The main types of modern political processes. Types of political processes
Types and varieties of political process
Typology of political processes. Stages (phases) of the political process
In Western political science there are several typology systems political processes. The first of them was created within the framework of comparative political science by the American political scientist L. Pye who, comparing political development Western and non-Western countries, connected their fundamental differences with the cultural “code” that determines the practical orientations of the population and its behavior. Summarizing empirical observations, L. Pai created a classic “ideal type” in the spirit of M. Weber, capable of expressing the originality of the West and the uniqueness of non-Western societies. The contrast between the “West” and the “non-West”, based on differences in cultures, allows us to understand why the ideas of democracy developed within the boundaries of the historical “West” and were alien to the existential foundations of the “non-Western world”.
L. Pai distinguished between political processes of Western and non-Western types. In the article “Non-Western Political Process” he formulates 17 points on which they differ political processes in Western and non-Western societies.
1. In non-Western societies there is no clear boundary between politics and the sphere of public and personal relations.
2. Political parties tend to claim to express a worldview and represent a way of life.
3. The political process is dominated by cliques.
4. The nature of political orientations suggests that the leadership of political groups has significant freedom in determining strategy and tactics.
5. Opposition parties and power-seeking elites often act as revolutionary movements.
6. The political process is characterized by a lack of integration among participants, which is a consequence of the lack of society of a unified communication system.
7. The political process is distinguished by the significant scale of recruitment of new elements to fulfill political roles.
8. The political process is characterized by sharp differences in the political orientations of generations.
9. Non-Western societies are characterized by little consensus regarding the legitimate ends and means of political action.
10. The intensity and breadth of political discussion has little to do with acceptance. political decisions.
11. Distinctive feature political process is a high degree of combination and interchangeability of roles.
12. In the political process, the influence of organized interest groups playing functionally specialized roles is weak.
13. National leadership forced to appeal to the people as a single whole, without distinguishing between social groups.
14. The unconstructive nature of the non-Western political process forces leaders to adhere to more definite views in foreign rather than domestic policy.
15. The emotional and symbolic aspects of politics overshadow the search for solutions to specific issues and general problems.
16. The role of charismatic leaders is great.
17. The political process proceeds mainly without the participation of “political brokers”.
In domestic political science, depending on the socio-cultural and socio-economic characteristics of the process, there are technocratic, ideocratic and charismatic political process.
The political process of the technocratic type is genetically characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon and Romano-Germanic states. It is distinguished by the presence of traditions of evolutionism, continuous and gradual adaptation of political institutions and mechanisms to changing environmental conditions, the priority of a technological (procedural) approach when making changes to the political system and role functions, and the exclusion from political practice of radical disruption of political structures that have developed over the centuries.
The political process of the ideocratic type is characteristic of most states experiencing the initial stages of modernization. It is distinguished by the dominance of one idea (ideology), in relation to which there is (achieved or declared) a national consensus. The political process of a charismatic type is characterized by the omnipotence of a charismatic leader, to whose political goals ideological doctrines and political institutions are adjusted. He largely determines the goals, content and direction of the political process.
Based on the scale of spatiotemporal parameters, political processes can be divided into global and local-regional. The former have an impact on the general course of world politics. The latter affect the interests of the local community and its constituent groups. But it should be borne in mind that often the result of one or another local process can have an impact on world politics. For example, the regional process of the collapse of the USSR at the turn of the 80-90s grew into a global political process of transformation of the entire system of international relations.
According to the objects of political influence, political processes are divided into foreign policy and domestic policy . Foreign policy regulates the state's relations with other entities externally political activity. The content of internal political processes varies significantly in many countries. The foundation of the internal political process of any country is the relationship between socio-economic structures, the existing social structure of society, and the degree of satisfaction of the population with their situation.
You can speak about evolutionary and revolutionary political processes . During the revolutionary process, both peaceful and non-peaceful means, violence, are used. Transformations are carried out in a relatively a short time, are often of a landslide nature and do not always achieve the results for which they were designed.
The basis evolutionary development- legitimacy of the authorities, common socio-cultural values of the elite and the masses, ethics of consent, the presence of constructive opposition.
