Conditions and factors of stability of political systems. Political stability. Essence and indicators of political stability. Conditions and factors of political stability

STABILITY POLITICAL

STABILITY POLITICAL

POLITICAL STABILITY - a political system, characterized by the presence of the necessary conditions and factors that ensure the preservation of society's identity, civil peace and harmony on the basis of achieving a balance of interests of various social actors and political forces, timely legitimate resolution of emerging problems and contradictions in the field of politics with the help of mechanisms provided by law and funds.

Various models of political stability have existed in the history of political discourse. In antiquity (homonoia) was thought of as a harmonic ratio that has a numerical one. Thus, Solon's reforms proceeded from a harmony established through precise proportions and ensuring consistency between the various groups of the polis (2/1, 3 / 2.4 / 3).

In the Middle Ages, political stability was achieved through the strength of tradition and the authority of the Christian church.

In the New, in connection with the division of powers, the decisive model was the balance between them, the achievement of a balance between various political forces. Differentiation of the political system of modern society, pluralism of its political forces significantly complicate the achievement of social integration. Nowadays, the relative nature of political stability, subject to fluctuations and based on the ideas of a systems approach and self-organization, is becoming more and more recognized.

Political stability, like the stability of society; due to the laws of the functioning and development of society, the nature and methods of interaction of its subsystems, changes and which do not entail the destruction of the functional unity of the structure and their balance. Political stability is ensured by the political system of society (its main element is) and the effectiveness of the implementation of its functions, which in turn depends on the mass support of citizens: 1) on the so-called "situational support", which expresses public opinion's assessment of specific decisions made by state bodies, public statements political leadersendowed with power, the effectiveness of political actions, and 2) from “systemic support”, that is, from the sustainability of positive assessments and opinions, testifying to public approval of the activities of power structures as a whole, the state's domestic and foreign policies. An important factor of “systemic” support is trust in political leaders and the political regime, the willingness of various social groups to defend their interests on the basis of and in accordance with the law, legal and moral norms.

Mass support for the political regime is also expressed in the acceptance by the majority of the population of the entire set of basic political values \u200b\u200b(separation of powers, glasnost, multiparty system, opinions, freedom of speech, the media, etc.) that determine the nature and methods of functioning of this political system.

The main conditions affecting the level of mass support for the existing political regime also include: the level of material security and social security of citizens; the existence of democratic institutions and mechanisms to ensure public participation in the political process; security and legal guarantees of the person.

Mass political support is especially gaining in the context of reforms, when in general and its political system, in particular, is going through a period of transition from one state to another, becoming for some time unbalanced, and therefore less stable. In these conditions, there is even a gap between social norms and values, asserted (imposed) by power structures, and social norms and values \u200b\u200bthat dominate the mass consciousness. In the mass consciousness, for a number of reasons - inertia, a more persistent adherence to fundamental values \u200b\u200b- there may be rejection of the norms and values \u200b\u200bof the ruling groups, tension and even between the masses and the authorities. It is important to take into account that in society there is always competition between groups for, a change of groups claiming a more prominent political role and a more significant political one. Organized into political movements and parties, these groups can spearhead opposition protests in various forms. The more successful they will be, the more they reflect national interests and goals, cultural values \u200b\u200band mentality. Opposition groups are capable of coming to power provided they manage to mobilize and lead the masses, uniting them with ideological slogans and programs. Much depends on a politically authoritative leader who is popular with the masses. Maintaining political stability special meaning have established in society, codified in legal laws and have become legitimate ways of fighting for. The historical illegitimate political struggle, from political conspiracies to political revolutions, shows that it is destructive to political stability and fraught with the collapse of society. Illegitimate for power may have an explicit character. Latent forms of illegitimate power struggle, without entering the surface of public life, can seriously weaken the ruling regime, destroy its internal consolidation and ultimately lead to serious political upheavals.

Ensuring the political stability of society is achieved through legal guarantees of the security of the participation of citizens and political organizations in political activity, and especially in opposition (protest) movements defending their political interests and claiming political participation in power. Many democratic countries of the world have accumulated considerable experience of political struggle (and, first of all, the struggle for power), which does not lead to cataclysms and national upheavals. The reformed Russia has yet to acquire such experience. IN different countries special stabilization programs have been put forward and are being implemented, their experience in overcoming the economic and political crisis, restoring political stability without changing the socio-political system, modernizing the economy under state control and regulation, taking into account socio-political systems and historical conditions, national and state peculiarities in its adaptation equally important for Russia.

Political stability depends on the level and nature of political activity, on the positions of political leaders, on their ability to express national interests and consolidate the political will of citizens, on critical analysis of their activities, on their observance of moral and legal norms.

An important condition for the political stability of society during the period of reforms is their legal security, achieved on the basis of the unity of the constitution (basic law), federal and local legislation. The system of laws existing in society must change in accordance with new conditions and new challenges of the time. Untimely, lagging behind or delaying the improvement of constitutional norms and current legislation has a destabilizing effect on the political, on the interaction of political subjects and branches of government.

An indicator of the political stability of a society is to neutralize negative external influences (subversive, international terrorism, economic blockade, political pressure, blackmail, disinformation, the threat of the use of force, etc.). Such negative impacts can lead the political system to a state of extreme instability and even destroy it. In this regard, it is especially dangerous to unleash a civil war or large-scale political violent acts on the part of both supporters and opponents of the existing system. Therefore, it is so important for the state to be adequate to the threat to its sovereignty, its social interests and the security of its citizens.

