote of no confidence in the government. Although the head of government (prime minister or chancellor) is not officially the head of state, in reality he is the first person in the country's political hierarchy. The President actually occupies a more modest place in this hierarchy.
The main distinguishing feature presidential republic is that the president simultaneously acts as both the head of state and the head of government, directs domestic and foreign policy and is the supreme commander of the armed forces (USA). The president is elected by the people. He himself appoints cabinet ministers who are responsible to him and not to parliament. In a presidential republic, the government is stable, there is a strict separation of powers, the parliament cannot pass a vote of no confidence in the government, and the president does not have the right to dissolve parliament. Impeachment of the president is possible, but this procedure is significantly more difficult.
Mixed Republic seeks to combine strong presidential power with effective parliamentary control over government activities. Its main characteristic feature is the dual responsibility of the government to the president and to the parliament (France, Austria, Ukraine). The President and Parliament are elected independently of each other. Parliament cannot remove the president, who, in turn, has the right to dissolve parliament, but with prerequisite announcement of the date of early parliamentary elections. The President has the right of suspensive veto over parliamentary decisions. The head of state presides over government meetings, approves its decisions and thereby controls its activities (France).
2.2. The form of government is understood as the territorial and political organization of the state, including the political and legal status of its components and principles of relations between central and regional authorities.
The territorial organization of the state characterizes the relationship between the whole and parts, central and regional authorities. There are two main forms of territorial structure of the state: unitary and federal.
Unitary the form of territorial structure is a single politically homogeneous organization consisting of administrative-territorial units that do not have their own statehood. A unitary state has a single constitution and citizenship. All government bodies, including judicial bodies, form one system and operate on the basis of uniform legal norms (France, Hungary, Italy, Ukraine). Depending on the political regime, unitary states can be centralized, decentralized, or relatively decentralized.
Federal state - a union state consisting of relatively independent entities, equal subjects of the federation, having their own constitutions (union republics, states, cantons, lands, etc.). It is built on the basis of the distribution of functions between its subjects and the center, fixed in the union constitution, which can be changed with the consent of all subjects of the federation. The federation is characterized by the presence of dual citizenship and, as a rule, a bicameral parliament, one of the chambers of which represents the interests of the constituent entities of the federation, and the other represents national interests.
A special type of union of states is a confederation. Confederation is a union of independent states created to achieve specific goals (for example, for joint defense, solving economic, transport, energy and other problems). Members may voluntarily leave the confederation by terminating the confederal treaty. This is a rarely encountered form of organization of a political community (for example, the European Union, the CIS).
Questions and tasks for the topic:
1. What are the essential differences between the state and other political institutions: political parties, movements, etc.?
2. Expand the content of the concept of “sovereignty”.
3. What functions is the state called upon to perform?
4. What is meant by the structure of the state?
5. How does a federation differ from a unitary state?
6. What was the USSR - a federation or a unitary state? Give reasons for your answer.
Lecture No. 1,2
State as a central institutionpolitical system
“Origin, essence and main features
statesas a “special organization of force”
Among all the diversity of institutions and institutions structuring the political system, the decisive role is played by the state as a “special organization of power”, which in the most concentrated and socialized form embodies the political and power principles in the life of any society. That organizational and managerial core represented by the hierarchy of authorized authorities, both in the center and locally, which ensures the joint life of people as a differentiated set (within the boundaries of a certain territory). And it mediates the movement of the main contradiction of this life, namely: the contradiction between the social nature of human activity and individual form its implementation. Between people's needs for freedom and the impossibility of realizing this freedom in conditions of anarchy. If this instrument personified by the state had not arisen to ensure the integrity and regulation of human society, then people (and classes) would simply have destroyed each other in a fierce struggle, in a “war of all against all” determined by the “sinfulness” of man as a biological being.