From the point of view of the publicity of the ruling circles exercising their powers of power and decision-making, open and hidden (shadow) political processes.
In an open political process, the interests of groups and citizens are identified in the programs of parties and movements, in voting in elections, through discussion of problems in the means mass media, through contacts of citizens with government institutions, through accounting public opinion. Shadow, hidden political structures are located at the highest and middle levels of government. We are talking about 6 hidden actions government agencies, secret documents, orders, the existence of bodies with secret functions (security agencies) and completely secret institutions (intelligence, counterintelligence, etc.). Illegal activities and corruption of officials and authorities may occur. Under certain conditions, illegal (shadow) structures of a non-political nature are formed (parallel economy, black market, underworld organizations, mafias and mafia corporations of various kinds). They tend to merge with legal ones government agencies and can have a serious influence on them, even to the point of hidden participation in the political life of individual regions. They promote their representatives to deputies, to positions in the state apparatus, etc.
From a sustainability point of view political system we can talk aboutstable and unstable political processes. Stable process based on sustainable social structure, rising standard of living population, regime legitimacy. Citizens support the rules of the game; trust the authorities. All participants in the political process are committed to cooperation, searching for compromise solutions, and are united by a commitment to democratic values. Unstable political process often arises in conditions of a crisis of power, its loss of legitimacy. The reasons for instability can be very different: a decline in production, social conflicts, discrimination against certain social groups, their dissatisfaction with their social status, etc.
Political processes are systemic (global) and private. The systemic process involves the combined actions of political subjects that ensure the formation, functioning and development of the entire political system. Private processes are activities political subjects, embodied in the development of individual elements and aspects of the political system: political-ideological, political-legal, etc.
Political processes can also be classified on the following grounds:
1. According to importance for society - basic and peripheral.
2. By type of political regimes - democratic and non-democratic.
3. According to the degree of involvement of the masses - engaged and non-engaged.
4. In terms of scale, in accordance with the levels of policy, processes can be distinguished from micro-level (interpersonal and intragroup) to mega-level (world-scale processes).
5. By specifics of the organization We can distinguish between vertically organized and horizontally organized political processes. Horizontally organized political processes form equal independent subjects. Vertically organized political processes take place within the framework of the “dominance-subordination” relationship.
6. By degree of control political processes, their participants can be distinguished managed And spontaneous (spontaneous) processes. The specificity of managed political processes is that they are controlled by political subjects and directed by them. Spontaneous political processes have their own logic of development, independent of the intentions of any individual subjects.
7. By place in the political system we can distinguish:
1. Login processes:
a) articulation of interests - expression and discussion of the needs of citizens and their demands on the government;
b) aggregation of interests - activities during which interests are transformed into political programs.
2. Conversion processes- making political decisions.
3. Exit processes- management, control.
An integral part of the political process is activity as a specifically human form of active relationship to the world around us, associated with its purposeful change.
On the scale of the entire life cycle of a social system, the political process can be divided into four stages (phases):
1. Stage of constitution- the most important in the political process. The political forces that come to power create a system that meets their interests. Public agreement is achieved on fundamental values in society, a constitution is adopted.
2. Operating stage coincides with the stable period social development. The activities of political subjects do not reproduce the existing order.
3. Stage of development accompanied by a regrouping of political forces, changes in structure and powers government agencies, reforms in various spheres of society.
4. Decline stage characterized by the predominance of centrifugal tendencies over centripetal ones. Officials use power primarily in their own interests, without caring about the public good, and the central government is not able to fight this, as a result of which its legitimacy is weakened. Conditions arise for radical changes in society, which can lead to the constitution of a new political system.
Also, the political process can be divided into the following 5 stages:
b formation (maturation) of political priorities;
b bringing political priorities to the forefront (agenda) of the political process;
b formulation of political problems requiring government decisions and political decisions;
b activation of the implementation mechanism decisions made(political instrumentalization);
b assessment of the results of political decisions.
The modern political process is characterized by a number of common tasks that manifest themselves differently in different historical conditions and countries, as well as at certain stages of the activities of its own subjects.
The development of political processes demonstrates the growing role of politics as a powerful factor and instrument of action social forces, the system-forming link of all social movements, as well as the most essential element in politics - political power.