Lit .: Political theory and political. M., 1994; Semigii G. Yu. Political stability of Russian society in the context of reforms. M., 1996; Pearson T. The system of modern societies. M., 1998; Ivanov V. N. Russia: finding the future. M., 1998; Russia: Overcoming a National Catastrophe. M., 1999.

G. Yu. Semigin

New philosophical encyclopedia: In 4 vols. M .: Thought. Edited by V.S.Stepin. 2001 .

See what "POLITICAL STABILITY" is in other dictionaries:

A system of connections between various political actors, which is characterized by a certain integrity and the ability to effectively implement the functions assigned to it. Political Science: Dictionary Handbook. comp. Prof. Paul of Sciences Sanzharevsky ... ... Political science. Vocabulary.

English. stability, political; German Stabilitat, politische. The ability of a watered system to function and persist for a long time without abrupt changes. Antinazi. Encyclopedia of Sociology, 2009 ... Encyclopedia of Sociology

STABILITY POLITICAL - the ability of the state system to function for a long time without significant changes, ensuring systematic development, continuity of power, a favorable investment climate and economic growth. Probably the first state, ... ... Big topical political encyclopedia

STABILITY POLITICAL - a stable state of the political system, which allows it to function effectively and develop under the influence of external and internal environmentwhile maintaining its structure and ability to control the processes of social change. ... ... Political Science: Reference Dictionary

STABILITY POLITICAL - English. stability, political; German Stabilitat, politische. The ability of watered systems to function and remain for a long time without sudden changes ... Explanatory Dictionary of Sociology

STABILITY POLITICAL - (political stability, from Latin stabilis stable) trait, characteristic, state of the political life of society, manifested in the stable functioning of all political institutions in society, in compliance with legal and political ... ... Power. Politics. Public service. Vocabulary

STABILITY POLITICAL - (Lat. stabilis constant, stable, Greek politike politics) the state of the political system, characterized by the stability of its basic elements, stability in the performance of its functions and in relations with other political ... ... Political Science Dictionary

The sphere of culture, which develops ideas about civilizational forms of polit, process, assessment of the level of its development. The concept of P. to. polysemantic, it includes polit, thought, connections between culture and polit, philosophy, assessment of polit. structures with t.zr. ... ... Encyclopedia of Cultural Studies

STABILITY MILITARY - POLITICAL MILITARY POLITICAL STABILITY ... Legal encyclopedia

N.P. Medvedev

POLITICAL SYSTEM STABILITY:

THEORY AND RUSSIAN PRACTICE

One of the main problems of modern Russia is to scientifically substantiate the prospects and modern models for the development of various spheres of public life in the context of the modernization of the political system and the search for effective forms government controlled... In this regard, the problem of political stability in the Russian Federation is an important theoretical and practical task. At the same time, in the context of Russian political transit, we are talking about fundamental and strategic issues related to the ability of the modernized Russian political system to ensure stability and order in society in the future.

In the literature, there is a wide range of approaches to understanding the categories of internal political stability of the state.1 Since the state is in essence a political instrument, its stability is associated primarily with the life of the corresponding society, and to the extent that the state feels the influence of this society, talk about "internal" stability, meaning that interaction on the part of other societies and states initiates the problem of "external" stability of a given state.

Stability is one of the most important components of any state, an essential characteristic of its political system. State stability is often understood as the tendency of the basic elements of its political system to remain within certain and predetermined constraints, even if the system is influenced by the environment. At the same time, structural stability of the state is often different, that is, the continuation of the functioning of the state mechanism in time without any significant changes in its essential elements, and dynamic stability, which is understood as the movement of the state mechanism to restore equilibrium disturbed by the influence of internal or external forces. Possessing sufficient dynamic stability, the state extinguishes the environmental influences it experiences by transforming its mechanism, modifying only its individual elements. Structural instability of the state is already a consequence of such influences that lead to a change in this system, to a complex transformation of all its essential elements 2.

The problem of political stability really arises in connection with the process of interaction between the state as a political system and society as its environment. Any state, whatever its nature, always interacts with society and therefore senses and reacts to its impact. However, when the political system suppresses society, then stability is achieved by the violent orientation of the state towards the invariability of its structure. If the state perceives the development strategy, turning its face to modern civilization, then it cannot but change its structure, taking into account the development processes taking place in society, not proportionate its structure, regime and power with the constantly changing conditions of both its internal and external environment. The concept of stability as the immutability of the political system, which during the years of stagnation was an end in itself of the Soviet state, as a result of the events of 1991 that actually changed the national state structure and political regime of the country, cannot but give way to the concept of stability as stability or directionality of political development, based on the assumption of the possibility the political system to manage social processes, control their functioning, changing for these purposes, if necessary, its own political structure.

According to the famous political scientist E. Heywood, “the state should be able to maintain its own existence and, at the same time, the functioning of this or that political system within itself. Here, therefore, first of all, we should talk about how strong this political system is, how strong its historical roots are, the ability of the state to restrain or resolve conflicts arising in society depends on all of this.

The interaction of the state and society in the technical sense can be represented as the management of execution and sanctions, on the one hand, and as popular support and manifest opposition, on the other. 4 In other words, the interaction of the political system and the social environment represented by certain groups or organizations is described in a wide range of interactions - from cooperation to conflict. And if one or both parties in this pair interaction take the path of internal conflict behavior, then the stability of the political system begins to depend on its ability to manage the conflict with society.