In the Basics social concept The Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) says in this regard that “the need for a state does not flow directly from the will of God about the primordial Adam, but from the consequences of the Fall and from the agreement of actions to limit sin in the world with His will.” Seeing the moral meaning of the existence of the state in limiting evil and supporting good, “the church not only orders its children to obey state power, regardless of the beliefs and religion of its bearers, but also to pray for it, “so that we may lead a quiet and serene life in all piety and purity.” "
Theories of the origin of the state.
Exists many different theories and concepts about the origin and essence of the state, its functional purpose. Among them, the most common are:
Theocratic theory as a product of the era of undivided dominance of the Catholic Church. It is based on the idea that the emergence of the State was the result of a contract between man and God. And the transition sanctioned by him from direct rule by God to worldly rule, the arrangement of worldly affairs based on an earthly ruler,
faithful to the commandments of God and the creation of good business Revealing the teaching of Christ about the correct attitude towards government authority, the Apostle Paul wrote: “Let every soul be subject to the higher authorities; for There is no authority that is not from God, but the existing authorities have been established by God.” Therefore, he who resists authority resists God's institution; and those who resist will bring condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good deeds, but to evil deeds. Do you want to not be afraid of power? Do good and you will receive praise from her; for the boss is God's servant, for your good. If you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain: he is God’s servant, an avenger to punish those who do evil...”
The Apostle Peter expressed the same thought: “Be subject therefore to every human authority, for the sake of the Lord: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to the rulers, as those sent by him to punish criminals and to encourage those who do good - for this is the will of God, that We, doing good, stopped the mouths of the ignorance of foolish people - as free people, not as those who use freedom to cover up evil, but as servants of God.”
In general, the apostles taught Christians to obey authorities regardless of their relationship to the church. It is well known that in the apostolic age the Church of Christ was persecuted by both the local Jewish authorities and the Roman state authorities. This, however, did not prevent the martyrs and other Christians of those times from praying for the persecutors and recognizing their authority.
Teachings built on the postulate “all power comes from God” are constantly present in the reasoning of theologians and preachers John Chrysostom (345-407), Aurelius Augustine the Blessed (354-430), Thomas Aquinas () and others, having justification as the ultimate goal the need to subordinate the state to the church, the secular rulers of the sacred ministers. Thus, F. Aquinas believed that all types of power, including monarchical power, which was given preference, came from God. But at the same time he placed church power above secular power, insisting that all rulers must obey the Pope, since he received power “from Christ.” However, in the Middle Ages, a balance was generally maintained between church power and political power: each dominated in its own sphere, but the former was still revered more.
The theocratic theory of the origin of the state is built on real historical facts: the first state formations had religious forms (rule of priests), divine law gave authority to power, and the decisions of the state - binding. Modern Catholicism and Orthodoxy also presuppose the divine genesis of the idea of the state and the principles of power, but at the same time, as written in the already mentioned Fundamentals of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, “Christians must avoid the absolutization of power, from non-recognition of the boundaries of its purely earthly, temporary and transitory value, due to the presence of in the world of sin and the need to restrain it,” Equally, according to the teachings of the Church, this applies to power itself - it “also does not have the right to absolutize itself, expanding its borders to complete autonomy from God and the order of things established by Him, which can lead to abuses of power and even the deification of rulers.” During the English bourgeois revolution, two opposing theories became widespread; On the one side, idea patriarchhalal origin and essence of the state and the thesis derived from this about the divine nature of monarchical power (Claudius Samazius and Robert Filmer). With another - theory of contractual origin of state governmentgift power.
So, as for R. Filmer, he outlined his views on the state in the essay “Patriarchy, or the Natural Power of the King.” In it, he interpreted the formation of the state as a process of mechanical connection of clans into tribes, tribes into larger formations up to the state, which appears as a developed form of patriarchal power, exercised on behalf of all and for the common benefit. At the same time, monarchical power is presented as power inherited by the king directly from the progenitor (patriarch, father) of the human race - Adam and is not subject to earthly laws. The sovereign is not appointed, elected or removed by his subjects; his power over the people is likened to the natural power of a father over his son and is paternalistic, guardian in nature. Built on the principles of virtue.