Question 1. Concept and types of political process
Lecture 7. Political process
Lecture questions:
1. Concept and types of political process.
2. Political change and political development.
3. Theories of political modernization.
1.1. Political process - is a set of consistent actions of various political subjects aimed at conquering, retaining, strengthening and using political power in society.
The term ʼʼprocessʼʼ ( from lat. "processus"- promotion) usually characterize a certain movement that has its own direction; sequential change of states, stages, evolution; a set of sequential actions to achieve a result.
Main types of political processes:
a) formation of bodies of the political system;
b) reproduction of the components and features of the political system in the process of its functioning:
c) adoption and execution of political decisions.
The interconnection of these processes gives rise to a complex combination of actions aimed at ensuring the constancy, inviolability of political relations and their changes, at giving them dynamics and renewal.
Special emphasis is placed on extreme types of political process:
a) rebellion;
Anyone uprising There is a certain level of organization, and managers play a big role here, putting forward certain goals. These goals are justified in a simple program and slogans.
By the presence of a certain degree of organization and purposefulness, an uprising differs from riot - mass action, which is even more limited by the time of its occurrence, as well as by the problem, the cause that caused it.
A riot is almost always a response to any extraordinary actions of representatives of dominant political groups or government bodies, without outgrowing the limited tasks of resistance to individual government actions.
Mutiny in terms of intensity, emotional tension, it is close to a riot, but unlike it, it has a more limited number of participants. A rebellion arises as a result of thoughtful, purposeful preparation of a certain group of people. It is armed in nature, the bet is on military force and the main core of the rebels is usually the army.
With the addition of a wider range of participants to its initiators, the rebellion quickly loses the quality of an organized, purposeful action. A person here is subject to emotions, and his actions increasingly lose touch with real conditions and the possibilities of society. This logic of development quickly gives the rebellion the quality of rebellion; it exhausts its transformative potential and fades away.
If the masses do not join the rebels, then the rebellion becomes putsch , that is, it is expressed in armed actions that are not based either on broad support, or on taking into account the situation, or on a well-thought-out program.
According to the methods of achieving dynamic equilibrium of the political system during its transformations, which presuppose a certain sequence of political changes, we can distinguish three types of political processes:
a) technocratic;
b) ideocratic;
c) charismatic.
This classification is the result of a theoretical assumption, the identification of certain ideal types, which in political practice closely interconnected, intertwined.
The political process is of a technocratic type. Participants strictly adhere to those political roles and functions that are prescribed to them by law and political traditions.
This type developed in countries with a relatively high homogeneity of the cultural environment - in Anglo-Saxon countries. The adherence of the majority of the population to traditions ensures the stability of the political system and the preservation of the high efficiency of its political institutions, since leaders act as bearers of the interests of those institutions that they directly represent.
Political process of ideocratic type typical for traditional societies, where there is no autonomous personality, developed differentiation of political roles and functions, which are at the initial stage of modernization. It is possible to integrate an ethnoculturally and socioeconomically diverse society on the basis of a national idea.
Political process of charismatic type. This type is characteristic of the Eastern cultural tradition, within which the role and status of the political leader are absolutized, and often he is simply deified. But a political leader is not always a leader by position. He should also be an informal leader.
The charismatic type of political change can be effective if it is complemented by technocratic and ideocratic political processes. A leader's charisma can be based either on his official status or on his ability to express the aspirations of the vast majority of members of society, using discontent, protest and promising to change the situation for the better.
Question 1. Concept and types of political process - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Question 1. Concept and types of political process" 2017, 2018.
The concept of "process" is used in all social sciences, various processes constantly take place in all spheres of public life, and the political sphere is no exception. Political processes indicate that the political system exists, functions and develops. In other words, they serve as a form of functioning of the political sphere (system) of society.
In a broad sense, political processes are forms of political activity of society. The diversity of this activity and the fact that each case has its own cause and purpose, varying degrees of predictability of the result and other differences make it difficult Scientific research political processes give rise to a variety of points of view on the same issues. This topic is one of the most controversial in political science. And, nevertheless, the degree of scientific development of political processes allows them to be classified quite clearly.