The preservation of its structure by the state, as V.-D. Eberwein, is a cumulative positive result of: 1) opposition, expressed in various forms of society's influence on power, regime or community; 2) government sanctions to prevent

the rotation or suppression of this opposition; 3) support of the power, regime or community of the state by society.

Obviously, with a lack of public support and ineffective sanctions, the impact of the opposition can reach such a degree that structural instability will lead to a radical change in the power, regime or state integrity.

The stability of the state, therefore, is derived from the level and intensity of political conflicts occurring in it, through which both opposition or public support for the power, regime and integrity of the state, and government sanctions against the opposition are directly manifested.

There is no need to prove how important political support is to ensure the stability of the existing political system.

The anti-entropic orientation of political support explains the position of D. Easton, who equates stability with the quality of the functioning of a particular political system, which provides sufficient support for the regime and power from society. In other words, the intention of the stability of power, according to this view, is described within the framework of the process of their political support 5.

Easton's view of this problem has been developed by a number of Western researchers. In particular, V.-D. Eberwein views political support, along with opposition, sanctions and political violence, as part of the concept of political stability. It proceeds from the multidimensionality and comprehensive understanding of the category of political stability, within which stability is not the equivalent of the immutability of existing political structures, but is considered as a process conditioned by the complex structure of interaction between the state and society. It seems that when applied to the Russian political system of a transitional type, this approach allows one to adequately describe the existing reality. Thus, political support is closely associated with an assessment of the quality of functioning of various levels of the political system - power, regime and political community. At the same time, in a number of cases, the category of support receives an expansive interpretation, including positive and negative assessments of the functioning of various levels of the political system. In our opinion, such an expansive interpretation of the category of support ignores a number of significant differences between support itself and opposition as two sides of society's attitude to the state.

The point is that political support in the narrow sense of this term is manifested primarily in the course of routine procedures of the democratic process, such as elections, referendums, etc. In an extreme case, we can talk about mass events in support of specific individuals or political movements in the framework of election campaigns. The situation is different with the political opposition to the authorities, the regime and the community. Open expression of protest, even within democratic political systems, requires completely different mechanisms of mobilization.

A broad interpretation of the category of political support ignores these differences. The concept of political support covers both the evaluative orientations of political actors and their political behavior. In accordance with this, the latent support, expressed in the political attitudes of the individual, that is, in his behavioral predisposition, and the manifested support, manifested in the parallel action of political actors, are distinguished. Since the manifestation of support occurs during elections, plebiscites, referendums, etc., determining the level of latent support can be crucial for predicting the outcome of such political events.

At the same time, the transition period in the life of Russian society confronts researchers with many additional problems... In particular, the accuracy and adequacy of assessing the nature, place and potential of the new Russian elite groups in the political life of society is of great importance. In this regard, in addition to dividing support into latent and manifest support, it becomes necessary to introduce the concepts of elite and mass support.

In the scientific literature, within the framework of the theory of elites, there are many definitions of this category. Among them are the most politically active people, power-oriented, an organized minority of society; people with intellectual or moral superiority over the masses, the highest sense of responsibility, etc.

V.-D. It is no accident that Eberwein introduces the category of elite support into his model only in relation to the political systems of the countries of the so-called "second" and "third" world. Due to the fact that a feature of these systems is the domination of patronymic, corporatist, etc. relationship models, such an assumption looks quite justified. Since most of these states are repressive, mass support in many cases is not a factor in political stability.

The above criteria allowed V.-D. Eberweine believes that if the "Western" systems are completely dependent on mass support, then in the countries of the "second" world only 25 percent of the total support is allocated to mass support, and the rest falls on the elite.

Paying attention to a certain arbitrariness of such a statement, we note at the same time that the degree of democracy of a particular state directly indicates the balance between both types of support necessary to ensure its stability. It is the authoritarian political regimes that are interested in consolidating and strengthening the status of the elite, receiving from it in return the support that, in view of their inherent isolation from the will of the masses, becomes vital for these regimes as a means of maintaining systemic equilibrium.

If we project these approaches onto Russian political reality, then in the conditions of today's Russia, in our opinion, four main elite groups should be distinguished:

The political elite, which includes employees of the apparatus of state power and administration, including deputies of representative bodies of power at all levels;

The military elite, which includes the senior officers of the Armed Forces and senior officials of the internal security forces (FSB, Russian Interior Ministry, etc.);

Business elite;

The civil elite, which includes the leaders of the education system, health care, culture and social welfare, as well as the media.

The proposed model is based on the assumption that a significant part of the citizens of modern Russia, due to the dominance of unreleased archetypes of patronymic thinking, the peculiarities of emerging corporate ethics, or other reasons, is firmly connected with the corresponding elite groups. At the same time, a distinctive feature of not only the electoral, but also the political behavior of such citizens in general is the blurring of their ideas about the role, characteristics and functioning of the country's political system, which is acquiring democratic features, as well as about their own place within this system. As a result, the formation of political preferences and their explication are almost completely controlled and directed by one or another elite group.

Thus, elite support is understood not only as support for the authorities, regime or political community on the part of the

elites, but also the groups of the population that are least affected by the processes of modernization and democratization under their control.

As for mass support, its definition within the framework of this model is very specific. If in Western literature, mass support, as a rule, means support from the broadest strata of the population, then in Russian conditions one should bear in mind the support of the most modernized, independently-minded part of the population, not controlled by the elite groups listed above.

