Dictatorship in its authoritarian form has been the most common type of political regime in the world until modern times. It played a certain role in the modernization of a number of countries, in preparing their transition to a democratic system. A number of signs of totalitarianism can be found in ancient Eastern and medieval despotism: the absence of guaranteed private property, the complete dependence of citizens on the will of the ruler, and others character traits"Asian mode of production". But totalitarianism became a true phenomenon in the 20th century.

Today in Russia the concepts of “authoritarianism” and “totalitarianism”, borrowed from Western political science, are widely used to explain certain periods of our national history, and to explain the development of other countries. These categories are most often used by transposing (often arbitrarily) the thoughts of Western researchers and transferring their assessments to our soil.

Authoritarianism (lat. autoritas - influence, power) is a non-democratic political regime that acts as a form political power, which is concentrated in the hands of one person or in one government body, as a result of which the role of other bodies or branches of government is reduced, first of all, the role of representative institutions is diminished.

Authoritarianism, when consistently implemented as the power of one person, one person, can turn into autocracy (Greek autocrateja - autocracy, autocracy), i.e. into a form of government with unlimited, uncontrolled sovereignty of one person. This is exactly how the despotisms of the Ancient East, empires - Rome, Byzantium, absolute monarchies Middle Ages, Modern times.

• 1) concentration of power in the hands of one person or one - most often executive - branch of government and its institutions;
• 2) the role of the representative branch of government and its bodies has been significantly narrowed;
• 3) minimizing opposition and autonomy of various political organizations (associations, parties, unions, institutions), a sharp curtailment of democratic political procedures (political debates, mass rallies and demonstrations, restrictions on the press, etc.).

Totalitarianism (lat. totalitas - integrity, completeness) is a non-democratic political regime characterized by general - total - control of those in power over all aspects of public life: economics, politics, culture, over all aspects of human life - both public and personal life.

In modern everyday consciousness, totalitarianism often seems to be a monstrous modern Leviathan, not allowing citizens not only to live, but simply to breathe freely, and the totalitarian leader is an outright dictator, whose atrocities could not be recognized only by lackeys and complete idiots. Another thing is an authoritarian, civilized dictator, like Charles de Gaulle, his main concern is public order and ensuring the prosperity of the country.

What really are the similarities and differences between authoritarianism and totalitarianism? We must immediately emphasize the main thing: both political regimes are anti-people and undemocratic. The following comparative characteristics can be given.

Authoritarianism is established contrary to the opinion of the majority, while totalitarianism is established with the most active participation of the masses, which is why it is sometimes called “dictatorship.” mass movements" It was they who brought Mussolini and Hitler to power.

Under authoritarianism, civil society remains autonomous to a certain extent, although it is not capable of exerting a serious influence on the state. Under totalitarianism, the civil society that has begun to form is purposefully and completely subordinate to the state.

Under authoritarianism, the political leader does not always try to “flirt” with the people, but, on the contrary, often emphasizes his superiority. At the same time, the people often view the leader as a usurper and do not at all strive for intimacy with him. The totalitarian leader constantly emphasizes his unity with the people. The enemy of an authoritarian leader is perceived only as his enemy, and the enemy of a totalitarian leader is perceived as an enemy of the people. A totalitarian leader, as a rule, is a favorite of the crowd; it is enough to recall the enthusiastic attitude of millions of Italians towards their Duce - Benito Mussolini, or the cliquey worship of Hitler by the majority of representatives of the German nation, not to mention the monstrous cult of Stalin in the USSR.

Under authoritarianism, those in power provide a person with certain opportunities for self-realization in civil society and prevent active independent political activity citizens. Under totalitarianism, in conditions of extreme politicization and ideologization of all human life, the political regime constantly tries to keep people in a state of political tension and even exaltation.

One of the key problems that arises when studying non-democratic regimes is elucidating the reasons for the emergence of totalitarian orders in the most seemingly different conditions: in Italy of the 20s, in Germany of the 30s and the Soviet Union of the Stalin era. In Western political science, the book most often referred to is Hannah Arendt's seminal book in this regard, The Origin of Totalitarianism (1951). But the book focuses on the Jewish question and anti-Semitism, which does not reveal the main reasons for the emergence of totalitarianism.

It is not often remembered in educational literature that one of the first to thoroughly outline the conditions for the emergence and signs of totalitarianism was the outstanding representative of the Russian diaspora I.A. Ilyin (1883 - 1954). He laid three criteria at the basis of totalitarianism:

• 1) monopoly on property,
• 2) monopoly on power,
• 3) monopoly on the socialization of citizens (on their assimilation social experience). Two other signs:
• 4) the desire to realize a utopian idea
• 5) ideological messianism - together with the first three they form “incomplete totalitarianism.”

“Complete”, from the point of view of I.A. Ilyin, totalitarianism has other characteristics: unlimited violence against citizens, the cult of the leader, anti-democracy, material and spiritual self-isolation.

There are usually three types of totalitarianism.

Bolshevik (communist) type. Most often it is associated with the era of Stalinism. Here everything, including economic life, is under total control. Private property has been eliminated, which means that the basis of individualism and autonomy of members of society has been destroyed.

The political regime of Mao Zedong in China is close to this type. It is characteristic that the tightening of this regime coincided with the period of transition from totalitarianism to authoritarianism in the USSR. In fact, relations between the CPSU and the CPC were interrupted. China found itself practically in a state of political isolation, which was a prerequisite for the tightening of totalitarianism.

