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 functioning mechanism political system Political regime 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 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 instinct is to dismiss the people themselves, the people, then the first instinct is to dismiss the people themselves, replace them with another, more loyal one” (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 regime have a lot 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. Exist different types 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.

Democratic political regime Democracy (from the Greek demo people and power) - the power of the people or democracy. This is a form of state, its political regime, in which the people or their majority are (considered) the bearer of state power. The concept of “democracy” is very multifaceted. Democracy is understood as the form of structure of a state or organization, and the principles of management, and a type of social movements that involve the implementation of democracy, and the ideal of a social structure in which citizens are the main arbiters of their destinies. Democracy, as a method of organization and form of government, can take place in any organization (family, scientific department, production team, public organization, etc.) democracy is associated with freedom, equality, justice, respect for human rights, and citizen participation in governance. Therefore, democracy, as a political regime, is usually contrasted with authoritarian, totalitarian and other dictatorial regimes of power. The word democracy is very attractive, so it is often used in combination with other words, for example, such as: social democrat, Christian democrat, liberal democrat, etc. . d. This is done in order to emphasize the commitment of certain social movements to democratic values. Authoritarian political regime Authoritarianism is a political regime characterized by the concentration of all power in one person (monarch, dictator) or ruling group. The characteristic features of authoritarianism are: high centralization of power; nationalization of many aspects of public life; command-administrative methods of leadership; unconditional submission to authority; alienation of the people from power; preventing real political opposition; restriction of freedom of the press. The political structure of the authoritarian regime does not provide for a real separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial. Although formally all these power structures can exist. Under authoritarian regimes, the constitution is preserved, but it is of a declarative nature. There is also an election system, but it performs a fictitious function. Election results, as a rule, are predetermined in advance and cannot influence the nature of the political regime. Unlike totalitarianism, under authoritarianism there is no total control over all public organizations. Limited pluralism is allowed in ideology if it does not harm the system. Mainly active opponents of the regime are subject to repression. People occupying neutral positions are not considered enemies. IN personal life There are also certain rights and freedoms, but they are limited. Authoritarianism is ONE of the most common types of political systems. According to ITS characteristics, it occupies an intermediate position between totalitarianism and democracy. Therefore, it can be Used as a transition period both during the transition from totalitarianism to democracy, and vice versa from democracy to totalitarianism. Authoritarian regimes are very diverse. They may differ in goals and methods of solving problems, and in forms of organization of power. They can be reactionary, conservative or progressive. For example, countries such as Chile, Brazil, and South Korea came to a democratic regime of power through authoritarianism. Totalitarian political regime Totalitarianism (Latin T o t a1i - whole, whole, complete) is a political regime in which the state completely subjugates all spheres of life of society and the individual. It is precisely by the comprehensiveness of its supervision that totalitarianism differs from all other forms of state violence, despotism, tyranny, military dictatorship and others. The term “totalitarianism” was introduced in the 20s by critics of B. Mussolini, but since 1925 he himself began to use it to characterize the fascist state. As of 1929, this term began to be used in relation to the regime that had developed in the Soviet Union. Totalitarianism emerged in the twentieth century as a political regime and as a special model of socio-economic order, characteristic of the stage of industrial development, and as an ideology that provides clear guidelines for the development of the “new human”, “new economic and political order”. This is a kind of “reaction” of the masses to the accelerated destruction of traditional structures, their desire for unity and consolidation in the face of the frightening unknown. The political system of totalitarianism, as a rule, is a strictly centralized party-state structure that exercises control over the entire society, preventing the emergence of any public and political organizations outside this control. Under totalitarianism, civil society is completely absorbed by the state, and the ideological control of the ruling party is established over the state itself. The dominant ideology becomes a powerful unifying and mobilizing force of society. “He who is not with us is against us!” here is one of the slogans that did not allow for any pluralism of opinions. Depending on ideological trends, totalitarianism is usually distinguished into “left” and “right.” “Left” totalitarianism, based on the ideas of Marxism-Leninism, arose in communist countries (USSR, countries of Eastern Europe, Asia and Cuba). "Right" totalitarianism in fascist Germany was based on the igleology of National Socialism, and in Italy on the ideas of Italian fascism. For any totalitarian regime, the characteristic features are: military and paramilitary organization of society; constant search for internal and external “enemies”, periodic creation of extreme situations; permanent mobilization of the masses to carry out the next “urgent” tasks; requirement of unquestioning submission to higher management; rigid vertical power.

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 (Latin autoritas - influence, power) is an undemocratic political regime, acting as a form of political power that 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.

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 cited 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.

In educational literature, it is not often recalled 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 recent decades in 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.”

on the topic of:

Introduction.

I chose the topic “Comparative analysis of totalitarian and democratic regimes of political power”, because I consider it the most interesting and large-scale. The life of an entire people depends on the political regime established in the country. It is through the political regime that the state influences society. But the political regime itself has independence in relation to the forms of functioning of state power. With its help, you can determine different periods of life of the main institutions of the political system of society, the development or erosion of democracy, the degree of participation of the masses in the formation of government bodies.

The political regime of each country not only influences the political development of society, its social and class situation, but is itself determined primarily social essence the relevant state. In a slave-owning society, the political regime of any state was in one way or another connected with the division of people into free and slaves, which determined their status in the political system and the attitude of state authorities towards them; under feudalism, the same status resulted from serfdom and foreign economic relations; in a democracy, the political regime is determined by the fact of recognizing the equality of all people before the law while simultaneously recognizing inequality in relation to property; in a socialist society, the formal equality of all its members was established not only in the political, but also in the socio-economic and spiritual spheres.

The typology of political regimes is determined not only by the social factors of the respective state, but also by the moral, moral, and ideological foundations of society. Thus, the broader and more diverse moral nature of a democratic regime presupposes the recognition of such universal humanistic values ​​as freedom of conscience, belief, speech, political pluralism, etc.

The moral nature of an authoritarian regime is, on the contrary, a uniform ideology imposed from above, suppressing the spiritual and cultural independence of the individual and pluralism of opinions, completely dominating society and law. This ideology is united by the power of the state, guaranteed by its repressive organs and seeks to unify and control even the thinking and tastes of citizens. An authoritarian, especially a totalitarian, state actively and directly invades the sphere of the internal, spiritual life of an individual that does not belong to it.

Analysis by various schools of political scientists of earlier and current political regimes indicates that none of them existed in a pure form. There are also numerous “intermediate” political regimes. There is a constant evolution of political regimes in the world. Significant renewal or radical change of political regimes is permitted either by the masses through revolutionary measures, or by the ruling political elites through reforms and military coups.

I will look at the most common types of political regimes and analyze their impact on society.

