various political regimes. Typology of political regimes

The state is a special organization of society, it has an inextricable link with the population of the country. To exercise its power, it can use various methods and means, which together constitute the political regime. Let's find out what this term means.

concept

The political regime is a system of ways and means of influencing society, which determine the scope of the rights and freedoms of citizens, methods of regulation, options for organizing political power, the degree of participation of people in the adoption of laws.

Types of political regimes

Throughout the history of mankind, several political regimes have appeared. Some of them disappeared, they were replaced by other forms of organization of power, and some, having originated many centuries ago, continue to exist today.

Let us present in the form of a table political regimes, their varieties and features.

History of political regimes

The most striking examples of countries in which a totalitarian regime has established itself are Germany, Italy, where fascist parties came to power in the 20-30s of the twentieth century, and the USSR, where the power of the Bolshevik party was established for many years.

The rise of fascism in Italy and Germany was largely due to economic difficulties after the First World War and the need for strong power. Socialist ideas in Soviet Russia were established as a result of the overthrow of the monarchy in 1917 and the victory of the Bolsheviks in the Civil War.

These regimes were characterized by a large role of leader, the concentration of power in the hands of one party, the establishment of a single ideology.

TOP 4 articleswho read along with this

What have we learned?

Having studied the topic of social science grade 9, we found out that the political regime is a set of ways and means to assert and maintain power in the state. There are de varieties of political regimes - democratic and anti-democratic. The latter include totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. It seems that the best way to organize power is a democratic regime, since it does not allow one party or person to concentrate all power in his hands. Society can influence the adoption of political decisions, promote its ideas, thereby realizing its needs.

Topic quiz

Report Evaluation

Average rating: 4.6. Total ratings received: 962.

- one of the forms of the political system of society with its characteristic goals, means and methods of implementation.

The political regime gives an idea of ​​the essence of state power established in the country in a certain period of its history. Therefore, the structure of the political system or the state is not so important as the ways of interaction between society and the state, the scope of human rights and freedoms, the ways of forming political institutions, the style and methods of political management.

The same type or similar state structures can give rise to essentially different political regimes, and, on the contrary, the same type of regimes can arise in political systems that are different in structure. For example, many European countries are constitutional monarchies (Sweden, Norway, Belgium, etc.), but the political regime in these countries corresponds to a republican power structure with democratic methods of government. At the same time, the Republic of Iran, having a completely democratic political structure of the organization of the state, is actually an authoritarian state.

Distinguishing a truly democratic regime of power from an authoritarian or totalitarian regime can be difficult. The USSR for a long time was for many peoples of the world the personification of real democracy and an oasis of democratic freedoms. The true position of the people, who survived the most terrible totalitarian regime in the history of mankind, was revealed to the world only during the period of glasnost.

The nature and signs of the political regime

Important characteristics of the political regime are the principles of organization of institutions of power, the planned political goals, ways and methods of achieving them. For example, in totalitarian regimes, slogans and attitudes such as “the end justifies the means”, “victory at any cost”, etc. are very popular.

The nature of the political regime is significantly influenced by the historical traditions of the people and the level of political culture of society. A political dictator or a ruling political elite can only usurp power to the extent that the masses and institutions of civil society allow them to do so. It is difficult to imagine that in countries with long democratic traditions and a high level of political culture an authoritarian or totalitarian regime of power would be established. On the other hand, in countries with a predominantly traditional political culture, authoritarian and totalitarian regimes arise naturally.

Forms and types of political regimes

There are countless varieties of political regimes, but political studies usually distinguish three main forms of political regimes: totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic.

Totalitarian political regime

(lat. totalis - the whole, whole, complete) - a political regime in which the state completely subjugates all spheres of society and the individual. It is the omnipresence of its supervision that totalitarianism differs from all other forms of state violence - despotism, tyranny, military dictatorship, etc.

The term "totalitarianism" was introduced in the 1920s. critics of B. Mussolini, but since 1925 he himself began to use it to characterize the fascist state. Since 1929, this term has also been used in relation to the regime that has developed in the USSR.

Totalitarianism arose in the 20th century. as a political regime and as a special model of the socio-economic order, characteristic of the stage of industrial development, and as an ideology that gives clear guidelines for the development of the "new man", "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 frightening uncertainty.

In such a state, the masses become easy “prey” for various kinds of political adventurers (leaders, Fuhrers, charismatic leaders), who, relying on the fanaticism of their like-minded people, impose their ideology, their plans for solving the problems that have arisen, on the population.

The political system of totalitarianism, as a rule, is a rigidly centralized party-state structure that exercises control over the entire society, preventing the emergence of any public and political organizations that are outside this control. For example, in the USSR, at every enterprise, in every state or public organization, there was a party cell (CPSU).