Fascist type. Fascism in Italy was established in 1922. He was characterized by the desire to revive the Great Roman Empire. It was characterized by racism and chauvinism, and was based on the cult of the leader, strong merciless power. Paradoxically, Italy remained a monarchy during this period, and Mussolini sent occasional reports to King Victor Immanuel III.

Nazi type. National Socialism established itself in Germany in 1933 and had features similar to both the fascist and Bolshevik regimes. The goal was the dominance of the Aryan race, the German nation was proclaimed the highest nation.

A special form of authoritarian regimes are military regimes established as a result of military coups. This practice is especially common in developing countries. During the 20th century, a military coup attempt was carried out in 81 countries, in some countries several times. In general, they are associated with the instability of the socio-economic structures of developing countries, with the struggle of various social forces for power (in these countries, not only socio-economic, but also tribal and clan differences often play a significant role). Often, the immediate cause of military coups is a threat to the privileged position of army officers or active interference of civilians in the affairs of the army.

The establishment of military regimes was most often not accompanied by economic development. However, in last decades V Latin America military regimes of the so-called “new authoritarianism” are often established, the goal of which is to implement serious economic reforms in practice. An example of “new authoritarianism” is often cited as the military junta regime in Chile, established in 1973 after the democratic overthrow elected president Salvador Allende.

The line between totalitarianism and authoritarianism is fluid: the difference between them is only in the degree of control of the state over society (democracy is characterized by control of society over the state). Therefore, it is easier for totalitarianism to transform from authoritarianism than from democracy.

However, it is most easily born from anarchy, just as Hitler’s fascism emerged from the anarchy of the Weimar Republic. It was precisely this situation that Jaspers had in mind when he wrote that “freedom, if suddenly granted to a people unprepared by self-education, can not only lead to ochlocracy and, ultimately, to tyranny, but also, above all, contribute to the transfer of power to the hands of a random clique because people don’t know what they’re voting for.”

Political regime is a set of means, forms and methods of exercising state power, the uniqueness of the style of political leadership. It is determined by a combination of the relationship between state and society, the relationship between authorities and political forces that is original for each country.

Modern political regimes are extremely diverse. But if we take their attitude towards man and society as a criterion, then we can distinguish three main types of political regimes: authoritarian, totalitarian and democratic.

In order to decide what kind of political regime I would like to see operating in modern Russia, it would not be superfluous to examine each separately.

The authoritarian regime has been characteristic of various states for many centuries, from tribal to capitalist and socialist relations. It is a kind of intermediate stage between totalitarianism and a democratic regime.

monistic structure of political power. At the center is the dominance of a certain individual (elder, leader, monarch, dictator) or group of people (clan, caste, elite) who carry out excessive centralization in the management of socio-political life. Moreover, political power is based more on the power of authority than on violence;

the political structure does not provide for a real division of power into legislative, executive, and judicial. At the same time, elections are ostentatious and often fictitious;

In order to mobilize the country's forces to achieve their goals, the authorities restrict political freedoms and the rights of citizens. The Constitution is declarative in nature; the activities of only those political parties and organizations that fully support the dominant political elite;

While suppressing any resistance to the political regime, the authorities do not at the same time seek to control all social processes and people's behavior.

Investigating the reasons for the existence of authoritarianism, political scientists note the presence of both reasonable grounds for its emergence, justified by a specific situation, and irrational ones, brought to life only by the qualities of the leader (lust for power, suspicion, intolerance of other people’s opinions, etc.).

Historical experience shows that authoritarian political regimes justify themselves only as a short-term means of mobilizing the forces of society to overcome specific obstacles to its development (for example, in conditions of war). If the existence of an authoritarian regime is prolonged, then the costs of authoritarianism exceed its effectiveness. He immediately faces a choice: either democratize the regime and gain broad popular support, or tighten policies and move to coercion and dictatorship. This opens the way to totalitarianism.

There is much in common between totalitarianism and authoritarianism. Both regimes rely on leaders whose powers are practically unlimited. Representative bodies of government are puppet or non-existent. Both regimes presuppose a strict hierarchy of power relations from bottom to top. The legislative system is minimal and declarative. The rights and freedoms of citizens are significantly limited. Opposition is denied or banned altogether. At the same time, totalitarianism also has a significant difference from an authoritarian political regime:

the ultimate ideal of social order is always present, all resources of society, without exception, are aimed at achieving this universal goal (“Third Reich”, “Kingdom of Christ”, “communism”);

There is practically no separation between society and the state. The state totally dominates society, individual interests are completely subordinated to public ones (in the interpretation of the ruling oligarchy). The state does not exist for the people, but the people live for the state;

the presence of one (and only one!) dominant party, which either closely merges with the state bureaucracy or stands above it;

comprehensive control is established over all spheres of public life and the state;

eliminates disagreements not only on political, but also on economic, spiritual and ideological issues. All information and propaganda activities of the regime, the work of its repressive apparatus, army, law enforcement forces are aimed at preventing discontent, at achieving a kind of monolith. Mottos like “those who are not with us are against us”, “if the enemy does not surrender, then they destroy him” dominate here;

The totality of the regime consists not only in the fact that the party, elite or leader establishes comprehensive control over all spheres of society, but also in the fact that the overwhelming mass of the population almost sacredly believes in the proclaimed goals, guidelines, and orientations. Both sides seem to be merged in total unity to achieve a universal goal.