2. Comparative analysis of totalitarian and democratic regimes of political power.

2.1. The need to conduct a comparative analysis of regimes of power.

For an in-depth study of political science, it is necessary to conduct a comparative analysis of various political processes and systems. Comparative analysis makes it possible to get acquainted with the universal human values ​​that are characteristic of various states and the formation of new civilizations, a democratic and humanistic society, in the center of which is man. It makes it possible to use all the values ​​that have been achieved in political life in the post-industrial information and technological society of the most developed countries and to use this experience in the process of reforming Russian society on the path to establishing a democratic society and the rule of law in our country. Comparison is the usual way thinking. There is nothing more natural than to consider political phenomena by comparing them with each other. We compare political categories in order to more objectively assess existing political life, processes, systems, and the situation from the perspective of individuals in order to overcome social contradictions and choose a more rational path for the socio-political development of individual peoples, countries, and states. Traditionally, the comparative method uses data from two or more societies, political systems, regimes, continents, logical and static material for more convincing evidence when considering political phenomena and categories. Thus, we acquire knowledge through comparisons. All of the above indicates that comparative analysis is the most important direction in political science.

A comparative analysis of political regimes gives us the opportunity to determine the political climate in society, the dynamics of its development and the nature of political life in a given state. When considering the essence of political regimes and their comparative analysis in the modern world, French sociologists and political scientists made a certain contribution. M. Duverger defines a political regime as a certain state system, a certain type of organization of power, a certain combination of a party system, voting methods, one or more types of decision-making, one or more pressure group structures.

The famous French sociologist R. Aron in his work “Democracy and Totalitarianism” notes that “we strive to develop a theory of the regimes of our time” and gives his own version of the solution to this problem: “any regime that solves the problems of organizing power and relations between citizens must have idea of ​​one’s own ideal (with which citizens must agree).”

In modern conditions, the closest to this definition, in my opinion, is given by Professor of the Paris Institute of Political Sciences J.-L. Kermon: “A political regime is understood as a set of elements of ideological, institutional and social order that contribute to the formation of the political power of a given country for a certain period.” The main components of a political regime, in his opinion, are the principle of legitimacy (legality), the structure of institutions, the party system, the form and role of the state.

A comparative analysis of political regimes in the 20th century, according to the majority of Western and Russian political scientists, shows that the main types of political regimes are totalitarian, authoritarian, democratic regimes and the presence of mixed, transitional, hybrid regimes in most countries modern world. Their classification has important for the development of political science and comparative politics.

Thus, the political regime, as a way of functioning of the political system, political life and political processes, plays an important role in the life of society and its political sphere, affecting economic, social and spiritual life. The beginning of the 21st century is characterized by the gradual evolution of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes into democratic ones. Comparative analysis makes it possible to consider the common and distinctive features of anti-democratic regimes - authoritarian and totalitarian, and to show the advantages of a democratic regime that open the way for the development of humanity along the path of progressive development. Even more complex when considering this problem are the transitional, mixed and hybrid regimes that today characterize most countries of the modern world.

2.2. Typology of political regimes.

Political regime means a set of techniques, methods, forms, ways of exercising political state power in society, characterizes the degree of political freedom, the legal status of an individual in society and a certain type of political system that exists in the country. Historical types of states, as a rule, did not coincide with the types of political regimes. Within the same type of state and the same form of government, different political regimes could exist. Athenian and Roman states in Ancient world were slave-owning republics, but the nature of the political regimes differed significantly from each other: if in Athens all free citizens took an active part in political life, then in the Roman Republic actual power was concentrated in the hands of the slave-owning elite.

In the modern world, we can talk about 140-160 modes, which differ slightly from each other. One of the fairly simple, widespread classifications of political regimes is dividing them into totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic

2.2.1. Democratic political regime.

Democracy - (from the ancient Greek DEMOS - people and CRUTOS - power) - democracy - is one of the main forms of structure of any organization, based on the equal participation of its members in management and decision-making in it by the majority; the ideal of social order: freedom, equality, respect for human dignity, solidarity, etc.; social and political movement for democracy. Since its inception, democracy has been associated with the state, and therefore with coercion, and in best case scenario is the rule of the majority over the minority, and most often a form of government of a well-organized privileged minority, more or less controlled by the people.

Democratic regime - characterized by a high degree of political freedom of a person, the real exercise of his rights, allowing him to influence public administration society. Political elite, as a rule, is quite narrow, but it is based on a broad social base.

Character traits democratic regime:

1) Sovereignty of the people: it is the people who choose their government representatives and can periodically replace them. Elections must be fair, competitive and held regularly. “Competitive” refers to the presence of various groups or individuals who are free to stand as candidates. Elections will not be competitive if some groups (or individuals) have the opportunity to participate while others are deprived of it. Elections are considered fair if there are no frauds and there are special fair play mechanisms. Elections are unfair if the bureaucratic machine belongs to one party, even if that party is tolerant of other parties during elections. Using a monopoly on funds mass media, the party in power can influence public opinion to such an extent that elections can no longer be called fair.

2) Periodic election of the main bodies of the state. The government is born from elections and for a certain, limited period. To develop democracy, it is not enough to hold regular elections; it must be based on an elected government. In Latin America, for example, elections are held frequently, but many Latin American countries are not democratic because... The most common way to remove a president is through a military coup rather than an election. Therefore, a necessary condition for a democratic state is that persons exercising supreme power are elected, and they are elected for a certain, limited period; a change of government should occur as a result of elections, and not at the request of some general.

3) Democracy protects the rights of individuals and minorities. The opinion of the majority, expressed democratically in elections, is only a necessary condition for democracy, however, it is by no means insufficient. Only the combination of majority rule and the protection of minority rights constitutes one of the basic principles of a democratic state. If discriminatory measures are used against a minority, the regime becomes undemocratic, regardless of the frequency and fairness of elections and the change of the legally elected government.

4) Equality of rights of citizens to participate in government: freedom to create political parties and other associations to express their will, freedom of opinion, the right to information and to participate in competition for leadership positions in the state.

Depending on how the people participate in governance, who directly performs power functions and how, democracy is divided into direct, plebiscitary and representative.

In a direct democracy, all citizens themselves are directly involved in the preparation, discussion and decision-making. Such a system can only make practical sense with a relatively small number of people, such as in community or tribal councils or local trade union bodies, where all members can meet in one room to discuss issues and make decisions by consensus or majority vote. The first democracy in the world in Ancient Athens implemented direct democracy through assemblies in which 5-6 thousand people participated.

An important channel for citizen participation in the exercise of power is plebiscitary democracy. The difference between it and direct democracy is that direct democracy involves the participation of citizens at all the most important stages of the governing process (in preparation, adoption of political decisions and in monitoring their implementation), and with plebiscitary democracy the possibilities for political influence of citizens are relatively limited, for example, referendums. Citizens, through voting, are given the opportunity to approve or reject a particular draft law or other decision, which is usually prepared by the president, government, party or initiative group. The opportunities for the majority of the population to participate in the preparation of such projects are very limited.