Political process - one of the central categories of political science. There are three main points of view in defining the concept of “political process”. Some researchers understand by the political process everything that is happening in politics, others generally identify this category with the category “politics”, and the third approach interprets the concept of “political process” as a change in the states of the political system of society. But it is generally accepted that it reflects the real interaction of the subjects of politics, which has developed not in accordance with the intentions of leaders or party programs, but as a result of the action of various external and internal factors.
The political process shows how individuals, groups, institutions with their subjective goals interact with each other and with the state, realizing specific roles and functions. And since situations and motives of human behavior are constantly changing, the political process excludes any predetermination in the development of events.
In the policy process, various policy actors and factors interact, resulting in policy changes. It reveals two forms of political expression of citizens: 1) ways for an ordinary participant in the political process to present their interests (participation in elections, party membership, etc.); 2) forms of adoption and implementation of power decisions carried out by leaders and elites.
The implementation of their functions by political subjects expresses the distribution of power occurring in society, the political mobilization of citizens, decision-making and other forms of political activity of groups and individuals, including illegal ones. Therefore, in the political process there are also such forms of political activity as conspiracies, terror, and the activities of illegal parties and organizations, although they are usually on the periphery of political life.
In relation to society as a whole, the political process reveals the interaction of social and political structures, that is, it shows how society forms statehood, and the state, in turn, “conquers” society. According to political scientists V.P. Pugachev and A.N. Solovyov, the political process is a set of actions of political subjects to implement their specific functions (dysfunctions) in the sphere of power, ultimately leading to the development or decline of the political system of society.
The political process is the total activity of social communities, public organizations and groups, individuals pursuing certain political goals.
The peculiarity of political processes is that they cannot be studied as a single mass. There is a difference between processes within society and international political processes.
In the totality of political processes, two groups are distinguished - are common And private. They differ not only in the scope of social life, but also in content, forms of flow, goals and results, so they are studied separately. However, these two groups of processes are interrelated and can have a significant impact on the content, form and speed of each other.
General political process covers the entire society and leads to a change in the state of its political system. Private political processes- these are diverse and numerous forms of political activity of society, aimed at realizing political goals that do not affect the state of the political system of society as a whole (for example, not leading to a change in regime or form of government). They can occur at the national, regional, local level, within socio-demographic groups, classes, nations; in work collectives, parties, etc.
The general political process takes place in three known forms: evolution, revolution, crisis. Evolution- the main and most common form, meaning gradual changes in the country’s political system: in the alignment of political forces, political regime (increasing democratic or anti-democratic tendencies), power structures, etc. Revolutionary uniform the development of the general political process means “a radical turn in the life of society, during which there is a change in state power and dominant forms of ownership.” Political revolution is associated with violence, up to and including an armed change of power. There is a rapid destruction of all political bodies, which, as a rule, is accompanied by numerous casualties and the tragedy of millions of people. Political crisis- loss of control by power structures over the development of aggravated contradictions, weakening of political institutions, poor controllability of the economy and other spheres, growing discontent in society, etc. The causes of the political crisis are mainly economic and social character. Unlike a revolution, political crises rarely lead to a change in the state system, but these are dramatic periods in the destinies of society.
So, the general political process reflects the dynamics of the political system of society as a whole, the change of its states and forms government structure(form of government, methods of exercising power, national-territorial organization), as well as the political regime.
Structural elements private political process are the reason (or reasons) for its occurrence, object, subject and purpose. The reason for the emergence of the private political process- This appearance contradiction that needs to be resolved. For example, dissatisfaction with the tax system can initiate a legislative process to change it. Object of private political process- this is a specific political problem, which became its cause: 1) the emergence and need to realize any political interests; 2) creation of new political institutions, parties, movements, etc.; 3) reorganization of power structures, creation of a new government; 4) organizing support for existing political power. Subject of private political process- this is its initiator: some authority, party, movement or even an individual. It is necessary to determine the status of these entities, their goals, resources and strategy for their actions. The purpose of the private political process- this is what the political process begins and develops for. Knowing the goal allows you to assess the reality of its achievement by weighing the resources available to the participants in the process.