The theory of contractual origin of the state(the theory of social contract or social contract) is associated with the names of G. Grotius, D. Locke, T. Hobbes, B. Spinoza, J.-J. Rousseau and others. They believed that the state arose as a result of a conscious and voluntary agreement between people who were in a primitive, natural, absolutely free state before the agreement. Their behavior was determined by instincts, uncontrollable desires and needs. In order to protect themselves, people affirm the state, voluntarily transferring to it part of the rights given by nature, receiving in return order and the ability to act within the framework of established legal laws. As the French thinker D. Diderot noted, people “realized that each person needs to give up part of his natural independence and submit to the will, which would represent the will of the entire society and would be ... the common center and point of unity of all their wills and all their forces "
Proponents of the theory of the contractual origin of the state interpreted it in different ways. So, if at D. Locke, the people entrust power to the sovereign, becoming his subjects, and undertake to carry out his will, then in J.-J. Rousseau, everyone submits to everyone and, therefore, to no one in particular. A person acquires civil liberty and the right of ownership of personal property. The people cannot give up their right to self-government and decide their destiny to anyone.
In the second half of the twentieth century, thanks to famous discoveries in the field of biology and zoology, it became popular organic theory of forthe formation of the state, which was developed by O. Comte and G. Spencer. Thus, drawing an analogy between a social organism and a living organism, G. Spencer argued that human society, like a biological body, has its own epidermis (protective skin) - an army, a vascular system - means of communication, a nutrition system - commodity exchange, nervous system- organizers of production (capitalists), musculoskeletal system - government. True, G. Speser did not completely identify social and biological organisms. He saw the main difference between them in the fact that people do not lose their individuality, joining an integral system, i.e., society, while the cells and organs of an animal do not possess such individuality. According to G. Spencer, the laws of evolution operate equally in both the plant and animal world, and in the social environment.
Sociological concept of the state and rights (theory of violence) of the Polish-Austrian positivist philosopher J. Gumplowicz explains the reason for their emergence in the enslavement of some tribes by others, as a result of which the rulers and the ruled, the rulers and the ruled, the winners and the vanquished appear. Not divine providence, a social contract or the idea of freedom, but a clash of hostile tribes, brute superiority of force, violence, conquest - these, in the words of L. Gumplowicz, are “parents and midwife states." F. Nietzsche also believed that the state is a means of originating and continuing this violent social process, during which the birth of a privileged cultured person, dominating over the rest of the mass.
Marxist theory of the genesis of the state derives this institution primarily from private property, which has always and everywhere given rise to classes and the exploitation of some classes by others, which, in turn, led to the emergence of the state. The state arose where and when the division of society into antagonistic classes occurred - this is the main postulate of Marxism on the issue of the emergence of the state. The state is a product of the irreconcilability of class interests. There is a weapon for the domination of one class over another, a weapon for the suppression of one class by another. “The state,” wrote F. Engels, “is the state of the most powerful, economically dominant class, which, with the help of the state, also becomes the politically dominant class and thus acquires new means for suppressing the oppressed class.” The state is interpreted in the same vein and, for which “the state is an organ of class domination, an organ of oppression of one class by another, is the creation of an “order” that legitimizes and strengthens this oppression, moderating the clash of classes.”
However, only in Ancient Greece From class antagonisms within the clan system, the formation of state-polises took place. Whereas in Ancient Rome the state arises as a result of the struggle between the disenfranchised newcomer population (plebs) and the old tribal aristocracy (patricians), and among the Germanic tribes - “as a direct result of the conquest of vast foreign territories.”
K. Marx’s teaching about the Asian mode of production, in which the state existed, but there was no private ownership of the means of production, does not fit into the postulation of private property as the root cause of the emergence of the state. The need to create and maintain irrigation structures for the benefit of agriculture and the preservation of the habitat is a circumstance that, to a decisive extent, determined the pre-class emergence of the state within the framework of this mode of production. In this process of the pre-class emergence of the state, a significant role was also played by the need for the forced prohibition of incest (incest) and inter-tribal exchange of women in the name of preservation and reproduction of the clan.