The third, most common form of political participation in modern society is representative democracy. Its essence is that citizens elect their representatives to government bodies, who are called upon to express their interests in making political decisions, adopting laws and implementing social and other programs. Election procedures may vary widely, but whatever they may be, elected officials in a representative democracy hold office on behalf of the people and are accountable to the people in all their actions.

Democratic states are different, but they all have common unifying features:

1) Democracy - i.e. recognition of the people as the source of power, the sovereign (from the French SOUVERAIN - the bearer of supreme power in the state);

2) Government is based on the consent of the governed;

3) Majority rule - recognition of a subordinate minority to the majority while respecting the interests and opinions of the minority;

4) Minority rule;

5) Guarantees of fundamental human rights;

6) Free and fair elections;

7) Equality before the law;

8) Fair trial;

9) Constitutional limitation of government;

10) Social, economic, ideological and political pluralism;

11) Values ​​of cooperation and compromise.

There are different forms of government of democratic regimes. Quite common forms of republican government are a presidential republic and a parliamentary republic.

A distinctive feature of a presidential republic is that the president in it simultaneously acts as both the head of state and the head of government. Perhaps the most striking example of presidential democracy is the United States. Executive power is concentrated in the hands of one ruler, i.e. the President of the United States, who is regularly elected every 4 years by all the people. The president appoints cabinet ministers who are accountable only to him and not to parliament. This is the essence of presidential rule. This does not mean that the president is a dictator. The President has no legislative powers. All legislative power belongs to the highest legislative body of the United States - Congress (House of Representatives and Senate). In the exercise of his powers, the President of the United States is limited to a certain extent by the power of Congress. Congress decides budget issues, has the right to cancel any appointments of the US President (veto power) and, finally, Congress has the right to begin the process of “impeachment”, i.e. early removal of the president from power (for treason, violation of the Constitution and other crimes).

Home distinctive feature A parliamentary republic is the formation of a government on a parliamentary basis (usually by a parliamentary majority) and its formal responsibility to parliament. Parliament performs a number of functions in relation to the government: forms and supports it; issues laws adopted by the government for execution; approves the state budget and thereby establishes the financial framework for government activities; exercises control over the government and, if necessary, can express a vote of no confidence in it, which entails either the resignation of the government or the dissolution of parliament and the holding of early elections. In the modern world there are 3 main types of parliamentary regimes.

The first can be described as a one-party majority in parliament, i.e. when one political party is consistently strong enough to form a government. Sometimes such government is called the “Westministerial model,” referring to the British Parliament, in which a given party only needs 50% of the votes to form a government for the entire election period.

The second type is a parliamentary coalition system, when the cabinet of ministers is formed on the basis of a coalition (agreement) of various parties, none of which has an absolute majority in parliament. Coalitions can be long-term (former Germany) or short-term (Italy).

The third type of parliamentary regime is often called consensual. It was proposed by one of the modern political scientists, Laibhart. He proposed the concept of a consensual parliamentary regime in order to designate regimes that exist at the expense of a regional or ethnic majority. Let us say that in Belgium, where the Flemings make up less than 15% of the Belgian population and where, under parliamentary or presidential rule, the French-speaking population would become second-class citizens, a system of pre-planned compromises was invented, i.e. a situation in which the rights of both linguistic groups are protected. To resolve any controversial issues, both sides create a commission of an equal number of representatives of these ethnic groups and try to find a compromise.

Modern democracy is the representation of interests, not classes. All citizens in a democratic state are equal as participants in political life. Equality is of two kinds - equality before the laws and equality of political rights. A modern democratic state is a legal state, in which the separation of three powers has been implemented in practice and real mechanisms have been created to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens.

A democratic regime is based on democratic methods and means of government and the political participation of the people in making government decisions. Characterized by the following features:

1. The source of power in the state is the people. He elects the government and gives it the right to decide any issue based on its own opinion. The laws of the country protect the people from the arbitrariness of power and the government from the arbitrariness of individuals.

2. Political power is legitimate and carries out its functions in accordance with adopted laws. The basic principle of the political life of a democratic society is “citizens are allowed everything that is not prohibited by law, and government officials are allowed only those activities that are provided for by the relevant by-laws.”

3. A democratic regime is characterized by separation of powers (separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers from each other). Parliament has the exclusive right to make laws. Higher executive branch(president, government) has the right of legislative, budgetary, personnel initiative. The highest judicial body has the right to determine the conformity of laws issued with the country's constitution. In a democracy, the three branches of government balance each other.

4. A democratic regime is characterized by the right of the people to influence the development of political decisions (through approval or criticism in the media, demonstrations or lobbying activities, participation in election campaigns). Political participation people in making decisions is guaranteed by the country's constitution, as well as international legal norms.

5. An important characteristic of a democratic political regime is political pluralism, which presupposes the possibility of the formation of a two- or multi-party system, competition between political parties and their influence on the people, and the existence of legal political opposition both in parliament and outside it.

6. A democratic political regime is characterized by a high degree of implementation of human rights. These include norms, rules and principles of relations between the state and citizens.

A democratic regime presupposes the recognition of broad rights and freedoms for citizens, legally valid opposition parties, the formation of a government by those parties that won the relevant elections, etc. One of the most important tasks associated with the formation of a democratic state should be considered the development and improvement of legislation, the formation of an essentially new legal system.

A modern democratic legal state presupposes a developed civil society in which various public organizations and political parties interact, in which no ideology can be established as the official state ideology. Political life in a rule-of-law state is built on the basis of ideological and political diversity (pluralism), and a multi-party system. Therefore, one of the ways to form a rule of law state, one of the directions of this work is the development of civil society, which acts as an important link between the individual and the state, in which most human rights and freedoms are realized; affirmation of the principles of political pluralism.

An authoritarian regime is a system of government in which power is exercised by one specific person with minimal participation of the people. This is a form of political dictatorship. The role of dictator is played by an individual politician from an elite environment or a ruling elite group. If this person is the royal family, in this case the authoritarian regime is called an absolute monarchy.

Such regimes are maintained with the help of the apparatus of coercion and violence of the army. Unlike a democratic regime of power, where the repressive apparatus operates within the framework of the law, in an authoritarian state, the means of violence, on the contrary, are kept in plain sight. Power, obedience and order are valued under an authoritarian regime of government more than freedom, harmony and participation in the political life of the people. In such conditions, ordinary citizens are forced to obey laws and pay taxes without personal participation in their discussion.