Within the framework of the concept of political support by D. Easton and a number of his followers, in addition to the specific support of the authorities based on the assessment of specific decisions, political course, a set of political actions, public statements, a general "leadership style" and, finally, the personal qualities of political leaders, the level of so-called diffuse support, which applies primarily to the political regime.

Unlike specific support, diffuse support is essentially based on what a particular object of assessment is, and not on the nature and legitimacy of its actions. In other words, diffuse support is perceived as a kind of "reservoir of favorable attitudes (orientations) or a charge of goodwill, which helps community members to accept or tolerate such results or such consequences of government activities in relation to which they are in opposition or which are considered by them in as detrimental to their own aspirations ”7.

A distinctive feature of diffuse support is its close relationship with the processes of socialization and the acquisition of personal life experience by an individual, while specific support remains focused on personal interests.

The most important components of diffuse support are:

Trust that arises due to the satisfaction of political actors with the processes through which the country is governed, that is, satisfaction with a set of norms and procedures, the role structure of political relations, or, in other words, the rules of the political game that are formed within a particular political community;

Legitimacy is the belief in the legitimacy of the existing order of things.

The main factors influencing massive support for the regime include:

Long-term democratic perfomance effect;

The presence of extremist organizations;

The level of state penetration into society and economy;

Economic growth rates.

The democratic perfomance effect reflects the nature of the means by which power is exercised. Such means can be either purely coercive (the authorities' reliance on sanctions and the repressive apparatus), and cooperative (a consensus model of relationships).

The presence of extremist organizations aimed at destabilizing the political system and constituting the organizational basis for anti-regime activity is clearly a factor contributing to a decrease in mass support for the regime.

The level of state penetration into society and the economy reflects the degree of regulation of socio-economic processes. At the same time, the level of state intervention in the redistribution of national income in itself is not unambiguously negative or, on the contrary, a positive factor in terms of supporting the regime. A certain (positive or negative) value is acquired by him depending on the general economic situation and, ultimately, on the rate of economic growth. Positive growth rates expand the regime's resource base.

The main factor of elite support is the level of socio-economic development, which determines the amount of resources to be redistributed between different elite groups, as well as the level of competition over the distribution of resources within specific elite groups.

When developing a model for supporting the political regime, one cannot ignore the specificity of the situation in which Russia finds itself today. By the joint efforts of all three branches of state power, its authority has now been reduced, apparently, to the level of dubious support. The modern Russian state has often lost the trust of society, so it is simply unrealistic to hope that in these conditions a set of universal, universally respected rules can be developed and implemented, since these rules change with the advent of the new government and the elite. The flip side of mistrust in the rules is an orientation towards specific individuals, therefore, for the foreseeable future, the factor of charisma of the Russian leadership will continue to be of key importance.

On the other hand, in the process of analysis it is impossible to ignore the features of the “catching up” type over the past centuries

development of the Russian state, which has been greatly enhanced today by the transition from the anomalies of totalitarianism to the liberal-democratic model of political development, which is no less alien to most Russians.

First of all, these problems relate to an unmodernized or weakly modernized part of the population under the direct influence of regional or municipal elites, which, under these circumstances, is not able to draw a clear line between the power and regime levels and, at best, can only give an instrumental or charismatic assessment of the authorities. automatically extrapolating its results to support the political regime. It is precisely because of this circumstance that elite support for the political regime in Russia, that is, support from the least modernized social groups mobilized by the elite, is viewed as the equivalent of support for the political authorities.

As shown by the December 2007 elections of deputies to the State Duma of the fifth convocation, Russian political practice is not always built on the basis of theoretical models known in political science and widely used by the political elite of most states with a democratic system of government.

NOTES

1 See: Heywood, E. Stability Criteria // Political Science. - M., 2005. - S. 502-504; Medvedev, N.P. Political stability // Political institutions and processes: comparative studies. - M., 2006. - S. 14-28; Skakunov, E.I. Political stability: in search of a concept // Workbooks / CMMI DA MFA RF. - 1992. - No. 1; Dowdiny, K.M. The Meaning and Use of "Political Stability" / K.M. Dowdiny, R. Kimber // European Journal of Political Resarch. - 1983. - No. 11. - P. 229-236; Sanderrs, D. Patterns of Instability. - N. I., 1981. - P. 1-21.

2 See: Frankey, I. Contemporary International Theory and the Behavior of States. - Oxford, 1979. - P. 68.

3 Heywood, E. The functioning of the political system // Political science. - M., 2005. -S. 502-503.

4 See: Eberwein, W.-D. Domestic Political Processes // The Globus Model Computer Simulation of Worldwide Political and Economic Developments. - Boulder, 1987. - P. 176.

5 See: Easton, D. System Analysis of Political Life. - N.J., 1965. - P. 52.

6 See: Eberwein, W.-D. Op. dt. - P. 245.

7 Easton, D. Re-Assesment of the Concept of Political Support // British Journal of Political Science. - 1975. - P. 444.

1

The article analyzes the concept and essence of the stability of the political system in the framework of modern political science concepts of the study of political systems. When revealing the tendencies and reasons for the stability (instability) of the political system, regulators are of great importance, which make it possible to bring its state to its initial or more other positive qualitative state. The complexity and scope of this phenomenon predetermines a wide range of scientific approaches. The attention is focused on various approaches to solving the problem of stability of the political system. The instrumental characteristics of some regulators of the stability of the political system are considered. It is concluded that they are potentially effective for equilibrium, homeostasis and maintaining a stationary regime of stable functioning of the political system. The author complements the existing approaches to research on this problem.

politic system

political science

the state

system stability

civil society

regulator

1. Anokhin M.G. Political system: transitional processes. - M .: RITs ISPI RAN, 1996 .-- 270 p.

2. Batanina I.A., Lavrikova A.A. Parameters of the political system as a factor in the development of political participation in the regions of the Central Federal District // Izvestia of the Tula State University. Humanitarian sciences. - 2013. - No. 1. - S. 124-134.