Totalitarianism arises, as a rule, in conditions of a deep crisis in the socio-political system. It can appear and develop in any country, whatever its socio-economic, ideological and political characteristics. As historical experience shows, such a regime can be very stable and capable of mobilizing enormous forces to achieve its goals.

At the same time, social practice shows that it is possible to unite society, all its spheres and human resources on the basis of a utopian (even beautiful!) ideal only during a certain historical period. With the erosion of faith among the main sections of the population in the ideals, values ​​and goals of totalitarian ideology, the regime begins to lose its specific forms. In relation to various kinds of political decisions made by a totalitarian government, people develop something like a stable immunity: while expressing approval in words, they show indifference or even rejection in practice.

This situation, in fact, means the end of totalitarianism in its “pure form”, since one of its fundamental principles is violated - totality, the total unity of the masses and the leader.

The third form of political regime we are considering is democracy. Historically, it has been known since ancient times. Let us note only the most common features of this political regime:

the source of political power is the people;

characterized by the priority of society over the state. The actions of the state and its authorities in relation to society as a whole and to its individual are strictly regulated by law;

guarantees equality of citizens. Not only proclaims, but also ensures political freedoms and rights of its citizens;

clear separation of powers and their close interaction;

almost unlimited political pluralism, excluding only violations of the rule of law. This makes it possible to respect the opinions of the minority and ensure their right to become the majority.

The most important condition for the effective functioning of democracy is the clear development of universal democratic procedures. These include:

The highest legislative body and local government bodies are elected by the people.

Voters have equal rights, and suffrage is universal.

Elections at all levels are made by majority vote.

The presence of public control over power.

As practice shows, it is the democratic political regime that is better than others capable of solving the political problems of society; it is it that ensures the effective search for the optimal combination of individual and public interests, the balance of freedom, equality, and responsibility.

From all that has been said above, the problem of choice is solved, one might say, by itself, unless you harbor an idea in your head that, in your opinion, rises above the entire mortal world. In this case, all you have to do is convince others that you are right, find like-minded people, find sources of financial support and bring your idea to life. In the meantime, the situation that has developed in our time, in my opinion, is best reflected by W. Churchill’s well-known formula, according to which democracy is a bad form of government, but humanity has not yet invented anything better.

Classical Marxist political science has come to the conclusion that democracy represents the best political framework for capitalism, both from the point of view of the workers and from the point of view of the bourgeois. It allows you to realize the best of possible ways political domination, namely the manipulation of the consciousness of the masses without the use of direct violence under normal conditions. I agree with this argument.

So what did we choose when we chose democracy? The generally accepted definition: democracy is the power of the people (democracy). But let's still be objective. Democracy, with rare exceptions, is the power of the political elite, i.e. power is almost always on behalf of the people, sometimes for the people, but almost never of the people themselves. In addition, “rule of the people”, i.e. direct control of the entire people is generally problematic and possible only in a hypothetical future.

However, at least in the new and modern times On average, statistically, on a large historical scale, democratic political systems turn out to be more viable than anti-democratic ones. However, in each individual case, society has to look for the optimal measure of democracy, the level of democracy that it can afford.

Summing up the choice of a political regime for Russia, I still want to see democracy - as a competent and responsible representative government to the people.

13 Political regime. Democratic, authoritarian, totalitarian political regimes Political regime A political regime is a way of government, it is a way of exercising state power in relation to citizens, it is a mechanism for the functioning of the political system Political regime A political regime: - determines the climate in society; - the dynamics of its development; - the nature of relationships between people; - affects all spheres of society; - reflects the relationship between: Personality Society State “Where power reigns, there the law is powerless” (Menander III in BC) (Menander III in BC) “Political freedom does not consist in doing what whatever you want. In a state, that is, in a society where there are laws, freedom can only consist in being able to, in a society where there are laws, freedom can only consist in being able to do what one should want and not be forced to do what one should not want” to do what one should want, and not be forced to do what one should not want” (C. Montesquieu) (C. Montesquieu)

13.1 Main types of political regimes (XX century) totalitarianism authoritarianism democracy Political state of one force (class, party, individual). Economic dominance of one (state) form of ownership Similar to totalitarianism, but allows for other forms of ownership. Allows mixed types of government and ownership. Political pluralism (parliamentarism, multi-party system). Economic pluralism (the existence of different forms of property) Regimes are divided into Totalitarian regimes Authoritarian regimes Democratic liberal regimes; ochlocratic; conservative; elitist - aristocratic. fascist; military - bureaucratic; theocratic. rigidly – ​​authoritarian; authoritarian – democratic. They can appear in the following forms: statism statism (etat - state) - management of state property by officials for their own benefit; plutocracy plutocracy is a form of government when government decisions are determined not by the opinions of the entire people, but by an influential class of rich people, while there is deep social inequality and low social mobility; partyocracy partyocracy is the actual government in the country, carried out by the top of the party apparatus.