It should be noted that the private political process does not necessarily arise in the political sphere. It can begin and develop in any sphere of society (economic, social, spiritual, cultural, etc.). If these spheres themselves cannot resolve the contradictions that have arisen, then the problem, for example, turns from economic to political.
For a comprehensive study of the process, information is needed on a number of its characteristics: the number and composition of participants, socio-political conditions and the form of its occurrence.
All private political processes, despite their diversity, go through three stages in their development. Every private political process begins with the emergence of a problem. At the first stage, the forces interested in solving it are identified, their positions and capabilities are clarified, and ways to solve this problem are developed. The second stage is the mobilization of forces to support the intended path to solve the problem or various solutions. The process ends with the passage of the third stage - the adoption by political structures of measures to solve the problem. There is another point of view, according to which any political process can be divided into five stages: 1) formation of political priorities; 2) putting priorities at the forefront of the process; 3) making political decisions on them; 4) implementation of decisions made; 5) understanding and evaluating the results of decisions.
Typology of private political processes:
According to the scale of the private political process vary processes within society And international processes . The latter are bilateral (between two states) and multilateral (between many or even all states of the world). Private political processes within society are divided into basic and local (peripheral).
According to the nature of the relationship between society and power structures processes are divided into stable and unstable. The former develop in a stable political environment with stable mechanisms for making political decisions and political mobilization of citizens. Unstable processes arise and develop in conditions of crisis of power and the political system as a whole and reflect the conflict of interests of groups.
According to the flow form. Explicit (open) political process characterized by the fact that the interests of groups and citizens are systematically identified in their public demands on government authorities, which openly make management decisions. Shadow process based on the activities of hidden political institutions and centers of power, as well as on the demands of citizens not expressed in official form.
Each of the political processes has its own internal rhythm, i.e. cyclical stages of interaction between subjects.
The main task of all participants in political processes is to include their demands in government decisions. Institutions of state power are the most important tool for taking into account group demands and developing the political will of society.
From point of view systemic organization political power there are two main types of political processes: democratic, where various forms of democracy are combined, and undemocratic, determined by the presence of totalitarian or authoritarian regimes, non-democratic parties, organizations and leaders, authoritarian political culture and the mentality of citizens.
In Western political science, there are two typologies of the political process as a whole. Within the first of them, the American political scientist L. Pai, comparing the political processes of different countries, distinguishes two types of them - Western and “non-Western”.
The second type of classification focuses on Western political systems, distinguishing two types of political process in them: horizontal and vertical. At the core horizontal political process lies recognition of the formal equality and autonomy of its participants. Vertical political process differs in that the government strives in every possible way to maintain its authority.
With changes in forms, methods and functions carried out by institutions government controlled, political processes are also changing. Most often, three modes of their occurrence are distinguished. The first is a mode of operation that does not take the political system beyond the established relationships between citizens and institutions of state power. The second mode of political processes is the development mode. In this case, the structures and mechanisms of power bring state policy to a level that allows it to adequately respond to the new demands of the population and the challenges of the time. The third type of mode of political processes is the mode of decline, the collapse of political integrity.
The political process is a complex multifactorial concept that has various forms and modes of occurrence. Analyzing processes in politics is a task that requires the researcher to have a broad perspective, the ability to take into account a variety of factors and points of view in order to avoid subjective assessments.
Political relations, their subjects and objects.
Types and stages of development of the political process.
The concept of the political process, its content and structure.
Plan.
TOPIC 12. Political processes and political relations.
Characteristics of politics as a process, i.e. the procedural approach allows us to see the special facets of interaction between subjects regarding state power. However, due to the fact that the scale of the political process coincides with the entire political sphere, some scientists identify it either with politics as a whole (R. Dawes), or with the entire set of behavioral actions of subjects of power, changes in their statuses and influences (C. Merriam ). Proponents of the institutional approach associate the political process with the functioning and transformation of government institutions. (S. Huntington). D. Easton understands it as a set of reactions of the political system to environmental challenges. R. Dahrendorf focuses on the dynamics of competition between groups for status and power resources, and J. Mannheim and R. Rich interpret it as a complex set of events that determines the nature of activity state institutions and their impact on society.
All these approaches, one way or another, characterize the most important sources, states and forms of the political process.