The given theories cannot be assessed unambiguously - each comes from the sum of the knowledge available at that moment and in its own way reveals one or another aspect (or manifestation) historical process the origin and development of the state - a process that was generally objective in nature, being an institutional expression of the social need of people to streamline their common life and centralization
The essence and main features of the state.
What is the state as a consciously organized social force that governs society and for society? As the Polish sociologist A. Bodnar emphasizes, The concept of “state” is perceived differently. Firstly, as an organization of a large social group. In this case, it is equivalent to the concept of “country”, “nation”, “society”, “fatherland” (American state, American nation, American people, etc.). Secondly, as an analogue of the executive branch and first of all the government. Most often, this perception of the state is typical at the everyday level. life. And finally, thirdly, as an extensive system of government bodies and legal norms, designed to provide a rationally and legally organized living environment for society.
This latter is most adequate to the essence of the state as a political institution (universal organization), which has a number of characteristics that distinguish it from other socio-political institutions and organizations. Among these signs, the most important one is "monopoinfluence on coercion and violence.”
The state, as M. Weber argued, cannot be defined in sociological terms of its goals or from the content of its activities, since there is no such task that would be exclusively the property of the state. Therefore, a clearly defined feature of the state, distinguishing it from all other social institutions and organizations, should be sought in the means that it uses. Such a means, in his opinion, is violence. “The state,” wrote M. Weber, “is a human community that, within a certain area... claims (successfully) a monopoly of legitimate physical violence. For it is characteristic of our era that the right to physical violence is attributed to all other unions or individuals only to the extent that the state, for its part, allows this violence: the state is considered the only source of the “right” to violence.” Based on this postulate, M. Weber considers the state “as a relationship of domination of people over people, based on legitimate (that is, considered legitimate) violence as a means. Thus, for it to exist, the people under domination must submit to the authority claimed by those who now dominate.” The state is interpreted in the same vein by a prominent representative of the Western liberal tradition, the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises: “The state is essentially an apparatus for the execution of coercion, its most important feature is to force by threats of force or persuasion to an order different from what we would like to do.” .
The philosophical dictionary published in Germany defines the state as “a structure of domination that is constantly renewed as a result of the joint actions of people, actions carried out thanks to the government, and which ultimately organizes social actions in a particular area.”
It would, of course, be wrong to reduce the essence of the state entirely to relations of domination and subordination. However, from the point of view of power and power structures, as the domestic political scientist rightly notes, it is these relations that distinguish the political from all other spheres of public life. For “the state (especially the modern state, which combines, as if in a single organism, many different conflicting, often incompatible interests, aspirations, attitudes, etc.) is not able to ensure the fulfillment of its main task - the implementation general will their subjects - through persuasion alone or relying on their consciousness and good will.”
In this light state appears as a political organizationtion having ultimate power over all people livingmi within the boundaries of a certain territory, and having its mainThe goal is to solve common problems and ensure the common good while maintaining, above all, order. At the same time, a modern democratic state in its activities is directly connected and limited by law, stands under the law, and not outside it and not above it. As a result, the violence used by this state, which is used only and exclusively as a last resort to ensure public safety and order, is legitimate in the sense that it is provided for and regulated by law.
The modern state has a number characteristic features and characteristics, the most important of which are recognized by the world community and are used by them as criteria for recognizing individual states as subjects of international relations with certain rights and responsibilities.