13.2 Totalitarianism Totalitarianism Totalitarianism - (totalis - universal, all-encompassing) complete control over the life of society, general and complete control of all aspects of the life of society and citizens, unification of life, violence against the individual; occurs when society is in a state of structural crisis, when it is demoralized (Germany, 1918, Russia - after the civil war); people may not suspect, but be satisfied, since there is nothing to compare with. Signs of totalitarianism: 1. The presence of a single mass party led by a leader - a dictator; 2. The presence of an officially dominant ideology in society; 3. State monopoly on the media; 4. State monopoly on the armed forces; 5. Terrorist police control system; 6. Central system of control and management of the economy. Example, Germany under Hitler, Russia under Stalin (USSR) “When the Fuhrer speaks, it is like a religious service” (Goebbels) “Whoever wants to live must fight, and whoever in this world of eternal struggle does not want to participate in a fight does not deserve right to life" (A. Hitler) to participate in a fight, he does not deserve the right to life" (A. Hitler)

Totalitarianism (XX century) “Right” “Left” options Fascism, national socialism Germany; Italy. 1. The priority of the nation, race, ethnic group is declared; 2. Ideology – racism, nationalism; 3. Idea – biological inequality of people, nations; 4. National values ​​dominate. USSR 1. The priority of the working class was declared; 2. Ideology – Marxism – Leninism; 3. Idea – equality, building communism; 4. Class values ​​dominate. The masses approve of the regime and perceive the leader as their own. The enemy of the leader is the enemy of the people; The masses are enthusiastic, politically active; The situation is characterized by political tension, the search for internal and external enemies; Everyone is in control; Punitive operations are perceived as the will of the people. “If a dictator of the modern type notices that he does not enjoy the trust of the people, then the first inclination is to dismiss the people themselves, the people, then the first inclination is to dismiss the people themselves, replace them with others, more loyal” (B. Brecht ) replace him with another, more loyal one” (B. Brecht) 13.3

13.4 in totalitarian states to the leader (leader). In totalitarian states, a big role belongs to the leader (leader). Illusions are formed Illusions are formed: omnipresence (mummy - in open coffin, portraits - icons); eternity, immortality (they don’t get sick, there is no photo of Hitler with glasses); tribal symbol (Stalin is the father of nations, after his death the people were orphaned; the children are Ilyich’s grandchildren); political symbol (photo on money); national symbol (images: Hitler - blue-eyed; roots are hushed up: Lenin - Jewish); role model: the noble origin was hidden (“Hitler Youth”, All-Union Pioneer Organization named after Lenin. Oaths: “Fuhrer, command, we follow!”, “Be ready - always ready!” - on the leader’s birthday); the ideal Fuhrer (leader) is an ascetic, asceticism. “The Fuhrer is the party, and the party is the Fuhrer” (A. Hitler, 1935) “We say Lenin, we mean the party, we say the party, we mean Lenin” (V. Mayakovsky) Authoritarian and totalitarian regimes have much in common; they are anti-people, anti-democratic, this is the power of a “firm hand”, but there is a difference! See below.

13.5 Authoritarian regime Authoritarian regime Authoritarian regime - (from the Latin auctoritas power, influence) characteristic of special types of non-democratic regimes based on the unlimited power of one person or group of persons while maintaining some economic, civil, spiritual freedoms for citizens. Characterized by partial state control over society. Society and state are separated; there are elements of civil society. an authoritarian regime is most often established against and against the will; the masses doubt, do not approve, do not support the regime, have a negative attitude towards the leader, consider the government illegitimate; the masses are inactive, apathetic, indifferent; There is a huge gap between the masses and the leader. Legitimacy Legitimus (from the Latin legitimus, agreeing with the laws, legal, lawful) is the consent of the people with the authorities when they voluntarily recognize their right to make binding decisions. The lower the level of legitimacy, the more often power will rely on force. Signs of the regime Signs of the regime: no clear ideology, ban on parties, media, etc.; control over the life of society is selective; the regime does not require loyalty; limited criticism is allowed; the negative aspects of life are not hidden; control is carried out by special bodies. Fidel Castro is the leader of Cuba. Ivan IV Vasilyevich the Terrible (with the help of the oprichnina he wanted to strengthen his power)

13.6 Democratic Regime Democracy Democracy is (in the words of Abraham Lincoln) “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” In this case, government is carried out by the people either directly (direct democracy) or indirectly, through elected intermediaries or through judicial proceedings. The main feature of democracy is legislatively ensured elective forms of both proportional representation in power (collective body) and authoritarian representation (president), and the mandatory presence of any forms of inalienable rights of citizens, which carry a mechanism for protecting the interests of minorities. Signs of the regime Signs of the regime: political pluralism; freedom of the press, absence of censorship, freedom of opposition; guarantee of personal integrity; multi-party system; more than 60% of society is middle class; tolerance. Countries – representatives Countries – representatives: Russia, USA, Greece “The Constitution of the USSR and the Constitution of the USA guarantee freedom of speech, but in the USA they guarantee freedom of speech, but in the USA freedom is also guaranteed after what has been said” (Anecdote) after what has been said” (Anecdote) “No not a single person above and not a single person below me" The main formula of the concept of democracy is contained in the formulation of "Rights and Freedoms of Man and Citizen" where "Rights" are a category of legislatively regulated freedom, and "Freedom" is a form of freedom necessary for everyday use and directly unregulated legislation, but are an integral part of the Concept of the Society enshrined in the Basic Law.