The political process is a set of all dynamic changes in the behavior and relationships of subjects, in the performance of their roles and the functioning of institutions, as well as in all other elements of the political space, carried out under the influence of external and internal factors.
The political process excludes any predetermination or predetermination in the development of events and places emphasis on practical modifications of phenomena. Thus, the political process reveals the movement, dynamics, evolution of political phenomena, specific changes in their states in time and space.
Due to this interpretation of the political process, it central characteristic stands for change, which means any modification of the structure and functions, institutions and forms, constant and variable features, rates of evolution and other parameters of political phenomena. Changes mean both a transformation of properties that do not affect the basic structures and mechanisms of power (for example, leaders, governments, individual institutions may change, but leading values, norms, methods of exercising power remain the same), and a modification of the supporting, basic elements that together they contribute to the achievement of a new qualitative state by the system.
Science has developed many ideas about the sources, mechanisms and forms of change. For example, Marx saw the main causes of political dynamics in the influence of economic relations, Pareto associated them with the circulation of elites, Weber with the activities of a charismatic leader, Parsons with the performance of various roles by people, etc. However, conflict is most often cited as the main source of political change.
Conflict is one of the possible options for interaction between political actors. As a source of the political process, conflict is a type (and result) of competitive interaction between two or more parties (groups, states, individuals) challenging each other for the distribution of power or resources.
This concept emphasizes the objectivity and natural historical nature of the development of political events. It shows the real interaction of political subjects, includes the subjective intentions of political leaders, groups, elites, etc., but the result, as a rule, is something very far from the consciously proclaimed goals. In other words, the concept of “political process” is neutral in relation to any political doctrines. It excludes any bias or predetermination of the evolution of political life.
In general, the political process includes mechanisms for the formation and functioning of political relations and institutions, forms of interaction between numerous political subjects, technology for the exercise of political power, etc.
It is customary to distinguish at least four significant components in the structure of the political process:
1) subjects (actors) of the political process (institutionalized and non-institutionalized);
2) political interests of these subjects;
3) political activity of people (professional political activity and political participation of citizens);
4) political relations that develop as a result of the activities of subjects of the political process.
From the point of view of the significance for society of certain forms of political regulation social relations political processes can be divided into basic and peripheral. The first of them characterize those various changes in various areas political life, which relate to the modification of its basic, systemic properties. These include political participation, which characterizes the ways in which broad social strata are included in relations with the state. In the same sense, we can talk about the process of public administration, which determines the main directions for the targeted use of the material power of the state. At the same time, peripheral political processes express changes in areas that are not so significant for society. For example, they reveal the dynamics of the formation of individual political associations (parties, pressure groups), the development of local self-government.
Political processes can reflect changes that occur in overt or hidden forms. An explicit political process is characterized by the fact that the interests of groups and citizens are systematically identified in their public claims to state power, which in turn makes the phase of preparation and adoption of management decisions accessible to public control. The hidden process is based on the activities of political institutions and centers of power that are not publicly formalized, as well as the non-powerful claims of citizens that are not expressed in the form of an appeal to official government bodies.
Open and closed political processes. Closed processes are the type of changes that can be fairly unambiguously assessed within the criteria of best/worst, desirable/undesirable, etc. Open - changes that do not allow us to assume what kind of character - positive or negative for the subject - the existing transformations have or which of the possible strategies in the future is more preferable.
Stable and transitional political processes. Stable ones express a clearly defined direction of change, the predominance of a certain type of power relations, forms of organization of power that presuppose the stable reproduction of political relations even with the resistance of certain forces of trends. Outwardly, they can be characterized by the absence of wars, mass protests, etc. In transition processes, there is no clear predominance of certain basic properties of the organization of power, which exclude the possibility of qualitative identification of changes.
Science also presents attempts to typologize political processes on a civilized basis. Thus, L. Pai singled out the “non-Western” type of political process, attributing to its features the tendency of political parties to pretend to express a worldview and represent a way of life; greater freedom for political leaders in determining the strategy and tactics of structures and institutions, etc.