FORCESS- The state maintains the order necessary for the normal functioning of society, mainly by means of coercion. The forms and methods of this coercion, as well as their volume and nature, depend primarily on the social essence of the existing political regime, as well as on the content and orientation of the norms of state law. For example, in the process of holding elections, referendums, and plebiscites, coercion is manifested in an ideological form. The relationship between the government and local authorities (municipalities, city halls, etc.) is based on administrative and financial coercion. For this purpose, the state has special detachments of armed people (army, police, etc.) and various punitive institutions (court, prosecutor's office, prison, etc.). Relationship" href="/text/category/vzaimootnoshenie/" rel ="bookmark">relationships with other governments in foreign affairs. Being an inalienable prerogative of state power, the sovereignty of the state cannot be transferred, divided or limited. At the same time, the state must strictly observe and implement its legislation in accordance with its international obligations. to other states and the UN.
UNIVERSALITY- The state acts on behalf of the entire society and exercises supreme power in the territory under its control, that is, the territory over which its sovereignty extends. This means that all citizens located in this territory, as well as stateless persons, persons with dual (multiple) citizenship, as well as foreigners, inevitably fall under the jurisdiction of the state - regardless of whether they wish it or not. Moreover, they all pay for the maintenance of the state not voluntary (as, say, in political parties), but mandatory contributions (taxes), from which they can only be released by leaving its borders. But even after renouncing citizenship and emigrating from the country, people are not always freed from the previous state - if, for example, they still have real estate there, then this dependence on the previous state remains.
All legal entities are equally dependent on the state.
, including public associations and political parties, regardless of whether they share its goals or fight against it (i.e., their activities are regulated by laws adopted by government bodies). And they can only get out from under the tutelage of the authorities by ceasing to exist. Therefore, it is not by chance that in the eyes of the “common man” the state acquires a “supernatural” appearance, which he subconsciously bestows on those in power (the government, the president, the prime minister, the monarch, the dictator, etc.).
TERRITORY- As the physical, material1 basis of the state and its fundamental feature, territory is characterized by such concepts as:
“non-division” (even in the conditions of the existence of private ownership of land, the ownership of land by private owners does not mean division of the territory between them);
“inviolability” (which means the inviolability of borders and non-submission to the authority of another state);
“exclusivity” (on the territory of a state, the power of only this state dominates);
“inalienability” (a state that has lost its territory ceases to be a state).
And although in modern conditions, within the framework of the development of integration processes (as the main form of globalization), as well as the formation of interstate associations and blocs, the dominance of many states on their territory is becoming more and more limited, nevertheless, the state-territorial division does not die out. The territory is still remains one of the main structuring elements of statehood. It is no coincidence that acute conflicts, including armed conflicts over disputed territories or for the preservation of territorial unity, do not cease in the modern world.
POPULATION- As an integral element of the state, the population is a human community living on the territory of a given state and subject to its authority. At the same time, the population can be either mononational (and then the state is interpreted as a legal personification of its constituent nation), or multinational, consisting of various tribes, nationalities and even nations (and then the state appears in a different guise - as a legal personification not of a nation, but people as a community, which is built not on the basis of ethnicity, but according to the criterion of economic and civil community). This is exactly what Russia, the USA, Switzerland and some other countries are like, formed as multi-ethnic states.
This “de-ethnicized” (“denationalized”) interpretation of the people as social basis state more accurately reflects the political reality of the modern world, taking into account the noticeable increase in the multiethnicity of many states that were previously formed as mononational (Germany, France, etc.), associated with mass migration to these states from underdeveloped countries. Under these conditions, any advantages of the “titular nation,” not to mention attempts to secure them legally in countries where these nations constitute a minority of the population, can serve (and most often do serve) as the root cause of the growth of inter-ethnic tension, which poses a serious threat to social stability and integrity of the state - to the point that it does not exclude the possibility of its “Balkanization” (i.e., collapse according to the Yugoslav “scenario”).
Closely related to the concept of population as an unchanging attribute of any state is concept of citizenship. Citizenship is understood as the legal affiliation of a person to a given state with all the ensuing rights and obligations not only on the territory of his state, but also beyond its borders. In monarchical states, another term is used - “nationality”. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 01/01/01 states: “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality or the right to change his nationality.”