3. Boyko S.I. Stability vs ambivalence: options for political algorithms // Bulletin of the Russian State University for the Humanities. - 2013. - No. 1 (102). - C.108-118.

4. Diskin I.E., Fedorov V.V. Responsiveness of the modern Russian political system // Monitoring of public opinion: economic and social changes. –2010. - No. 6 (100). - S. 004-011.

5. Kowalski E. Formation and development of constitutional statehood in Poland (historical and legal research). - SPb .: Legal Institute, 2010 .-- 328 p.

6. Korobov A.A., Ovchinnikov S.A. Information and political risks and stability of the political system in conditions of democratic transit // Information security of regions. - 2012. - No. 1 (10). - S. 110-115.

7. Kotlyarov I.V. The political system of Belarus: theoretical regulation and sociological understanding // Sociological almanac. - 2011. - No. 2. - S. 41-54.

8. Nazhmudinov G.M., Palatnikov D.E. Synergetic approach to the analysis of the socio-political environment of society // Bulletin of the Yaroslavl State University named after P.G. Demidov. Series: Humanities. - 2009. - No. 1. - P.82-85.

9. Nikonenko S.A. Political parties as an institution of political organization of civil society // Vestnik TSU. Humanitarian sciences. History and Political Science. –2011. - No. 10 (102). - S.278-282.

10. Shevchenko A.V. Stability of the political system: “communicative person” versus “political person” // Polis (Political studies). - 2009. - No. 5. - S. 68-83.

The political system is one of the main categories of political science. It defines the most important boundaries within which political life is realized. The political system, both in scientific terminology and in everyday language, has become a common general concept. There is a consensus in political science that the political system is the core of politics and a fundamental term for political analysis and the development of political theories. In recent years, the concept of a political system has become fundamental for everyone who studies political theory. At present, the concepts of political systems are most powerful, at least in the field of comparative political science.

There are many concepts of the political system. American political scientists and sociologists define the political system through the prism of social structures, procedures and institutions that interact together to find solutions to political problems. The French political school focuses on the broad mutual political relations that exist in the world system, adapted by society. Polish scientist E. Kowalski believes that the political system consists of the state apparatus, political parties, organizations and social groups, both formal and informal, that participate in political activities, and also includes general principles and the rules of law governing their relationship. Domestic political scientist M.G. Anokhin argues that the concept of a political system is based on two key points: on the one hand, it is a certain theoretical structure, a tool that allows one to reveal and describe the systemic qualities of various political phenomena. In this case, this category acts as a means of systematic analysis of politics ... On the other hand, the specific meaning of the political system determines a genuine complex mechanism for the formation and functioning of power in society, implemented by various political actors.

At present, the concept of a political system is aimed not only at comparing with the structure and functioning of pre-existing societies, but also at analyzing the political realities of the “post-statist era”, in which the state is no longer presented only as a stable organized political structure of society. This definition shows the possibility of combining the traditional state-political and newly formed political-public spheres.

The political system is constantly exposed to a variety of factors that directly or indirectly affect its sustainability, and this impact is asymmetric, uneven and multidirectional. The political system, like any other complex system, tries to maintain its stability at the expense of its potential. It is, in one way or another, determined by the nature of its interaction with civil society, the presence of direct and feedback channels. One of the approaches says that "the stability of a political system is the ability to maintain its development in a given direction (moving along a planned trajectory) and maintain the intended mode of functioning, despite the disturbances affecting the system." One of the tasks of studying the stability of the modern political system is due to the inability to preserve some of the given (existing) parameters of its progressive development, effective functioning, and the balance of political forces under the influence of external and internal factors. When diagnosing a political system, when revealing the essence of tendencies and the reasons for its instability, the tools that make it possible to bring its state to the initial or a more different positive qualitative state become important. Among such tools, one can name the most appropriate ways, methods and procedures aimed at restoring the functions of the political system and achieving the desired results in the field of politics.

The stability of a political system is one of its properties, characterized by the potential ability to remain within the existing parameters and criteria, as well as return to its original position under the influence of external and internal factors, while maintaining forward movement in a given set of political coordinates. Each specific political system is described by a certain number of parameters.

I.E. Diskin and V.V. Fedorov believes that "the stability of a political system means its equilibrium, a balance at the" entrance "and" exit ", i.e. compliance of political decisions and actions with the requirements of society. Violation of this balance in the form of "underloading", i.e. insufficient response to demands, or "overload" - an excessive, excessive response to the demands of society - generates instability of the political system, which can lead to a crisis in other areas. All the more important is the ability of the political system as a whole and all its elements to adequately respond to public expectations and fears in the context of the global economic crisis ”.

Political systems have the properties of structural, functional and dynamic stability. It is the violation of its stability that means the appearance of destabilizing processes in it that cannot be controlled and lead to the disintegration of the interaction of its elements. Possible random transformations can lead to a partial loss of the stability of the system, and can also be a prerequisite for the purposeful development of self-organizing systems, which also include political systems.