13.7 Democratic regime (continued) Mandatory: - freedom; - equality; - justice. The principle of the “Five Rings” The principle of democracy Legislative power The power of information The judicial power The power of intellect The executive power The multinational people are the bearers of sovereignty The people have the exclusive right to adopt a constitution The people exercise power Usurpation of power is a crime Elections take place on the basis of universal, equal, direct, secret suffrage man and his rights A democratic state proclaims man and his rights as the highest value; natural and inalienable Human rights – natural and inalienable: - the right to life; - the right to freedom; - right to property. Natural rights Natural rights are those that belong to a person by right of his existence; J. Locke, T. Payne

Natural rights Honor Personal integrity Intellectual rights The right of an individual to pursue his own happiness Freedom Life Dignity 13.8 Civil rights Civil rights are those that belong to a person as a member of society; Everything that is not prohibited by law is permitted. A democratic state adheres to the principle: “Everything that is not prohibited by law is permitted”; The state serves the individual and society, and not vice versa. The principle “The state serves the individual and society, and not vice versa”; Institutions that ensure the implementation of the principles of democracy: Referendum with alternative answers Presidential elections with several candidates Parliamentary elections with competing parties, electoral blocs Democracy Democracy is a popular form of government in which the people are vested with supreme power and exercise it either directly or through their elected representatives in a free electoral system. democracy The term “democracy” was introduced by Herodotus. The theory of DEMOCRACY was developed by: Herodotus (490 – 480 – 425 BC), Aristotle, Plato, J. Locke, A. Smith, Sch, Montesquieu, J.J. Russo et al

Fundamentals of democracy: democracy, popular sovereignty - as a source of power; government - based on the consent of the governed; the power of the majority – respecting the rights of the minority; guarantees of fundamental human rights; free and fair elections; separation of powers; rule of law; equality of all before the law; fair trial; constitutional limits on government; social, economic, political pluralism; full publicity; tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation and compromise in society. The conditions of democracy are: elections; political representation; providing civil rights to the population; competition. December 10 – International Human Rights Day 13.9

13.10 Basic human rights. UN Charter, Helsinki Final Act of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of the press; freedom of religion; freedom of assembly and association; the right to equal protection of the laws; the right to respect for the rule of law and a fair trial. Pluralistic democracy. Principles: Free elections of rulers Freedom to nominate candidates Freedom to vote Freedom of suffrage That is, secret voting and the possibility of propaganda That is, universal and equal suffrage on the principle of “one person - one vote” Pluralism Pluralism (from Latin - plural) is the position according to which there are several or many independent and irreducible principles or types of being, foundations and forms of knowledge, styles of behavior, etc. Wide opportunities for expressing one’s interests, opinions, views through organizations and the media.

13.11 Elections When participating in elections, you must remember: 1. Election campaigns are carried out, including at our expense (since the main organizer of elections is the state, which exists on the taxes of citizens); 2. There is no need to shy away from participating in elections, because this is a way to impose your will on the authorities, cause the authorities to doubt their infallibility, and evaluate the relative weight of their voice in the chorus of citizens’ voices; that 3. In elections, the voter votes not only for specific people, but also for what the given government will give him. Elections Elections are a democratic procedure by which executors are determined for certain key positions in various public structures (states, organizations). Elections are carried out by voting (secret, open), conducted in accordance with the election regulations. There are different types of elections: 1. Regular - held after the expiration of the statutory term of office of the elected body; 2. Early elections - are held in connection with the termination of the previously announced term of office of electoral authorities or elected officials; 3. Elections of deputies in the order of rotation. May be carried out against some of the deputies of a representative body of state power in the manner and within the period established by law; 4. Additional elections - are called in the event that a deputy resigns his powers under the main stipulated laws; 5. Repeated elections are held when the elections held are declared invalid or invalid by a decision of the court or election commission.

The vast majority of people are well versed in concepts such as democracy and dictatorship. Ask a resident of the most remote village with a secondary education about this, and he will easily give definitions of the words mentioned and indicate the difference between them. But not everyone, even a very educated individual, will be able to clearly explain how an authoritarian regime differs from a totalitarian one. For many people, both words are synonymous. However, this is not the case, and in this article we will talk about this in detail.

Formulations

Authoritarianism(authoritarian regime) is a phenomenon the essence of which is the concentration of power within one group of like-minded people or in the hands of one person. Any serious opposition to power is impossible or is merely decorative. However, in non-political areas of state life (culture, private life, economics and a number of other areas), free expression of personality and creativity is possible. The main rule is that this relative freedom does not affect the current government in a negative way.

By the way, usually any authoritarian regime sooner or later comes to the format of a one-man dictatorship, even if it began with the power of a certain group of people. States with an authoritarian system have always existed in large numbers. Today is no exception, for example: Morocco, Saudi Arabia are prominent representatives of absolutist monarchies; military regimes of the recent past - General Peron in Argentina, Chile led by Pinochet.

Totalitarian The regime can be figuratively called the “son of authoritarianism,” since in practice it is a further stage of its (the authoritarian regime’s) development. In a totalitarian state, there is always one person in power who has the rights of “god”, and it does not matter what he is called - dictator, king, leader, Fuhrer or general secretary. Although outwardly there may be some semblance of collective management. A striking example is the Central Committee of the CPSU in our recent past, where all real power was in fact concentrated in the hands of the party secretary general.

Under totalitarianism, the authorities strive for full control over all spheres of social life, right down to thoughts. Any dissent, an opinion different from the “royal” one, is considered a crime against the state and is punished by the authorities, often with extreme cruelty. Classic representatives of totalitarianism are considered to be the political regimes of Adolf Hitler in Germany, Joseph Stalin in the USSR and Benito Mussolini in Italy, and this is not a complete list.

Let us give two typical examples characterizing these political regimes.