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 in society. "Whoever is not with us is against us!" - this is one of the slogans that did not allow any pluralism of opinions.

Depending on the ideological currents, it is customary to mean totalitarianism on the "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 ideology 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", the periodic creation of extreme situations; permanent mobilization of the masses to carry out the next "urgent" tasks; the requirement of unquestioning obedience to higher management; rigid vertical of power.

Authoritarian political regime

(from Latin auctoritas - power, influence; auctor - initiator, founder, author) - a political regime characterized by the concentration of all power in one person (monarch, dictator) or the ruling group.

Authoritarianism is characterized by high centralization of power; nationalization of many aspects of public life; command-administrative methods of leadership; unconditional submission to power; alienation of the people from power; preventing real political opposition; restriction of freedom of the press.

Under authoritarian regimes, the constitution is preserved, but it is declarative. There is also an election system, but it performs an indicative-fictitious function. Election results are usually predetermined and cannot affect the nature of the political regime.

Unlike totalitarianism, under authoritarianism there is no total control over all public organizations. In ideology, limited pluralism is allowed if it does not harm the system. Mostly active opponents of the regime are subjected to repression. People in neutral positions are not considered enemies. There are certain personal rights and freedoms, but they are limited.

Authoritarianism is one of the most common types of political system. According to its characteristics, it occupies an intermediate position between totalitarianism and democracy. Therefore, it is possible both during the transition from totalitarianism to democracy, and vice versa, from democracy to totalitarianism.

Authoritarian regimes are very diverse. They differ in goals and methods of solving problems, in forms of organization of power, and can be reactionary, conservative or progressive. For example, such countries as Chile, Brazil, South Korea, through authoritarianism came to a democratic regime of power.

Democratic political regime

(from the Greek demos - people and kratos - power) - the power of the people, or democracy. This is a form of state, its political regime, in which the people or the majority is (considered) the bearer of state power.

The concept of "democracy" is multifaceted. Democracy is also understood as the form of the structure of a state or organization, and the principles of governance, and a variety of social movements that involve the implementation of democracy, and the ideal of a social order in which citizens are the main arbiters of their destinies.

Democracy as a way of organizing and a form of management can take place in any organization (family, scientific department, production team, public organization, etc.).

Democracy is associated with freedom, equality, justice, observance of human rights, participation of citizens in governance. Therefore, democracy as a political regime is usually opposed to authoritarian, totalitarian and other dictatorial regimes of power.

The word "democracy" is often used in combination with other words, such as social democrat, Christian democrat, liberal democrat, etc. This is done in order to emphasize the adherence of certain social movements to democratic values.

The most important signs of democracy are:

• legal recognition of the supreme power of the people;
• periodic election of the main authorities;
• universal suffrage, according to which every citizen has the right to take part in the formation of representative institutions of power;
• equality of the rights of citizens to participate in government - every citizen has the right not only to elect, but also to be elected to any elective position;
• making decisions by majority vote and subordinating the minority to the majority;
• control of representative bodies over the activities of the executive power;
• accountability of elected bodies to their constituents.

Depending on how the people exercise their right to power, there are three main ways to implement democracy.

Direct Democracy - the entire people (having the right to vote) directly makes decisions and monitors their implementation. This form of democracy is most characteristic of the early forms of democracy, for example, for a tribal community.

Direct democracy existed in ancient times in Athens. There, the main institution of power was the People's Assembly, which made decisions and often could organize their immediate implementation. This form of democracy sometimes resembled the arbitrariness and lynching of the mob. Obviously, this fact was one of the reasons that Plato and Aristotle had a negative attitude towards democracy, considering it to be a "wrong" form of government.

This kind of democracy existed in ancient Rome, medieval Novgorod, Florence and a number of other city-republics.

Plebiscitary Democracy - the people make a decision only in certain cases, for example, during a referendum on some issue.

Representative Democracy - the people elect their representatives, and they govern the state or some authority on its behalf. Representative democracy is the most widespread and effective form of democracy. The shortcomings of representative democracy lie in the fact that the people's representatives, having received power, do not always fulfill the will of those whom they represent.

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

In many ways, these characteristics are due to specific traditions, culture, historical conditions for the development of the state, so we can say that each country has its own unique political regime. However, many regimes in different countries show similarities.

In the scientific literature there are two types of politics:

• democratic;
• antidemocratic.

Signs of a democratic regime:

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

Signs of an anti-democratic regime:

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

The 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 a group of people, but outside the sphere of politics, relative freedom remains. At totalitarian regime the government strictly controls 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 features of democracy are:

• electivity- there is an election of citizens to the bodies of state power by 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- all have equal civil and political
• rights and freedoms, as well as guarantees for their protection;
• pluralism- respect for other people's opinions and ideologies, including oppositional ones, prevails, full transparency 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 by legal means.