STATE MACHINE- the presence of special governing bodies that play the role of intermediate links between the rulers and the governed. M. Weber interprets the emergence of a powerful bureaucratic apparatus as the formation of a modern state, which “technically is completely dependent on its bureaucratic basis. The more it grows, the more this dependence increases.” The transformation of the state into a special, independent institution led to the creation of a “class of officials” paid from the treasury, i.e., at the expense of taxpayers. As a result, officials become identified with their functions, which politically eliminates the question of their social origin. In democratic states, bureaucracy, although it does not replace politicians, sometimes has a significant influence on decision-making on a national scale. Moreover, unlike the highest bodies of state power, which are directly dependent on the results of the electoral struggle and the balance of power in parliament, the position of this category is characterized by great stability and stability. Being an instrument for the implementation of direct power functions, the army of government officials and employees continues to do their job regardless of what happens at the top of the power pyramid (that is, it continues to function despite government crises, the dissolution of parliament, early elections, etc.) . And if the political elite is a variable component of state power, then the bureaucracy is that part of it that personifies the battle the inviolability and “eternity” of this institution.
Three branches of government.
In structural and institutional terms, the state appears as an extensive network of institutions and organizations, embodying three branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial. Unlike the totalitarian system represented by the USSR, under which state power was structured according to the principle of a “working corporation,” i.e., the Councils of People's Deputies were simultaneously legislative and executive bodies of power, in a democracy such merging is not permissible. Here the basic principle of the organization and functioning of state power is the principle of "separation of powers" in accordance with which each branch of government is autonomous and independent from the other, that is, each has a clearly defined scope of powers and prerogatives by the constitution and other regulations, beyond which it is unlawful. And the legal principle of democracy - “everything that is not prohibited is permitted” - applies only to the level of ordinary citizens, while in relation to government bodies and bureaucrats another principle applies: “only what is permitted is permitted, everything else is prohibited.” Failure to comply with this principle and the absence of limits to bureaucratic discretion when making decisions lead to administrative and bureaucratic arbitrariness, omnipotence and permissiveness of the authorities.
In the famous work “On the Spirit of Laws” Sh.-L. Montesquieu wrote in 1748: “Political freedom can only be found where there is no abuse of power. However, many years of experience shows us that every person endowed with power is inclined to abuse it and retain power in his hands to the last opportunity... In order to prevent such abuse of power, it is necessary, as follows from the very nature of things, that one power restrained the other... When the legislative and executive powers unite in the same body... there can be no freedom... On the other hand, there can be no freedom if the judicial power is not separated from the legislative and executive. And the end of everything will come if the same person or body, noble or popular in character, begins to exercise all three types of power.”
Legislative power at the macrosystem level is represented byon parliament - the highest law-making body of the country. The essential features of this power are:
Representative character in the sense that parliamentary power is born during general democratic elections as a result of the free expression of the will of the people. Parliament is a body that embodies popular sovereignty. And in this capacity as an exponent of the people’s will and in the interests of performing the functions associated with this circumstance, it has legitimizing (legitimizing) power;
In the system of separation of powers, parliamentary power is limited and isolated from other subsystems of power. At the same time, it constantly interacts with them and has a certain supremacy in relation to the executive power - it is endowed with certain (“constituent” and supervisory-controlling) powers related to the processes of formation and functioning of this power;
Parliamentarism as a specific structure of power is organically connected with the party system and is formed on a multi-party basis. Parliamentary activity is a continuation of party activity - the struggle between political parties for power and influence - the organizational form of which is the activity of parliamentary factions formed on a party basis;
The power of parliament is a constitutional, normatively guaranteed power - the nature and breadth of the powers of parliament are determined by the number and nature of the functions with which it is endowed in accordance with the fundamental law of the country (i.e., the constitution).