Germany, Germany above all

In the middle of the 20th century, the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) came to power in broken and devastated Germany (after defeat in World War I). In the first few years, the National Socialist government was an authoritarian rule whose main goal was to boost the economy and strengthen the military power of the state. However, very quickly power was concentrated in the hands of one person - the Fuhrer (leader) of the party, Adolf Hitler. From this moment on, the stage of rapid degeneration of authoritarianism into totalitarianism began. Interestingly, the period of authoritarian rule itself was so vague and blurred that historians usually mention it in passing, as a fact not worthy of serious scientific research.

The widespread and violent inculcation of Nazi ideology began, the creation of a powerful police-ideological apparatus for total control over German citizens, living not only on the territory of the Reich, but also outside its borders. Almost everything possible and impossible was regulated and controlled in the country. Culture, medicine, sports - all areas of human activity came under strict, vigilant supervision. Germany turned into a well-oiled machine, where every cog knew its place and its task. Fortunately, this monster did not last long, but it brought a lot of trouble to all of humanity.

It's raining in Santiago

In 1973, on September 11, a military revolt led by General Augusto Pinochet began with this code phrase in Chile. The mutiny was bloody and successful. A military junta reigned in the South American republic for many years. However, Pinochet's regime can in no way be called totalitarian. Yes, it was a dictatorship; yes, a group of military men has completely arrogated to themselves the right to control the fate of an entire country; Yes, any attempts at resistance were brutally suppressed. But at the same time, complete freedom was given to the economy. The green light has been turned on for private businesses. Everything that benefited the state was allowed. Even the term “Chilean miracle” appeared. There is now much debate about whether the Chilean economic model was effective or whether it was an ordinary “pyramid” that eventually collapsed. However, this is not what our article is about. The main thing remains the fact that the government did not interfere in business, economics, medicine, sports, which is completely impossible under a totalitarian regime.

Comparison. Final verdict.

Ideology

A totalitarian regime needs a clear and comprehensive ideology. It is required to justify the crimes very often committed by the “leaders-Führers” against their own people. It must provide a justification for crimes that are often committed against other peoples. It is needed to zombify people in the right way. Without ideology, such a political system will not last long.

Opposition

People who think differently do not like any of the described regimes. However, authoritarianism allows for opposition if it does not directly threaten the existing order. Such opponents are called “pocket opposition.” In most cases, these are figures who in their youth sincerely wanted to “turn the world upside down,” but over time, the authorities proved to them the futility of fighting against it. And the former “shakers of the foundations” quietly and peacefully switched to supporting the ruling political regime, regularly holding harmless protests and giving their voices on command from above.

The totalitarian regime has a completely different attitude towards such comrades. The idea that anyone could say anything against the existing “party line” infuriates the regime. Any “troublemaker” is immediately punished, and very often with extreme cruelty - “so that others will be discouraged.” Therefore, the emergence of an opposition, even a “pocket” one, is impossible under totalitarianism. She simply won't have time to grow up.

Liberty

And here both modes are very similar. However, there is a difference between an authoritarian regime and a totalitarian regime in this matter, and quite a significant one.

Authoritarianism allows a certain independence of the individual in private life and in areas that are in no way related to the politics and orders established by the authorities. This applies primarily to economics, sports, medicine and some other areas of human activity. However, culture and spiritual spheres are already subject to strict censorship for criticism of the existing government.

The totalitarian regime keeps everything under strict control. Its very essence does not allow an ordinary citizen to go beyond the strictly established rules and procedures. Everything must be strictly scheduled and regulated. The regime raises uninitiated and stupid executors of its, sometimes the most monstrous, orders.

Leader

Leaders are present in both places. However, in an authoritarian format, the role of the leader is not as great as in a totalitarian regime. The main field of activity of authoritarianism is politics, the political structure of the state. And, since the “tsar” does not interfere in the private lives of citizens, his influence on their minds is not too strong - accordingly, the attitude of fellow citizens towards their leader is much more critical than that of his opponent (under totalitarianism). There are cases when citizens sincerely despised their leader and laughed at him. By the way, this phenomenon also occurs in the post-Soviet space, where some republics of the collapsed USSR are typical authoritarian formations, whose leaders are not particularly respected by the people.

In a totalitarian state, the leader is a completely different hypostasis. It is not in vain that we used this religious term, because often the leaders of such states are deified during their lifetime. Suffice it to recall Stalin and Hitler. A mandatory feature of the leaders of totalitarianism is strong charisma. The people must sincerely love their leader, the Fuhrer, and believe in him. This is precisely what the construction of totalitarian power is based on. Remember any totalitarian state. Always in the first act of a totalitarian performance, there is a strong, authoritative leader on stage who lays the foundations for future absolute power and takes control of the entire country, literally and figuratively. Subsequently, the leaders begin to weaken and degenerate, and as a result, the final scene for all such regimes is the same - complete collapse.

Law

Law and order are the key to the well-being of any state. Unfortunately, this axiom is very poorly understood by both regimes. True, the authoritarian system even more or less maintains the rule of law in areas that do not affect its direct interests - we have already mentioned them more than once, so we will not repeat them. In a hidden area for any authoritarian state - in political system– the constitution and legal law take tenth place. The political interests of the ruling elite and its leader come first. And they are observed without any regard for the laws.