Within the cycle of the political process, one can distinguish several phases or stages of the implementation of the main functions of politics in it, as was done, for example, by G. Almond and G. Powell. They postulate the presence of systemic (socialization, recruitment and communication) and procedural functions of politics, which include the functions of articulating interests, their aggregation, as well as the development of specific political measures and their implementation. Each procedural function can be associated with a certain stage in the development of an integral political process.
At the first stage, the “articulation of interests” of various social groups occurs, realizing that without influencing political power they can't solve their problems. Their design and expression are undertaken by numerous interest groups (trade unions, associations of entrepreneurs, etc.).
The second stage is characterized by “aggregation of interests,” that is, the process of consolidation, the reduction of relatively small, partial interests into a certain generalized political interest, the spokesman of which is already large political parties, associations, movements, etc.
At the third stage of the political process, the consent of the main interested forces is achieved in one way or another and a certain policy is developed, which is the result of the activities of mainly representative (legislative) authorities. Although in many cases (as, for example, in today's Russia), the direction of the developed political course depends to a large extent on the executive branch.
The fourth stage of the usual cycle of political processes consists in the implementation of collective political decisions, their “translation” into the language of specific practical activities of the state such as mobilization economic resources, budget execution, etc. This is already almost the exclusive prerogative of the executive power, whose actions should, in principle, be controlled by the legislative power. In practice, the nature and depth of such control each time depend on the prevailing situation. this moment balance of political forces controlling the main branches of government.
The political process can be defined as an ordered sequence of individual actions and interactions of political actors, usually creating and recreating political institutions. Another definition of the political process can be given - different in form, but close in essence: the political process is the deployment of politics in time and space in the form of an ordered sequence of individual actions and interactions, which is connected by a certain logic or meaning.
Coinciding in scale with the entire political space, the political process extends not only to conventional (contractual, normative) changes that characterize behavioral actions, relationships and mechanisms of competition for state power that meet the accepted norms and rules of the political game in society. Along with this, political processes also involve those changes that indicate a violation by subjects of their role functions recorded in regulatory framework, exceeding their powers, going beyond their political niches. Thus, the content of the political process also includes changes that take place in the activities of subjects who do not share generally accepted standards in relations with state authorities, for example, the activities of illegal parties, terrorism, criminal acts of politicians in the sphere of power, etc.
Reflecting actually existing, and not just planned changes, political processes have a pronounced non-normative character, which is explained by the presence in the political space of various types of movement (wave, cyclical, linear, inversion, i.e. return, etc.), which have their own forms and ways of transforming political phenomena, the combination of which deprives the latter of strict certainty and stability.
From this point of view, the political process is a set of relatively independent, local transformations of the political activity of subjects (relations, institutions), which arise at the intersection of a wide variety of factors and the parameters of which cannot be accurately determined, much less predicted. At the same time, the political process is characterized by discrete changes or the possibility of modifying some parameters of a phenomenon and at the same time maintaining unchanged its other features and characteristics (for example, a change in the composition of the government can be combined with maintaining the previous political course). The uniqueness and discrete nature of changes excludes the possibility of extrapolation (transferring the values of modern facts to the future) of certain assessments of the political process, complicates political forecasting, and sets limits to predicting political prospects.
At the same time, each type of political change has its own rhythm (cyclicality, repetition), a combination of stages and interactions of subjects, structures, and institutions. For example, the electoral process is formed in connection with election cycles, so the political activity of the population develops in accordance with the phases of the nomination of candidates for legislative or executive bodies power, discussion of their candidacies, election and control over their activities. The decisions of the ruling parties can set their own rhythm for political processes. During periods of qualitative reformation public relations decisive influence on the nature of the functioning of government institutions and methods political participation the population is influenced not by the decisions of the highest governing bodies, but by individual political events, changing the alignment and balance of political forces. Military coups, international crises, natural disasters, etc. can set such a “ragged” rhythm in the political process.
Reflecting real, practically established changes in political phenomena, the political process certainly includes in its content the corresponding technologies and procedures of action. In other words, the political process demonstrates the nature of changes that are associated with the activities of a specific subject who uses, at one time or another and in one place or another, the methods and methods of activity familiar to him. Therefore, the use of different technologies for solving even homogeneous problems implies changes of different nature. Thus, without this technocratic link, political changes acquire an abstract character, losing their specificity and concrete historical design.