Functions of Parliament
ü Function of power
ü Function of legislation
ü Legitimacy function
ü Function of representation of political interests
ü Function of ensuring political transparency
ü Function of political control and holding politicians accountable
Function of power- as a body embodying popular sovereignty, parliament makes political decisions related to the development of the main directions of development of society, determining the structure and content of its political system, as well as its individual component subsystems, based on the choice of alternatives for economic and socio-political development. These alternatives are formed by the programs of parliamentary parties promoted among voters. Voters, according to With personal ideas about the coincidence of certain programs with their interests, they give them their votes in parliamentary elections. The electoral support thus provided to parties, measured by their share of participation in parliament, reflects the will of voters and legitimizes the strategy and program of the parties that won the elections.
After winning the elections and gaining a parliamentary majority, the political programs of the parties are implemented in parliamentary decisions that are made With compliance with relevant (legally prescribed) procedures. The latter are designed to combine legal, professional rationality and reasonableness of decisions made with the requirements of parliamentary democracy.
Legislative or law-making function- the main goal of parliamentary activity is the creation of legal norms; regulating the behavior of citizens and organizations, their interaction with each other. Rule-making in the hands of parliament is the instrument through which it carries out the function of managing society. And it is the highest authority in this area, possessing a “monopoly of legitimate coercion (violence).”
(At the same time, the legislative rights of parliament are not unlimited. Modern political practice has developed stable forms of limiting them, which primarily include directly vesting the government with the right to issue regulations that have the force of law. In some states this right is constitutionally enshrined (for example, in Germany , Italy, France), in others - it exists on the basis of tradition, contrary to the constitution (USA, Japan).
In a number of countries there is also a de facto or constitutional limitation on the range of issues on which parliament can legislate. In this case, many issues are determined and decided by the executive branch (for example, in the UK, Finland).
There is also the practice of applying “framework laws”, laws-principles, when parliament passes a law in general view, and the government develops it and fills it with specific content.
Function of ensuring political transparency- requires open political debate from parties, government and deputies. Parliament is a kind of arena (tribune) where various parliamentary factions, independent deputies, and the government not only declare their positions, but also argue and defend them.
Limitation of parliamentary openness (conducting closed meetings and parliamentary hearings) is strictly stipulated by certain conditions and is legally enshrined.
Function of political control and responsibility- within modern system separation of powers, parliament has significant rights, which in certain cases are:
Exceptional (bringing the president to account through impeachment proceedings);
Special (expression of a vote of no confidence or refusal of confidence in the government);
Special (deprivation of deputies' right to parliamentary immunity (i.e., immunity), removal from duties).
The second branch of government power is executive power - represented by the government and administrative and management bodies. The structure of executive government bodies includes ministries and departments, control and supervisory authorities, the armed forces, law enforcement agencies, the state security service, etc. This part of state power in a democracy carries out the main political decisions made by the legislative branch. At the same time, the government has the constitutional right to make its own political decisions and by-laws related to the implementation of its management functions.
The third branch of government - the judiciary - is represented by a system of judicial bodies and the institution of independent judges who are subject only to the law. The court personifies the highest legality in the state and plays main role in resolving conflicts and all kinds of collisions that arise in various fields social life. The democratic principles in accordance with which the court organizes its activities include as basic: independence, collegiality, transparency, presumption of innocence, adversarialism, equality of parties, the right to appeal decisions, etc.
Functions of the state.
The state differs from all other subjects of the political system in a number of functions that are vital for society, giving it the character of a universal institution - a guarantor of maintaining the integrity and regulation of the social environment. Regardless of the type, the functions of the state include:
ü protection of the state (constitutional) system and its fundamental values and principles, achieving on this basis public consensus, consolidation around common goals and development prospects
ü ensuring social stability in society and preventing (eliminating) explosive conflicts fraught with increased social tension, sporadic outbreaks of violence and civil strife
ü maintaining a common internal policy for the country, differentiated in such areas as social, economic, financial, military, cultural, etc.
ü ensuring national security and protecting the interests of the country in the international arena, developing mutually beneficial international cooperation, bilateral and multilateral relations with other states, participation in solving global problems, etc. (foreign policy functions).