For lovers of totalitarianism, things are even worse. Here the law is nothing more than a screen, a haze covering absolute lawlessness. In any field, in any matter, if the authorities consider you a potential threat, you will be mercilessly crushed. Moreover, any, even the most monstrous decision will be covered up by ideology, fairy tales about a threat to the security of the state, the leader (favorite topic totalitarian regime). Torture, executions, kidnappings and murders of unwanted people - this is far from a complete arsenal of “legal” actions of the totalitarian system. Dismissal from work without the right to work, psychiatric hospitalization, expulsion from the country, deprivation of all material and social benefits are considered almost a democratic influence on the persecuted. A person subjected to such punishment should be happy and thank the authorities for their gentleness.

The actions of such regimes in the executive part of legislation have long been aptly described as state terrorism. Well, let’s summarize all of the above into one short table.

A political regime is a complex, multifaceted category, covering a number of dynamic aspects of the political life of society. This circumstance explains the possibility of classifying political regimes according to a variety of criteria. So, for example, in accordance with the principle of separation of the legislative, executive and judicial branches of power, one can distinguish between the regime of merger of powers and the regime of separation of powers; according to the status and role of the army in society - military and civilian regimes; by type of mentality, socio-cultural complex - “Western” and “Eastern”; according to the nature of the relationship between the state and the church - theocratic (clerical) and secular regimes. The typology of political regimes is generally accepted, taking into account the peculiarities of interaction between the state and civil society, the degree of penetration of state power into other spheres of social reality and the private life of citizens. Based on these criteria, democratic, authoritarian and totalitarian types of regimes are distinguished. However, every really existing political regime represents a certain combination of two opposing principles of organizing social relations - authoritarianism and democracy. Authoritarian tendencies are expressed in the desire of state institutions for unilateral authority, to establish strict discipline and responsibility of citizens, and their unconditional submission to laws and orders power structures. Democracy, on the contrary, presupposes equality of parties, their agreement, freedom of choice and political pluralism in public life. As practice shows, the measure of the relationship between these tendencies does not remain constant and, moreover, does not always correspond to any “proportion” established by some theoretical scheme.

A scientific approach to the analysis of any type of political regime involves identifying the main classification criteria that make it possible to give a comprehensive description of it. A fairly complete picture of the phenomenon under study can be obtained by calling:

socio-political groups whose interests are expressed by this regime;

methods of exercising political power chosen by the ruling circles;

the nature of the participation of the country's citizens in the government system, the conditions for the activity of the political opposition;

compliance with the principle of legality and protection of individual rights;

ideological design of power relations.

Guided by the above diagram, we can characterize the main types of political regimes. It should be taken into account that the “ideal” models obtained in this way contain only the most essential aspects of the reflected reality.

In political science, there are four main types of political regimes:

totalitarian - all-pervasive, all-subjugating;

liberal - free, providing civil rights and freedoms;

democratic - involving the masses in the processes of political governance.

In practice, the method of exercising state power most often appears in such a symbiotic manifestation: an authoritarian-totalitarian regime; liberal democratic government.

In contrast to the emotional assessments inherent in journalism, modern political science uses the concepts of “authoritarianism” and “totalitarianism” in relation to analytical constructs, each of which corresponds to a different degree of dominance of authoritarian principles of organizing power-political relations. Thus, the absolute predominance of these tendencies, when the state actually completely “absorbs” society, interfering unlimitedly not only in the area of ​​social reality, but also in the private life of citizens, is distinctive feature totalitarian regime.

Under a totalitarian regime, state power is strictly centralized and actually belongs to the apparatus of the ruling party, power organization or military junta. The head of state and government - usually for life - becomes an unaccountable leader who concentrates in his hands the highest legislative, executive, and sometimes judicial functions. The country's population is practically excluded from participation in the state government system, since representative bodies are either abolished or formed in violation of the principle of universal suffrage; in Hitler's Germany, for example, some of the Reichstag deputies could be appointed directly by the Fuhrer, while the rest were “elected” by the Nazi party. Authorities of autonomous entities and local self-government are replaced by “emissaries” appointed from above or lose their independence.

With the establishment of a totalitarian regime ruling circles They not only do not hide, but also openly demonstrate various methods of violence, sharply and decisively suppressing any attempts to resist the current course. The activities and interference in all spheres of public life by security forces - the army, police and security agencies - are significantly intensifying. In the economic sphere, as a rule, monopoly control by the state prevails, which, however, does not mean a complete refusal to carry out reforms, as well as temporary and minor concessions to entrepreneurs and employees in the private sector. State-owned enterprises may use a system of non-economic coercion.

“Ideal” totalitarianism is most characterized by a one-party system or the existence under the strict control of several parties and “official” trade unions that support the regime. Activity opposition parties and movements is strictly prohibited, so they are forced either to remain deep underground, using illegal methods of struggle, or to act in exile. Opponents of the regime are subject to police terror - in the sense that even formal legal procedures are usually not required to imprison them, concentration camps or physical destruction.

A characteristic feature of a totalitarian regime is the abolition or indefinite suspension of the constitution. At the same time, decrees of the head of state, orders of structures executive power or army directives acquire the force of law. The democratic rights and freedoms of citizens are significantly limited, the interests of the individual are subordinated to the “higher” interests of the nation, society or the implementation of any ideological doctrine.

Authoritarian regimes, unlike totalitarian ones, often use limited political pluralism, which is expressed in the fact that authoritarian-minded authorities, being unable to deprive large masses of citizens of the right to vote, resort to selective bans or temporary suspension of the activities of certain parties, public associations, and trade unions. .