Democracy is direct and representative. At direct democracy decisions are made directly by all citizens who have the right to vote. Direct democracy was, 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 of the Russian Federation was adopted by referendum on December 12, 1993.

In a large area, direct democracy is too difficult to implement. Therefore, government decisions are made by special elected institutions. Such a democracy is called representative, since the elected body (for example, the State Duma) is represented by the people who elected it.

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

Totalitarian regime(from lat. totalis - the whole, whole) occurs when all spheres of society are controlled by the authorities. Power under a totalitarian regime is monopolized (by a party, leader, 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 repressions, and acts of intimidation. The totalitarian regime forms a non-initiative personality prone to submission.

Totalitarian political regime

Totalitarian political regime- this is the regime of "all-consuming domination", which infinitely interferes in the life of citizens, including all their activities in the scope of its control and coercive regulation.

Signs of a totalitarian political regime:

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

2. Monopolization and 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 motivation and evaluation of human actions. Within the framework of this regime, the line between political and non-political spheres of life (“the country as a single camp”) disappears. All life activities, including the level of private, personal life, are strictly regulated. The formation of authorities at all levels is carried out through closed channels, bureaucratically;

3. "Unanimity" official ideology which, through massive and targeted indoctrination (media, education, propaganda) is imposed on society as the only true, 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 the society is distinguished by fanatical intolerance towards dissent and "other action" on the principle of "who is not with us is against us";

4. System physical and psychological terror, the regime of a police state, where the principle prevails as a basic "legal" principle: "Only what is ordered by the authorities is allowed, everything else is prohibited."

Totalitarian regimes traditionally include communist and fascist.

Authoritarian political regime

The main features of an authoritarian regime:

1 . ATpower is unlimited, beyond the control of citizens character and concentrated in the hands of one person or group of people. It can be a tyrant, a military junta, a monarch, etc.;

2 . Support (potential or real) for strength. An authoritarian regime may not resort to mass repression and may even be popular among the general population. However, in principle, he can afford any actions in relation to citizens in order to force them into obedience;

3 . Monopolization of power and politics, prevention of political opposition, 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 . Pthe replenishment of leading personnel is carried out by co-optation, and not by pre-election competitive struggle; there are no constitutional mechanisms for succession and transfer of power. Changes of power often occur through military coups and violence;

5 . Orenunciation of total control over society, non-intervention or limited intervention in non-political spheres, and, above all, in the economy. The government deals primarily with issues of ensuring its 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 rigidly authoritarian, moderate and liberal. There are also types such as "populist authoritarianism", based on equalization oriented masses, and also "national patriotic", in which the national idea is used by the authorities to create either a totalitarian or a democratic society, etc.

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

Democratic political regime

Democratic regime is a regime in which power is exercised by a freely expressing majority. Democracy in Greek means literally "rule of the people" or "rule by the people."

Basic principles of the democratic regime of power:

1. Folk sovereignty, i.e. The people are the primary holder of power. All power comes from the people and is delegated to them. This principle does not involve making political decisions directly by the people, as, for example, in a referendum. It only assumes that all holders 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 chosen by the people (a government formed and subordinated to parliament);

2 . Free elections representatives of the authorities, who presuppose the existence of at least three conditions: the freedom to nominate candidates as a consequence of the freedom to form and function; 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 ballot and equality for all in receiving information and the opportunity to carry out propaganda during the election campaign;

3 . Subordination of the minority to the majority with strict observance of 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 change, following the results of new elections, the former majority in power;

4. Implementation separation of powers. The three branches of power - legislative, executive and judicial - have such powers and practices that the two "corners" of this kind of "triangle" can, if necessary, 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 is a necessary condition for democracy;

5. Constitutionalism and 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.

Each state successively and gradually passes from one type of regime to another.

State (political) regimes, depending on the set of methods and means of state power, are divided into democratic and anti-democratic.

Democratic regime - this is a way of exercising state power, the characteristic features of which are: the formation of authorities by election; political pluralism, guaranteed existence of political rights and freedoms of citizens.

The concept of "democracy" means, as you know, democracy, the power of the people. However, the situation in which all the people exercised political power, yet nowhere implemented. It is rather an ideal, something that everyone should strive for.

Signs of a democratic regime:

recognition of the people as the main source of state power;

• freedom of enterprise and recognition of private property;

Real guarantee of human rights and freedoms;

· exercise of state power on the basis of the principle of separation of powers;

decentralization of state power;

a real opportunity for citizens to participate in the formation of state bodies and in monitoring their activities;

Lack of a universally binding official ideology, multi-party system, freedom of opinion and belief;

presence of legal opposition.