The asymmetry of the influence of factors on the stability of the political system is expressed in the fact that the intensity of their impact on it will differ significantly both in the degree of dependence on the acting factors, and in the level of the political system under consideration. For example, in modern conditions, in most cases, the influence of economic factors will be more significant compared to the influence of social aspects, and for developed countries, which differ in an established legislative framework and law enforcement practice, the influence of legal factors will be less significant than for developing countries.

Different authors offer different approaches to solving the problem of the stability of the political system. So, for example, G.M. Nazhmudinov and D.E. Palatnikov believe that the mechanisms of socialization and legitimation are the regulators of maintaining the stability of the political system. S.A. Nikonenko notes that a political party as a basic institution of the political system of society is a link between citizens and the state, ensuring the integrity and stability of the political system. The original approach is offered by I.V. Kotlyarov, in his opinion, it is necessary to use the political subsystem to ensure the stable and sustainable development of the social system without its disintegration into separate elements. This requires the formation of a special subsystem that regulates power relations in society as a whole and in its various segments. S.I. Boyko examines the dependence of the stability of the political system on political ambivalence. It is clearly manifested in the assessment of electoral campaigns by citizens, in their attitude towards political parties in the context of the traditional personification of state power. A.V. Shevchenko connects the problem of stability of the political system with the informational properties of its structure. There are other approaches ...

Let's consider some potentially effective, in our opinion, regulators of political system stability, partly tested in some countries:

• partial or complete change of the government team is used as a normal practice in a number of democratic countries (for example, Italy). This kind of transformation presupposes a complete change in the structure of the state, the creation of the basis for a new political system. Sometimes this reorganization happens suddenly, often without preparation. But in this regard, it is worth noting that there are violent events and breakthroughs (for example, Ukraine). In this case, the new elite not only does not have a vision of the new organization of the state, but is often not at all ready to take on the full power;
• transformation of legislation (for example, the Criminal Code, electoral regulations, etc.). The changes are aimed at softening the provisions related to non-democratic systems (certain guarantees of civil liberties, the ability to express one's views, permission for assemblies, etc.). Also important is the emergence of associations of citizens in structures, independent of the central government (associations, political parties);
• the emergence and development of opposition. The transition to a multi-party system in a number of countries was associated with the elimination of regulation, supervision and control in all areas of the life of the former ruling party, usually the communist. This time period is characterized by the search for new guidelines for political development, lack of coordination and the presence of elements of anarchy;
• the formation of new elites. In the process of creating new elites, it is necessary to include a recruiting mechanism for those who were not directly involved in the initial breakthrough. In the future, differentiation and diversification of the new elite takes place. Reformed Democrats are being replaced by conservatives, liberals, or leftists (eg Poland). At the stage of consolidation of small groups of society, an equilibrium of democratic systems occurs;
• democratization of the central government. There are criteria (for example, the democracy index), which are used to assess: the nature of governance, stability, efficiency, independence, government responsibility, as well as legislative and civil (public) control;
• development of public participation in the electoral process. Introduction of transparent and fair elections, development of parliamentarism and a multi-party system;
• the creation of non-governmental organizations, the effectiveness and stability of their activities, legal aspects, the development of free and independent trade unions and associations. In other words, the development of a real civil society;
• sovereignty of the media. Creation of an environment for freedom of expression, independent journalism, freedom from pressure on journalists from the state ... Free access to the Internet for all categories of citizens;
• self management. This regulator implies decentralization, electoral process, the degree of competence of local authorities, transparency and quality of regional communities;
• real justice. Implementation of constitutional reforms, observance of human and minority rights, full compliance with the law, humane treatment of prisoners and suspects, implementation of equality (without discrimination), etc. - this is an incomplete list of possible characteristics of this regulator of political system stability.

The analysis showed that there are other regulators of the stability of the political system. Among them are the mechanisms for combating corruption, methods and methods of optimizing the legislative process, technologies of political management, etc.

In order to comprehend the essence of the political system of a particular country, it is necessary to consider its social structure, aspects of political life, main economic problems, etc. So, for example, a group of socio-political factors can be used for system analysis (for example, tradition, public awareness, the quality of functioning of political institutions, etc.); to study political elites and their influence on the subsystems of the political system, and especially on the functioning of the party system; consider the problems of interaction of elements both within the system itself and with the external environment, etc. In this regard, it is very important to analyze the internal sphere of economic, social and cultural manifestations of the functioning of society and the external environment. The economic system is defined as the type of primary production and the nature of management. The social system is determined by gender, education, and the professional hierarchy of society. Features of the cultural context are associated with the dominant ideas in society and the system of socio-political views. The political system is also influenced by other political systems in the external environment. The political system, as a rule, must integrate with its environment through transformation mechanisms (for example, legal, social, ideological, political and technological).

Thus, from the point of view of systems analysis, a political system is one of many systems. When analyzing a political system, when revealing the essence of tendencies and the reasons for its stability (instability), functions (dysfunctions), tools (regulators) are of great importance, which make it possible to bring its state to an initial or a more positive qualitative state. These include the most appropriate ways, methods and procedures aimed at restoring and strengthening the functions of the political system and achieving the desired results in the field of politics.

Reviewers:

Avtsinova GI, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor of the Department of Political Science and Social Policy, Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Russian State Social University", Moscow;

Tarasov E.N., Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Political Science and Social Policy of the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Russian State Social University", Moscow.