Democratic institutions existing in authoritarian states as a screen have no real power in society. The political monopoly of one party supporting the regime is legalized. Under this regime, the activities of other political parties and public organizations are excluded. The principles of constitutionality and legality are denied. Separations of powers are ignored. There is a strict centralization of all state power. The leader of the ruling authoritarian party becomes the head of state and government for life. Leaderism turns into an official state principle. The theory and practice of authoritarian rule were expressed in the aphorism “The State is I,” expressed by Louis XIV.

Authoritarian regimes are established in crisis situations or on the basis of undeveloped political and social structures of society. The possibility of the emergence of an authoritarian regime in the transition period from totalitarianism to democracy lies in the psychological reaction of people to a crisis situation, in the desire for social order, reliability, and predictability. They can solve progressive problems related to the country's recovery from the crisis. Thus, before the Second World War, during the crisis in some Western European countries, the parliamentary democratic regime turned out to be unable to resolve intense social conflicts. Under these conditions, authoritarian systems arose, even developing into fascism. Authoritarianism was the desired regime even after the Second World War, under the influence of existing acute economic and social contradictions.

2.2.3. Totalitarian political regime (totalitarianism).

The extreme form of an authoritarian regime is totalitarianism. The formation of political totalitarian regimes became possible at the industrial stage of human development, when not only comprehensive control over an individual, but also total control of his consciousness, became technically possible, especially during periods of socio-economic crises.

This term should not be considered only as negatively evaluative. This is a scientific concept that requires an appropriate theoretical definition. Initially, the concept of “total state” had a completely positive meaning. It denoted a self-organizing state, identical with a nation, a state where the gap between political and socio-political factors is eliminated. The current interpretation of the concept is first proposed to characterize fascism. Then it was extended to the Soviet and related models of the state.

The first totalitarian regimes were formed after the First World War in countries that belonged to the “second echelon of industrial development” (Italy, Germany, Russia).

The ideological origins and individual features of totalitarianism go back to antiquity. Initially, it was interpreted as a principle for building an integral, united society. In the VII-IV centuries. BC e. theorists of rationalization of Chinese political and legal thought (legists) Zi Chan, Shang Yang, Han Fei and others, rejecting Confucianism, advocated the doctrine of a strong, centralized state regulating all aspects of public and private life. Including the endowment of the administrative apparatus with economic functions, the establishment of mutual responsibility among the population and the bureaucracy (along with the principle of official responsibility for their affairs), systematic state control over the behavior and state of mind of citizens, etc. At the same time, they viewed state control as a constant struggle between the ruler and his subjects.

Plato proposed the type of totalitarian state regime close to the legalists of China. In his later dialogues ("Polity", "Laws"), the socio-economic characteristics of a second, more perfect and different from the Athenian society depicted in the "Republic" are drawn. Plato endowed his state with threefold dignity with the following features: unconditional subordination of all citizens and each individual individually to the state; state ownership of land, residential buildings and cultural buildings, which were used by citizens on the basis of ownership, and not private property; planting collectivist principles and unanimity in everyday life; state regulation of children's upbringing laws; a common religion for all fellow citizens, political and legal equality of women with men, excluding holding positions in higher authorities authorities. Plato's law prohibited persons under 40 years of age from traveling outside the state on private matters and limited the entry of foreigners; provided for the cleansing of society from unwanted persons through the death penalty or expulsion from the country. The Platonic model of the state regime is unacceptable for most modern countries, but in which social system it is better to live is clearer after Plato. Liberal democrats, philosophers, B. Russell, K. Popper, generally came to the conclusion that both medieval authoritarianism and modern totalitarianism go back to Plato.

The concept of a totalitarian regime was developed in the works of a number of German thinkers of the 19th century: G. Hegel, K. Marx, F. Nietzsche, O. Spengler and some other authors. And yet, as a complete, formalized political phenomenon, totalitarianism matured in the first half of the 20th century. It was first given political significance by the leaders of the fascist movement in Italy. In 1925, Benito Mussolini was the first to coin the term “totalitarianism” to describe the Italo-fascist regime. At the end of the 20s, the English newspaper The Times also spoke out about totalitarianism as a negative political phenomenon that characterizes not only fascism, but also the political regime in the Soviet Union.

The Western concept of totalitarianism, including the directions of its critics, was formed on the basis of an analysis and generalization of the regimes of fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Francoist Spain and the USSR during the years of Stalinism. After the First World War, the subject of additional study of political regimes was China, the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe and some Third World countries.

This is not a complete list, indicating that totalitarian regimes can arise on different socio-economic bases and in diverse cultural and ideological environments. They can be a consequence of military defeats or revolutions, appear as a result of internal contradictions, or be imposed from the outside.

Western political scientists K. Friedrich and Z. Brzezinski, in their work “Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy,” were the first to identify six features that distinguish all totalitarian state regimes from democracy and authoritarianism:

General state ideology;

One mass party led by a charismatic leader, that is, exceptionally gifted and endowed with a special gift;

State monopoly on the media;

State monopoly on all weapons;

A specially organized system of violence, terror as a specific means of control in society;

Strictly centralized control over the economy.

The state under totalitarianism strives for global dominance over all spheres of public life. Pluralism is being eliminated from socio-political life. Social and class barriers are violently demonstrated. The authorities claim to represent a certain universal “super-interest” of the population, in which social group, class, ethnic, professional and regional interests disappear and become depersonalized. The total alienation of the individual from power is affirmed. Totalitarianism forcibly removes the problems: civil society - the state, the people - political power. The state completely identifies itself with society, depriving it of its social functions of self-regulation and self-development. Hence the peculiarities of the organization of a totalitarian system of state power:

Global centralization of public power led by a dictator;

The dominance of repressive apparatuses;

Abolition of representative government bodies;

The monopoly of the ruling party and the integration of it and all other socio-political organizations directly into the system of state power and the transformation of the latter into a kind of “drive belts” (means) of a totalitarian dictatorship.

Legitimation of power is based on direct violence, state ideology and personal commitment of citizens to the leader, political leader (charisma). Truth and personal freedom are virtually absent. A very important feature of totalitarianism is its social base and the specificity of the ruling elites determined by it. According to many researchers of Marxist and other orientations, totalitarian regimes arise on the basis of the antagonism of the middle classes and even the broad masses in relation to the previously dominant oligarchy.

Let us consider in more detail the essential features and principles of functioning of totalitarian political regimes:

First of all, about the “ideological absolutism” of totalitarian power. Firstly, it is associated with the spread in such countries of messianic mono-ideology - social or national, designed to inspire and gather the broad masses under the banner of the regimes. Secondly, the spiritual preparation of the population for certain sacrifices in the name of solving “lofty heroic tasks”, an ideological cover for the selfish interests of the ruling nomenklatura.