Without allowing strong opposition political activity, authoritarian regimes retain a certain autonomy of the individual and society in non-political spheres. Under authoritarianism, for example, there may be no strict control by the authorities over production, education, and culture. Intervention in the economy is usually limited, aimed at supporting national capital, and promoting economic development.

A special type of authoritarianism is represented by the political regimes in some states of the Arab East, where today the traditional form of government is preserved - an absolute or dualistic monarchy. Such monarchies are characterized by the absence or decorative nature of representative bodies, the concentration of all state power in the hands of the monarch, who occupies the throne in the established order of succession to the throne. The monarch has a monopoly right to publish laws, appoints and dismisses officials at his own discretion, and manages the funds of the state treasury. At the same time, the country's population has virtually no influence on lawmaking and does not participate in control over management.

An authoritarian-totalitarian regime can take the form of a dictatorship of some classes, social forces (a variety - junta, military dictatorship), and also act as a cult of personality. What this regime has in common is the alienation of citizens and their organizations from independent participation in politics; the relationship between society and the state takes on a perverted form - society is completely and completely subordinate to the state.

An authoritarian-totalitarian regime, objectively being the antipode of democracy, always acts as its opponent, although in words - in programs, statements, appeals - it widely uses democratic phraseology, slogans of freedom and universal equality. At the same time, we should point out a very common, but always veiled fact: no one ever openly substantiates the naturalness and legitimacy of totalitarianism. Quite the opposite - everything is covered up by the standards of democracy, its demands.

Other principles of the organization and functioning of state power underlie the liberal, democratic regime. Moreover, if the main characteristic of a liberal political approach is freedom for citizens and society in crucial spheres of life, not to mention private life, then in a democratic approach the most significant thing is the involvement of the population and citizens in public affairs through their varied participation in the exercise of power. And, of course, in accordance with this, the state uses a completely different arsenal of means and methods in its activities. Openness and transparency, characteristic of a democratic state, create completely new opportunities for the formation and renewal of government bodies, and for the development of internal and foreign policy taking into account the interests of man and society.

Democratic regimes are most common in economically developed countries, with strong traditions of democracy, liberalism and pluralism, and an activist political culture.

Characteristic features of democratic regimes:

recognition of the people as the source of power;

election of the main government bodies and officials, their accountability to voters;

control and responsibility government agencies, formed by appointment, before elective institutions;

proclamation of fundamental democratic rights and freedoms;

equality of all citizens before the law;

the legal existence of pluralism in society, the presence of a developed two- or multi-party system;

government system based on the principle of “separation of powers”;

creating the necessary conditions for the development of the “middle class”, which serves as the social basis of a democratic regime.

In modern conditions, the model of representative, pluralistic democracy is very common. In accordance with it, society is dominated by powerful organized groups, and the government plays mainly the role of an intermediary between them and, in addition, often itself acts as one of such groups. Each group acts in its own interests, and the government facilitates coordination and compromise to satisfy the desires of the most powerful groups as fully as possible.

Modern democratic regimes are far from ideal. They do not exclude the possibility of using authoritarian methods of power in one or another “extreme” situation. Any democratic state retains an apparatus of coercion and violence that can be used to suppress mass anti-government protests. However, in a developed democracy, such actions by the authorities are quite rare. Typically, the relationship between state institutions and civil society is based on the understanding of the fact that the fate of the “people’s representatives” ultimately depends on the will of the voters, and in order to obtain or maintain existing powers of power, it is necessary to enlist the support of the majority of the population, demonstrating the advantages not only his program, but also his personal qualities in comparison with his opponents. The tactics of political maneuvering come to the fore, the success of which largely depends on the ability of the authorities to play on public opinion, find appropriate ways to relieve social tension and, despite concessions in search of achieving one or another compromise, control the economic and political situation in the country.

Political and ideological pluralism, which democratic regime is implemented through a legal, legally enshrined multi-party system, contributes to the fact that the ruling party or coalition is constantly in the field of constructive criticism by supporters of alternative approaches and worldviews, and in the event of an appropriate expression of the will of the people based on the results of voting in the next elections, power will “softly” pass to opposition forces ready for their execution.

The most important principle of the political regime is the constitutional and other legislative consolidation of the basic human, political and socio-economic rights and freedoms of citizens, which primarily include the right to life, the right to property, the right to participate in political activities by voting or holding an elected office , the right to work and education, freedom of speech, press, assembly, as well as freedom of conscience, which implies the right of everyone to profess any religion or adhere to atheistic beliefs. At the same time, the law also provides for restrictions designed to prevent the transformation of democratic freedoms into permissiveness. It is obvious that there cannot be complete freedom of the press: there is responsibility for disclosure in the press and other media mass media information containing state or military secrets, publication of deliberately false materials discrediting the honor and dignity of citizens and organizations. In order to protect the moral health of society, many countries have strict rules prohibiting the distribution of pornographic publications outside designated areas and the sale of this printed material to minors.

In modern democratic states Legislation establishes that citizens have certain rights and freedoms, but does not always determine how they will be implemented. The right to work enshrined in the constitution is not a guarantee against unemployment, and in order to enjoy freedom of speech or the press, you must have a certain amount of money to pay for airtime or publish an advertisement in the press, not to mention publishing your own newspaper. The media can not only promote the realization of the right to freedom of speech, but also act as one of the tools for influencing society in the interests of the most powerful social forces.