At the intra-country level, these functions are specified as functions:
Economic- is expressed in the organization, coordination, regulation of economic processes through taxes and credit policy, creating incentives for economic growth or implementing sanctions, and ensuring macroeconomic stability.
Social- manifests itself in caring for a person as a member of society: meeting people’s needs for housing, work, maintaining health, education. Ensuring social security of vulnerable groups of the population (targeted assistance to the elderly, disabled, unemployed, etc.). Life, health, property insurance.
Organizational- consists in streamlining all government activities: making, organizing and executing decisions, forming and effectively using the administrative apparatus, monitoring the implementation of laws, coordinating and coordinating the activities of various subjects of the political system, etc.
Legal- includes ensuring legality and order, establishing legal norms governing social relations and the behavior of citizens, as well as the organization and functioning of the state itself and its individual institutions.
Political- consists of ensuring political stability and stability, exercising power using rational and legal technologies and techniques, developing programmatic and strategic goals and objectives for the development of society, making the necessary adjustments in accordance with the dynamics of social demands and expectations of citizens, as well as changes in the international plan
Educational- is implemented in the activities of the state to ensure democratization and humanization of the entire education system, its continuity, providing people with equal opportunities for access to higher and postgraduate education, etc.
Cultural and educational- aimed at creating conditions to satisfy the cultural needs of people, the formation of high spirituality and citizenship. Maintenance and development of such “branches” of culture as literature, art, theater, cinema, music, media, fundamental and applied science, etc.
Ecological- is associated with the establishment by the state of a legal regime for environmental management, obligations to citizens to ensure a normal living environment.
In carrying out these functions, the state most often plays the role versupreme social arbiter, which organically follows from the asymmetrical structure of society and the general interest of citizens and various groups in having such an arbiter - standing above social differences and having the right to distribute (or observe with the right to intervene) public values ( material goods, education, healthcare, etc.) with the aim of ensuring the common good and social justice, “protecting the weak from the tyranny of the strong.”
In order to mitigate the disproportionate distribution of social benefits and resources, the state legislatively provides for certain restrictions for some and guarantees for others, both general and private (for example, unemployment benefits or the prohibition of officials in their functional activities to obey party directives), but there are no absolute guarantees of the correctness (impartiality) of state arbitration, and given the limited resources of society (and they are always limited, scarce), with different strengths of interested groups (and they are always unequal), there cannot be.
“The unrestricted nature of the freedom of private enterprise,” R. Dahl writes in this regard, “gives rise to economic inequality, which, in turn, creates a threat to political democracy, the meaning of which is, first of all, equal opportunities for people and groups and associations representing their interests to influence political decisions. The state is not an objective “arbiter” - “interested groups” do not have equal or counterbalancing political resources in the final outcome. Government structures are not a neutral “arbiter” in relation to all “interests”: business organizations have a disproportionate share of resources and have much greater opportunities to influence legislative bodies. This naturally conflicts with the nature of democracy.”
And yet, the social arbitration of the state is still carried out on a larger or smaller scale, which is also served by the activities of special bodies designed to monitor compliance with legal norms (constitutional court, special arbitration, general courts and other bodies).
In cases of particularly acute struggle between opposing forces, the social arbitration of the state can take on specific forms: the introduction of a state of emergency, the dissolution of organizations and associations restabilizing public order, the prohibition of printed publications, rallies, demonstrations, etc. If these actions are carried out on the basis of the law and with strict observance the latter, they do not go beyond the implementation of that “hypostasis” of the state, which is called social arbitration.
In the most concentrated form, social arbitration of the state is expressed by such concepts as:
- constitutional state, the essence of which is expressed in the unconditional dominance of law as the main regulator of the life of society. At the same time, not only social groups both the individual, but also the state itself, all bodies respect the law and are in the same position in relation to it
- social state, the essence of which is expressed in the government pursuing a strong social policy with the aim of providing all its citizens with a decent level of social security and safety, as well as creating relatively equal living conditions for all
start.