In accordance with the guidelines of totalitarian regimes, all citizens were called upon to express support for the official state ideology and spend time studying it. Dissent and the emergence of scientific thought from the official ideology were persecuted. Without understanding all this, it is impossible to reveal the reasons for the establishment of the Hitlerite and Stalinist political regimes, to explain their connection with the masses, their support with the people of these countries.

A special role in a totalitarian regime is played by its political party. Only one party has a lifelong ruling (leading) status, acts either in the singular, or “heads” a bloc of parties or other political forces, the existence of which is permitted by the regime. Such a party, as a rule, is created before the emergence of the regime itself and plays a decisive role in its establishment - in that one day it comes to power. At the same time, her coming to power does not necessarily occur through violent measures. For example, the Nazis in Germany came to power entirely through parliamentary means, after the appointment of their leader A. Hitler to the post of Reich Chancellor. Having come to power, such a party becomes a state party, party and state structures unite and merge, and the power itself becomes party-state.

The specific features of a totalitarian regime are organized terror and total control, used to ensure the adherence of the masses to party ideology. The secret police and security apparatus uses extreme methods of influence to force society to live in a state of fear. In such states, constitutional guarantees either did not exist or were violated, as a result of which secret arrests, detention of people without charge and the use of torture became possible.

Hitler's Gestapo and the Soviet NKVD were not subject to any legal or judicial restrictions. Their actions were directed by the directors of power not only against individual citizens, but also against entire peoples, classes and political parties. Depending on the specific country, Jews, communists, capitalists, etc. could be declared such enemies of society and the regime.

Totalitarian regimes are characterized by a monopoly of power on information and complete control over the media. With the help of the media and institutions of the spiritual sphere, political mobilization and almost one hundred percent support for the ruling regime are ensured.

Strict centralized control over the economy is an important feature of a totalitarian regime. Here control serves a dual purpose. Firstly, the ability to control the productive forces of society creates the material base and support necessary for the political regime, without which totalitarian control in other areas is hardly possible. Secondly, the centralized economy serves as a means of political control. For example, people can be forcibly moved to work in those areas of the national economy where there is a shortage of labor.

Totalitarian political regimes, therefore, are created by the powerful elites to implement the ideological doctrines and selfish economic interests of the ruling classes. And therefore, all totalitarian regimes sooner or later collapse, and the countries where they took place move either to liberal democratic systems (Germany, Spain, Italy, etc.) or to socialist democracy (China, etc.).

2.3. Democracy or totalitarianism: advantages and disadvantages.

Economists Benjamin Jones and Benjamin Olken, authors of the study "The Role of the Leader", tried to find a relationship between the regime of their government and the rate of economic growth in the countries they lead.

The degree of influence of a change of a leader on economic processes largely depends on the level of development of political institutions in the country. Jones and Olkin conducted a comparative analysis between totalitarian and democratic countries, while acknowledging the lack of great precision in such comparisons. The difference is that in democratic societies, the leader constantly faces limitations on his own power, including in the process of being elected to the highest office in the state. Limitations are also reflected in the ease with which one can lose one's position as a result of reckless policies.

Even in autocratic countries where political parties actually operate and actually compete, the negative effect of a change of ruler is much less than in countries where there are no political parties at all or they perform purely decorative functions. The lack of appropriate legislation, as well as the peculiarities of the very procedure for choosing the leader of the state, are also of great importance. The smaller the role of institutional structures in the political life of the country, the greater the impact the death of the first person has on the economy. It is curious that the level of poverty of the population does not have any significant impact on this process. A change in the ruler of an authoritarian or totalitarian country significantly affects the level of inflation - in democracies Ah, no such connection was found.

An authoritarian regime ensures the power of individual or collective dictatorship by any means, including direct violence. They are not allowed any competition between political subjects. Monopoly of power is the principle of authoritarianism. At the same time, authoritarian power does not interfere in those areas of life that are not directly related to politics. Economy, culture, and interpersonal relationships may remain relatively independent (but do not necessarily remain). Individual independence is also allowed within certain limits. That is, the state is differentiated from society, and the institutions of civil society function within a limited framework.

Historically, the first and classical form of totalitarianism was communism (socialism) of the Soviet type, which began with the military-communist system, in general outline formed in 1918. Communist totalitarianism, to a greater extent than other varieties, expresses the main features of this system, since it presupposes the complete elimination of private property and, consequently, all personal autonomy, the absolute power of the state. And yet, the characterization of Soviet-type socialism as totalitarianism is one-sided and does not reveal the content and goals of politics in this type of society. Despite the predominantly totalitarian forms of political organization, the socialist system also has humane political goals. For example, in the USSR the level of education of the people sharply increased, achievements of science and culture became accessible to them, social protection of the population was ensured, the economy, space and military industries, etc. developed, the crime rate sharply decreased, and, moreover, over the course of For decades, the system almost did not resort to mass repression.

The second type of totalitarian political systems is fascism. It was first established in Italy in 1922. Here the totalitarian features were not fully expressed. Italian fascism gravitated not so much towards the radical construction of a new society, but rather towards the revival of the Italian nation and the greatness of the Roman Empire, the establishment of order and firm state power. Fascism claims to restore or purify the “soul of the people,” ensure collective identity on cultural or ethnic grounds, and eliminate mass crime. In Italy, the boundaries of fascist totalitarianism were set by the position of the most influential circles in the state: the king, the aristocracy, the officer corps and the church. When the doom of the regime became obvious, these circles themselves were able to remove Mussolini from power.

The third type of totalitarianism is National Socialism. As a real political and social system, it arose in Germany in 1933. National Socialism is related to fascism, although it borrows a lot from Soviet communism and, above all, revolutionary and socialist components, forms of organization of the totalitarian party and state, and even the address “comrade”. At the same time, the place of class here is taken by the nation, the place of class hatred is taken by national and racial hatred. If in communist systems aggressiveness is directed primarily inward - against one’s own citizens (the class enemy), then in National Socialism it is directed outward, against other peoples. The main differences between the main varieties of totalitarianism are clearly expressed in their goals (respectively: communism, revival of the empire, world domination of the Aryan race) and social preferences (working class, descendants of the Romans, German nation).

Any totalitarian states in one way or another they belong to the three main types of totalitarianism, although there are significant differences within each of these groups.

Totalitarianism in its communist form turned out to be the most tenacious. In some countries it still exists today. History has shown that a totalitarian system has a fairly high ability to mobilize resources and concentrate funds to achieve limited goals, for example, victory in war, defense construction, industrialization of society, etc. Some authors even consider totalitarianism as one of the political forms of modernization of underdeveloped countries.