Bibliographic reference

Grishin O.E. SUSTAINABILITY OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM: CONCEPT, APPROACHES, REGULATORS // Contemporary problems science and education. - 2015. - No. 1-1 .;
URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id\u003d18121 (date accessed: 01/17/2020). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural Sciences"

STABILITY POLITICAL - the state of the political system, characterized by the presence of the necessary conditions and factors that ensure the preservation of society's identity, civil peace and harmony on the basis of achieving a balance of interests of various social actors and political forces, timely legitimate resolution of emerging problems and contradictions in the field of politics using the mechanisms provided by law funds.

Various models of political stability have existed in the history of political discourse. In antiquity, agreement (homonoia) was thought of as a harmonic ratio that has a numerical character. Thus, Solon's reforms proceeded from harmony established through precise proportions and ensuring consistency between the various groups of the polis (2/1, 3/2, 4/3).

In the Middle Ages, political stability was achieved through the strength of tradition and the authority of the Christian church.

In modern times, in connection with the division of powers, the decisive model was the model of balance between them, achieving a balance between various political forces. Differentiation of the political system of modern society, the pluralism of its political forces significantly complicate the achievement of social integration. Nowadays, the relative nature of political stability, subject to fluctuations and based on the ideas of a systematic approach and self-organization, is becoming more and more recognized.

Political stability, like the stability of society, is determined by the laws of the functioning and development of society, the nature and methods of interaction of its subsystems, changes and evolution of which do not entail the destruction of the functional unity of the structure and their balance.

Political stability is ensured by the political system of society (its main element is the state) and the effectiveness of the implementation of its functions, which in turn depends on the mass support of citizens: 1) on the so-called "situational support", which expresses public opinion's assessment of specific decisions made by state bodies, public statements by political leaders endowed with power, the effectiveness of political actions, and 2) from "systemic support", i.e. from the stability of positive assessments and opinions, testifying to the approval of the society of the activities of power structures in general, the state's domestic and foreign policies. An important factor of "systemic" support is trust in political leaders and the political regime, the willingness of various social groups to defend their interests on the basis and in accordance with the law, legal and moral norms.

Mass support for the political regime is also expressed in the acceptance by the majority of the population of the entire set of basic political values \u200b\u200b(the principle of separation of powers, glasnost, multiparty system, pluralism of opinions, freedom of speech, independence of the media, etc.), which determine the nature and methods of functioning of this political system.

The main conditions affecting the level of mass support for the existing political regime also include: the level of material security and social security of citizens; the existence of democratic institutions and mechanisms to ensure the participation of the population in the political process; security and legal guarantees of the person.

Mass political support is of particular importance in the context of reforms, when society as a whole and its political system, in particular, are going through a period of transition from one state to another, becoming imbalanced for some time, and therefore less stable. In these conditions, a contradiction and even a gap arises between the social norms and values, asserted (imposed) by the power structures, and the social norms and values \u200b\u200bthat dominate the mass consciousness. In the mass consciousness, for a number of reasons - inertia, a more persistent adherence to fundamental values \u200b\u200b- there may be rejection of the norms and values \u200b\u200bof ruling groups, tension and even conflict between the masses and the authorities. It is important to take into account that in society there is always competition between groups for leadership, a change of groups claiming a more prominent political role and a more significant political status. Organized into political movements and parties, these groups can spearhead opposition protests in various forms. The more successful they will be, the more they reflect national interests and goals, cultural values \u200b\u200band mentality. Opposition groups are capable of coming to power provided they manage to mobilize and lead the masses, uniting them with ideological slogans and programs. Much depends on a politically authoritative leader who is popular among the masses. In maintaining political stability, the methods of struggle for power that have become established in society, codified in legal laws and have become legitimate are of particular importance. The historical experience of illegitimate political struggle, from political conspiracies to political revolutions, shows that it is destructive for political stability and is fraught with the collapse of society. An illegitimate power struggle can be overt and latent. Latent forms of illegitimate power struggle, without emerging on the surface of public life, can seriously weaken the stability of the ruling regime, destroy its internal consolidation and ultimately lead to serious political upheavals.

Ensuring the political stability of society is achieved through legal guarantees of the security of the participation of citizens and political organizations in political activities, and especially in opposition (protest) movements defending their political interests and claiming political participation in power. Many democratic countries of the world have accumulated considerable experience of political struggle (and, first of all, the struggle for power), which does not lead to cataclysms and national upheavals. The reformed Russia has yet to gain such experience. In different countries, special stabilization programs have been put forward and are being implemented, their experience in overcoming the economic and political crisis, restoring political stability without changing the socio-political system, modernizing the economy under state control and regulation, taking into account the difference in socio-political systems and historical conditions, national and state the peculiarities of its adaptation are just as important for Russia.

Political stability depends on the level and nature of political activity, on the positions of political leaders, on their ability to express national interests and consolidate the political will of citizens, on the ability to critically analyze their activities, on their observance of moral and legal norms.

An important condition for the political stability of society during the period of reforms is their legal security, achieved on the basis of the unity of the constitution (basic law), federal and local legislation. The system of laws existing in society must change in accordance with new conditions and new challenges of the time. Untimely change, lagging behind or delaying the improvement of constitutional norms and current legislation has a destabilizing effect on the political process, on the interaction of political subjects and branches of government.