Communist totalitarianism has gained significant popularity in the world due to its connection with socialist ideology, which contains many humane ideas. The attractiveness of totalitarianism was also facilitated by the fear of the individual who had not yet been cut off from the communal-collectivist umbilical cord of alienation, competition and responsibility inherent in a market society. The vitality of the totalitarian system is also explained by the presence of a huge apparatus of social control and coercion, and the brutal suppression of any opposition. And yet totalitarianism is a historically doomed system. This is a Samoyed society, incapable of effective creation, prudent, proactive management and existing mainly due to rich natural resources, exploitation, and limiting consumption of the majority of the population. Totalitarianism is a closed society, not adapted to timely qualitative renewal, taking into account the new requirements of a continuously changing world. Its adaptive capabilities are limited by ideological dogmas. The totalitarian leaders themselves are captives of an inherently utopian ideology and propaganda. Totalitarianism is not limited to dictatorial political systems opposed to idealized Western democracies. Totalitarian tendencies, manifested in the desire to organize the life of society, limit personal freedom and completely subordinate the individual to state and other social control, also occur in Western countries.

So, totalitarianism has its advantages and disadvantages, but is it necessary? society democracy? The spread of democracy in the world is a complex and contradictory process. Since the emergence of the Athenian Republic, democratic states have always remained in the minority. In the history of mankind, after rare “tides” of democracy, an expansion in the number of democratic states, it was usually followed by protracted “ebbs” - a reduction in the number of such states or even disappearance for many centuries. Is any country ready for democracy and what can it give to society and individuals - the destruction of statehood, chaos and anarchy or freedom, order and prosperity? The answers to these questions are especially relevant for Russia and a number of other post-socialist states that have embarked on the path of democratization of society.

For many decades, liberal democracy has been one of the main symbols of the West in its fight against communist ideology and countries of command socialism. This left its mark not only on everyday, but also on scientific ideas about democracy, and contributed to the mass dissemination of idealized, clearly inflated assessments of its capabilities, which manifested themselves in attempts to substantiate democracy as a universal and the best form of political system for all countries and peoples. In world political thought, there are value-based and rational-utilitarian justifications for democracy. The first of them consider democracy as an intrinsic value (regardless of its economic and social influence), as a real embodiment in the state structure of the most important universal human values: freedom, equality, social justice, etc. Is it really? To what extent does the modern model of democracy embodies these values ​​or contributes to their implementation and are these values ​​themselves universal, i.e. recognized and desired by all people, or at least by the vast majority of them?

One of the most revered democratic values ​​is freedom. For thousands of years, many of the manifestations of freedom were not considered good. Even the greatest mind of antiquity, Aristotle, considered giving people the opportunity to live as they please as a sign of incorrect, bad forms of government. Some civilizations did not even know the concept of freedom in its liberal interpretation, i.e. as independence from the state and society. Thus, European Christian missionaries brought a liberal understanding of freedom to China only in the 19th century. This society was based on the naturalness of the social and political hierarchy, the construction of government on the basis of such principles as humanity, care of elders for the younger and obedience of the latter, good manners, shame and punishment. With the development of an individualistic worldview and individual self-awareness, people's desire to participate in state affairs increased, and political freedom turned into one of the social values. And yet, despite the fact that politics has a fairly large influence on life modern man, the possibility of free participation in its formation, equal influence on power is not considered by the majority of citizens to be the most important value.

This is explained primarily by the fact that the immediate vital interests of citizens usually lie in non-political spheres and their implementation is not directly related to democracy. Political freedom may even prevent their implementation. In such cases, citizens tend to choose to limit their freedom for the sake of other vital goals, such as economic efficiency, strengthening security and order, etc. At the same time, democracy, the decisions of the majority, may well act as a tool for limiting individual, and sometimes all freedom, as was the case, for example, in the case of the democratic transfer of supreme power in the Weimar Republic to Hitler. The relatively low importance of political freedom for most people and the very weak connection between democracy and freedom call into question the value justifications of democracy.

Other widespread value justifications for democracy, such as its identification with equality and social justice, are also not convincing. These concepts themselves are interpreted quite ambiguously by various people, including scientists. In the modern world, the value revered by the majority of citizens is the understanding of equality as equal life chances for every person, opportunities for personal self-realization, its development, or as everyone receiving what they deserve. Such equality is considered fair in contrast to social equalization and unjust inequality.

Democracy has very little to do with equality of opportunity and justice. It means only the formal equality of all citizens, i.e. their equality as legal entities. The political equality it provides is very far from the actual equality of people's life chances and can be used as a screen to cover up deep social inequality.

Given the very weak connection of democracy with freedom, equality and humanism in general, there is no reason to identify it with social justice, which is one of the fundamental human values.

If democracy in itself is not a generally recognized value, then perhaps it has an instrumental value, i.e. is capable of bringing the greatest benefit to society and people compared to other forms of government? Democracy is not a universal value, and although one cannot agree with all such judgments about man and democracy, history teaches that democracy is good only when it corresponds to the political culture and mentality of the people and has the necessary economic and social prerequisites. Otherwise, it degenerates into ochlocracy - the rule of the crowd, directed by demagogues, leads to chaos and anarchy and, ultimately, to dictatorial regimes.

Vulnerability to criticism of both value-based and rational-utilitarian justifications of democracy means that it is not a universal, best form of government for all times and peoples. "Bad", ineffective democracy can be worse for society and citizens than some authoritarian and even totalitarian regimes. History shows that many monarchies and other authoritarian governments have done much more than weak or corrupt democracies to achieve economic prosperity, increase prosperity, enhance the security of citizens and guarantee their individual freedom, and the fair distribution of the results of their work.

And yet the growing desire of the population of the modern world for democratic forms of government is not accidental. Given certain social preconditions, democracy has a number of advantages over other forms of government. The common disadvantage of all non-democratic political systems is that they are not controlled by the people, which means that the nature of their relationships with citizens depends primarily on the will of the rulers. In past centuries, the possibility of arbitrariness on the part of authoritarian rulers was significantly restrained by the traditions of government, the relatively high education and upbringing of monarchs and aristocracy, their self-control based on religious and moral codes, as well as the opinion of the church and the threat of popular uprisings. In the modern era, these factors either disappeared altogether or their effect was greatly weakened. Therefore, only a democratic form of government can reliably curb power and guarantee the protection of citizens from state arbitrariness.

It is needed not only by individual citizens, but also the political system itself. In conditions of weakening possibilities of charismatic, traditional and ideological legitimation, in order to be effective, power especially needs to be recognized by the people through democratic procedures.

Modern socio-economic progress largely stimulates the development of democracy, nourishes the democratic mentality and value orientations of citizens. It requires the social emancipation of the individual, respect for his dignity and independence of thought, fundamental rights and freedoms. It needs freedom of information and pluralism in public life in general. And in this sense, for those peoples who are ready for individual freedom and responsibility, limiting their own selfishness, respect for the law and human rights, democracy really creates the best opportunities for individual and social development, the realization of humanistic values: freedom, equality, justice, social creativity

2.4. The influence of political regimes on the life of society using the example of some countries.

China. Statistics show that throughout the reign of Mao Zedong (the founder of communist China), the economic growth in the country was negligible, averaging 1.7% per year. In the period immediately following his death in 1976, economic growth rose to 5.9%. Statistics from Mao's reign coincide with periods of forced collectivization, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution, which naturally slowed the country's economic growth. Deng Xiaoping's rise to power in 1978 is generally considered to mark the beginning of China's economic recovery.

Mozambique. Samora Machel, leader of the Mozambican Liberation Front (FRELIMO), achieved Mozambique's independence from Portugal in 1975 and was elected president of the new country. He made FRELIMO the only legal political party and began a campaign of land nationalization (Machel was a convinced communist). The result of this was the collapse of the already weak economy of Mozambique (during the reign of Zamora, economic growth was negative, averaging 7.7% per year) and the emergence of anti-communist rebels (the RENAMO front). After the death of Samora Machel (plane crash, 1986), President Joaquin Chisano carried out a series of reforms - he abandoned the one-party system of government (1990) and began to create a free market economy. As a result, Mozambique's economic growth averaged 2.4% per year.

Russia. The end of the Cold War was the result of proven competitive advantages of the system of democratically organized states over the system of totalitarian organized states in the global competition of capitalist and socialist systems.

The factor of the political regime (totalitarian - democratic) is strategically important, although not the only reason for the historical defeat of the socialist system. Another, external factor of strategic importance for her was the onset of the “post-industrial” and then “information” eras of technological development of society. Technically, the role of totalitarianism was reflected in the fact that in new historical conditions it came into conflict with the dynamics of changes in the technological side of the life of the human community. The totalitarianism of the “Soviet model,” adapted to the conditions of an industrial society, turned out to be insensitive to the challenges of the post-industrial stage of social development. The world of socialism, thanks to the totalitarian organization, turned out to be essentially “fenced off” from the process of creation. Socialist countries, largely thanks to the totalitarian organization, which by the mid-20th century had reduced the economic and technological gap with the countries of the democratic West, by maintaining the totalitarian nature of political systems and regimes in the post-industrial era, put themselves in the position of catching up. By the beginning of the 1980s, all socialist countries were faced with the task of repeating “catch-up type” modernization.

Spain is the last state of modern Europe where the fascist dictatorship existed most long time. This is the only country in which the ideology of fascism survived the Second world war and in which the authoritarian regime disappeared naturally as a result of the death of General Franco. The modern political organization of Spain was created after the death of this dictator, which followed in November 1975. At that time, a number of institutions of the previous regime continued to operate for several years. The two successive governments of A. Novarro and especially A. Suarez took a clear course towards democratizing the country. The bill prepared by the government of A. Suarez on political reform was approved by a national referendum in December 1976. This law established some democratic principles for the transitional period; At the national level, an almost new structure of government bodies was established, in particular, a bicameral parliament was formed - the Cortes, formed by general and direct elections by secret ballot. Selected June 15, 1977 The new Cortes developed the country's constitution, the eleventh since the First Spanish Revolution of 1808. In December 1978, in a national referendum, this constitution was approved by an overwhelming majority of voters; she abolished fascist laws and established a new state legal order. Spain received a form of government of a parliamentary monarchy, a unitary political and administrative structure with significant rights for the units that make up the country - autonomous communities and a democratic political regime. Implementing the principles of political pluralism, today in Spain there are more than 200 (!) of all kinds of parties, of which the main ones are: Spanish Socialist Workers Party, Communist Party of Spain, Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain, People's Party, Democratic and Social Center, Reformist Democratic Party .

3. Conclusion.

So, modern political scientists distinguish two most common political regimes: democratic and anti-democratic. Among democratic regimes, the most common ones in the world are parliamentary and presidential regimes. Anti-democratic, in turn, are divided into authoritarian and totalitarian.

A political regime as a way of functioning of one or another political system is determined both by the social factors of the corresponding state and by the moral, moral and ideological foundations of society. In an absolutely pure form, political regimes are, as a rule, rare. Therefore, when characterizing them, double concepts are used: liberal-democratic, democratic-authoritarian, etc.

Through political regimes, ruling entities have a direct impact on the people as a whole and each person individually.

Democracy, as evidenced by the historical experience of civilizations, provides a wider outlet for energy and social creativity personality than other types of political regimes. It acts as a powerful means of overcoming various types dictatorships and despotic governments.

The situation in the world community at the end of the 20th century indicates that anti-democratic regimes have historically and politically become obsolete. The world is evolving towards civilized democracy. In this regard, there is hope that the next century will be its final victory. Consequently, the typology of political regimes will become a thing of the past.

4. Literature.

1. Klyamkin I.M. What political regime is possible in Russia today. Polit. research 2003- No. 5.

2. Aron R. Democracy and totalitarianism. M., 2003.

3. Zerkin D.P. Fundamentals of Political Science. Lecture course. Rostov-on-Don, “Phoenix”, 1996.

4. Shilobod M.I., Petrukhin A.S., Krivosheev V.F. Politics and law. M., “Bustard”, 2004

5. Gadzhiev K.S. Introduction to Political Science. – M., 2001.

8. Foreign political science: Dictionary-reference book. – M., 1998.

9. Lijphart A. Democracy in multi-component societies: a comparative study. – M., 2001.

10. First All-Russian Congress of Political Scientists: Materials. – T. 1. – M., 1999.

11. Pugachev V. P. Introduction to political science. M., 2001.

12. Sumbatyan Yu.G. Historical genesis and essence of political regimes. // Bulletin of Moscow State University. – Episode 12: Political Science. – 1995. – No. 6.

Which reflects the relationship between government and society, the level of political freedom and the nature of political life in the country.

In many ways, these characteristics are determined by specific traditions, culture, and historical conditions for the development of the state, so we can say that each country has its own unique political regime. However, similar features can be found among many regimes in different countries.

IN scientific literature allocate two types of political regime:

• democratic;
• antidemocratic.

Signs of a democratic regime:

• rule of law;
• separation of powers;
• the presence of real political and social rights and freedoms of citizens;
• election of government bodies;
• existence of opposition and pluralism.

Signs of an anti-democratic regime:

• reign of lawlessness and terror;
• lack of political pluralism;
• absence of opposition parties;

An anti-democratic regime is divided into totalitarian and authoritarian. Therefore, we will consider the characteristics of three political regimes: totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic.

Democratic regime based on the principles of equality and freedom; The main source of power here is the people. At authoritarian regime political power is concentrated in the hands of an individual or group of people, but relative freedom is maintained outside the sphere of politics. At totalitarian regime The authorities tightly control all spheres of society.