An indicator of the political stability of a society is its ability to neutralize negative external influences (subversion, international terrorism, economic blockade, political pressure, blackmail, disinformation, threat of the use of force, etc.). Such negative impacts can lead the political system to a state of extreme instability and even destroy it. In this regard, it is especially dangerous to unleash a civil war or large-scale political violent acts on the part of both supporters and opponents of the existing system. Therefore, an adequate response of the state to the threat to its sovereignty, its social interests and the safety of its citizens is so important.

Literature:

1. Political theory and political practice. M., 1994;

2. Semigin G.Yu.Political stability of Russian society in the context of reforms. M., 1996;

3. Parsons T.The system of modern societies. M., 1998;

4. Ivanov V.N.Russia: finding the future. M., 1998;

5. Russia: overcoming a national catastrophe. M., 1999.

Political stability is a stable state of society that allows it to function effectively and develop in conditions of external and internal influences, while maintaining its structure and ability to control the process of social change.

The state of political stability cannot be understood as something frozen, unchanging, given once and for all. Stability is viewed as the result of a constant process of renewal, which rests on a set of unstable equilibria between backbone and systemic processes within the system itself.

Political stability is a positive state of social development, a certain social order dominated by a system of connections and relations reflecting the commonality and continuity of goals, values \u200b\u200band means of their implementation. At the same time, stability is the ability of subjects of socio-economic and political life to resist internal and external disorganizing the system of influence and to neutralize them. In this understanding, stability is perceived as the most important mechanism of life support and development of the social system.

The main factors of political stability are: ensuring order, legitimacy, certainty, and the effectiveness of the activities of power structures; constancy of norms and values \u200b\u200bof political culture; familiarity of types of behavior, stability of political relations. It is known that the greatest successes were achieved by those societies that traditionally focused on the values \u200b\u200bof order. On the contrary, the absolutization of the values \u200b\u200bof change in society led to the fact that the resolution of problems and conflicts was achieved at a high price. In order for development and orderliness to coexist, coherence, consistency, gradual change are necessary and at the same time a realistic program capable of connecting goals with means - resources and conditions.

Political stability and political order are achieved, as a rule, in two ways: either by dictatorship or by the broad development of democracy. stability that is achieved without the participation of the masses and opposition through violence, suppression, repression is historically short-lived. Stability on the basis of democracy, a broad social base, and a developed civil society is another matter.

Stability depends on the attitude of the population to the existing political power, the ability of the political regime to take into account the interests of various groups and coordinate them, the position and condition of the elite, the nature of relations within society.

Distinguish between absolute, static and dynamic political stability.

The absolute (complete) stability of political systems is an abstraction that has no reality.

Static stability is characterized by immobility, constancy of socio-economic and political structures, connections, relations; it rests on ideas about the inviolability of social foundations, a slow pace of development, the need to preserve conservative traditions in the dominant ideology, and the creation of adequate stereotypes of political consciousness and behavior. However, the viability of a statically stable political system is extremely limited.

The current state of the social environment is characterized by a new dynamic level of political stability. It is achieved by "open" societies, in which socio-economic and political changes in the existing socio-political environment are considered as a stabilizing factor.

Dynamic systems have the necessary degree of stability, stability, ensuring their self-preservation and at the same time not being an insurmountable obstacle to change. They are possible only in a democracy. Under these conditions, the state of stability is always relative, there is a regime of constant self-correction of the political system.

The problem of political stability presupposes an analysis of the concept of "political risk".

In foreign practice, risk is most often interpreted as the likelihood of unforeseen consequences in the implementation of decisions. Accordingly, they talk about the level or degree of risk. Assessment of the degree of political risk based on the analysis of possible scenarios for the development of events allows choosing the optimal solution that reduces the likelihood of undesirable political consequences.

Within the framework of the general country risk, non-commercial (political) and commercial risks are distinguished.

The term "political risk" has many meanings - from predicting political stability to assessing all non-commercial risks associated with activities in various socio-political environments.

The classification of political risk is carried out on the basis of the separation of events caused either by the actions of government structures in the course of carrying out a certain state policy, or by forces outside the control of the government. In accordance with this principle, the American researcher Charles Kennedy proposed the division of political risk into extralegal and legal-governmental.

Extra-legal risk means any event, the source of which is outside the existing legitimate structures of the country: terrorism, sabotage, military coup, revolution.

Legal-government risk is a direct consequence of the current political process and includes events such as democratic elections leading to the formation of a new government, and changes in legislation regarding the part of it that deals with trade, labor, joint ventures, and monetary policy.

When determining the "political risk index" pay attention to the following factors:

• 1. the degree of ethnic and religious differences;
• 2. social inequality in the distribution of income;
• 3. the degree of political pluralism;
• 4. the influence of left-wing radicals;
• 5. the role of coercion in maintaining power;
• 6. the scale of anti-constitutional actions;
• 7. violation of the legal order.

It should be noted that the analysis of political risk in Russia has some specific features.

First, political traditions, imperfection of democratic institutions and a turning point in historical development have led to a significant role of the personality factor, which must be taken into account when assessing political risk.

Secondly, a significant factor of uncertainty is the presence of a multitude of different types of political-territorial entities with different economic potential, heterogeneous in ethnic composition and based on different historical, political, cultural and religious traditions. Regional conflicts show both a direct effect on the general political situation and an indirect effect on the situation in other regions, since the solution of regional problems requires additional subsidies, which leads to an increase in the federal budget deficit, changes in tax legislation, cost cuts, an increase in the size of public debt, fluctuations in interest rates and exchange rates, i.e. to a deterioration in the political and investment climate in the country.