Characteristics of political regimes

Democratic regime(from the Greek demokratia - democracy) is based on the recognition of the people as the main source of power, on the principles of equality and freedom. The signs of democracy are as follows:

• electivity - citizens are elected to government bodies through universal, equal and direct elections;
• separation of powers - power is divided into legislative, executive and judicial branches, independent of each other;
• civil society - citizens can influence the authorities with the help of a developed network of voluntary public organizations;
• equality - everyone has equal civil and political rights
• rights and freedoms, as well as guarantees for their protection;
• pluralism— respect for other people’s opinions and ideologies, including opposition ones, prevails, complete openness and freedom of the press from censorship are ensured;
• agreement - political and other social relations are aimed at finding a compromise, and not at a violent solution to the problem; all conflicts are resolved legally.

Democracy is direct and representative. At direct democracy decisions are made directly by all citizens who have the right to vote. There was direct democracy, for example, in Athens, in the Novgorod Republic, where people, gathering in the square, made a common decision on every problem. Now direct democracy is implemented, as a rule, in the form of a referendum - a popular vote on draft laws and important issues of national importance. For example, the current Constitution Russian Federation was adopted by referendum on December 12, 1993.

In a large area, direct democracy is too difficult to implement. That's why government decisions adopted by special elective institutions. This kind of democracy is called representative, since the elected body (for example, The State Duma) represents the people who elected him.

Authoritarian regime(from the Greek autocritas - power) arises when power is concentrated in the hands of an individual or group of people. Authoritarianism is usually combined with dictatorship. Political opposition is impossible under authoritarianism, but in non-political spheres, such as economics, culture or private life, individual autonomy and relative freedom are preserved.

Totalitarian regime(from Latin totalis - whole, whole) arises when all spheres of society are controlled by the authorities. Power under a totalitarian regime is monopolized (by the party, the leader, the dictator), a single ideology is obligatory for all citizens. The absence of any dissent is ensured by a powerful apparatus of supervision and control, police repression, and acts of intimidation. A totalitarian regime creates a lack of initiative personality, prone to submission.

Totalitarian political regime

Totalitarian political regime- this is a regime of “all-consuming power”, which endlessly interferes in the lives of citizens, including all their activities within the scope of its management and compulsory regulation.

Signs of a totalitarian political regime:

1. Availabilitythe only mass party led by a charismatic leader, as well as a virtual merger of party and government structures. This is a kind of “-”, where the central party apparatus is in first place in the power hierarchy, and the state acts as a means of implementing the party program;

2. Monopolizationand centralization of power, when such political values ​​as submission and loyalty to the “party-state” are primary in comparison with material, religious, aesthetic values ​​in the motivation and assessment of human actions. Within the framework of this regime, the line between political and non-political spheres of life disappears (“the country as a single camp”). All life activities, including the level of private and personal life, are strictly regulated. The formation of government bodies at all levels is carried out through closed channels, bureaucratic means;

3. "Unity"official ideology, which through massive and targeted indoctrination (media, training, propaganda) is imposed on society as the only correct, true way of thinking. At the same time, the emphasis is not on individual, but on “cathedral” values ​​(state, race, nation, class, clan). The spiritual atmosphere of society is distinguished by fanatical intolerance of dissent and “dissent” according to the principle “those who are not with us are against us”;

4. Systemphysical and psychological terror, a police state regime, where the basic “legal” principle is dominated by the principle: “Only what is ordered by the authorities is allowed, everything else is prohibited.”

Totalitarian regimes traditionally include communist and fascist regimes.

Authoritarian political regime

The main features of an authoritarian regime:

1. INpower is unlimited, uncontrollable by citizens character and is concentrated in the hands of one person or group of persons. This could be a tyrant, a military junta, a monarch, etc.;

2. Support(potential or real) on strength. An authoritarian regime may not resort to mass repression and may even be popular among the general population. However, in principle, he can allow himself any actions towards citizens in order to force them to obey;

3. Mmonopolization of power and politics, preventing political opposition and independent legal political activity. This circumstance does not exclude the existence of a limited number of parties, trade unions and some other organizations, but their activities are strictly regulated and controlled by the authorities;

4. PRecruitment of leading cadres is carried out through co-optation rather than pre-election competitive struggle; There are no constitutional mechanisms for succession and transfer of power. Changes in power often occur through coups using armed forces and violence;

5. ABOUTrefusal of total control over society, non-interference or limited intervention in non-political spheres, and, above all, in the economy. The authorities are primarily concerned with ensuring their own security, public order, defense and foreign policy, although it can also influence the strategy of economic development, pursue an active social policy without destroying the mechanisms of market self-regulation.

Authoritarian regimes can be divided into strictly authoritarian, moderate and liberal. There are also types such as "populist authoritarianism", based on equalizingly oriented masses, as well as "national-patriotic", at which national idea used by the authorities to create either a totalitarian or democratic society, etc.

• absolute and dualistic monarchies;
• military dictatorships, or regimes with military rule;
• theocracy;
• personal tyrannies.

Democratic political regime

Democratic regime is a regime in which power is exercised by a freely expressing majority. Democracy translated from Greek literally means “power of the people” or “democracy”.

Basic principles of a democratic regime of government:

1. Folksovereignty, i.e. The primary bearer of power is the people. All power is from the people and is delegated to them. This principle does not imply that political decisions are made directly by the people, as, for example, in a referendum. He only assumes that all bearers of state power received their power functions thanks to the people, i.e. directly through elections (deputies of parliament or the president) or indirectly through representatives elected by the people (a government formed and subordinate to parliament);

2. Free elections representatives of government, which presuppose the presence of at least three conditions: freedom to nominate candidates as a consequence of freedom of education and functioning; freedom of suffrage, i.e. universal and equal suffrage on the principle of “one person, one vote”; freedom of voting, perceived as a means of secret voting and equality for all in receiving information and the opportunity to conduct propaganda during the election campaign;

3. Subordination of the minority to the majority with strict respect for the rights of the minority. The main and natural duty of the majority in a democracy is respect for the opposition, its right to free criticism and the right to replace, based on the results of new elections, the former majority in power;

4. Implementationprinciple of separation of powers. The three branches of government - legislative, executive and judicial - have such powers and such practice that the two “corners” of this unique “triangle”, if necessary, can block the undemocratic actions of the third “corner” that are contrary to the interests of the nation. The absence of a monopoly on power and the pluralistic nature of all political institutions are a necessary condition for democracy;

5. Constitutionalismand the rule of law in all spheres of life. The law prevails regardless of the person; everyone is equal before the law. Hence the “frigidity”, “coldness” of democracy, i.e. she is rational. Legal principle of democracy: "Everything that is not prohibited by law,- allowed."

• presidential republics;
• parliamentary republics;
• parliamentary monarchies.