The types of democracy are:

1. Liberal Democratic Regime.

It exists in those countries where market relations have developed. Examples include the industrialized countries of Europe and the United States. Such a regime is now being established in Russia. The liberal state not only proclaims rights and freedoms, but also promotes their use. In a liberal state, there are many parties of various political orientations, including opposition ones. State bodies are formed on the basis of free elections, when each person is given the right to express his opinion regarding a particular candidate.

State power is exercised on the basis of the principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial. This is what reduces the possibility of abuse of power.

2. Self-democratic regime.

This is a more developed and more free mode for people. The Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland, Norway) came close to him. The main distinguishing features of such a regime are: the solution of many state issues by taking into account the opinion of the people, expressed in referendums, in the course of polls, with the help of popular initiatives; high standard of living, humanism and morality of people.

Anti-democratic regimes.

Among the anti-democratic regimes most often called totalitarian and authoritarian.

1. Totalitarian regime.

The term "totalitarian" in Latin means "whole", "whole", "complete" was introduced into political circulation by B. Mussolini in 1925 to characterize the fascist movement. Like a political regime totalitarianism is a comprehensive control of the state over the population, all forms and spheres of society and is based on the systematic use of violence or the threat of its use.

The totalitarian regime existed in the former USSR, now in Cuba, North Korea, and Iraq. The essence of the totalitarian regime is manifested in the control of power over all aspects of human life. Not only a person's views on the social structure are controlled, but even his personal life. And if a person's beliefs do not coincide with the attitudes of the authorities, then measures of coercion are applied to him. Recall that, for example, Alexander Solzhenitsyn was serving a sentence in Stalin's camps only because he wrote a letter to a friend from the front, where he doubted the correctness of Stalin's policy.

The leader is the center of the totalitarian system. His position is akin to the divine. He is declared the most wise and infallible, just, constantly thinking about the welfare of the people.

In a totalitarian state, a person is limited in rights and freedoms, although formally they can be proclaimed in the constitution.

Fascism is considered a form of totalitarianism. Its characteristic feature is the oppression of people on a national basis.

Signs of a totalitarian regime:

· the ideologization of all public life on the basis of an official ideology for the whole country;

intolerance to dissent;

a monopoly on information;

· suppression of human individuality, mass terror against the population;

merger of the state and party apparatus;

centralization of power (often led by a leader);

· denial of private life and private property, the dominant position of state property.

Such a regime is considered more “democratic” than a totalitarian one. Its main specificity is that the state is led by a narrow circle - ruling elite, which is headed by a leader and enjoys great privileges and benefits. Such a regime existed in the USSR during the reign of L. Brezhnev, M. Gorbachev.

Under an authoritarian regime, the authorities do not so openly violate human rights and freedoms. For example, academician Andrei Sakharov, the authorities did not dare to imprison him for his views, in particular for his condemnation of the war in Afghanistan. A. Sakharov was exiled to the city of Gorky, where he lived in an ordinary city apartment, but under the vigilant control of the KGB, without the right to leave the city.

Under authoritarianism, a parliament can exist, but it does not play any role in the state. In reality, social life is directed by the party (religious) leadership. The decisions of the central government do not take into account the opinion of the people, and therefore for their implementation it is necessary to use coercion. That is why in such a state the power of punitive organs (police, security agencies) and the army is strong.

The power of the elite is not limited by law;

· the people are removed from government and cannot control the activities of the ruling elite;

· in political life, the existence of a multi-party system is allowed, but there are really no opposition parties;

· the presence of areas free from political control - the economy and private life. It is mainly the political sphere that is subject to control;

the priority of the interests of the state over personal interests.

In addition to the above types of anti-democratic regimes, there are other types:

3. Despotic regime.

It existed, for example, in Egypt during the time of the pharaohs, in Babylon, in Assyria, in Russia under Ivan the Terrible.

In despotism, power is exercised exclusively by one person. The despot entrusts some managerial affairs to another person who enjoys special confidence in him (for example, the vizier in the East). The will of a despot is arbitrary, and sometimes autocracy borders on tyranny. The main thing in a despotic state is obedience, the fulfillment of the will of the ruler.

Under despotism, any independence, discontent, indignation and disagreement of the subject are brutally suppressed. The sanctions applied in this case stagger the imagination with their severity (hanging in the square, stoning, burning, quartering, wheeling, etc.). The authorities strive for visibility in the application of punishment in order to sow fear and ensure obedience.

A despotic regime is characterized by the utter lack of rights of its subjects.

4. Tyrannical regime.

It is based on one-man rule and is characterized by the presence of a governor. Usually, tyranny was established in the process of territorial conquest (Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, etc.), accompanied not only by physical and moral violence against people, but also by violence against the religion and customs of the people. So, in the Ottoman Empire, a part of the population that opposed the imposition of Islam was literally slaughtered.

The power of a tyrant is cruel. In an effort to crush resistance and sow fear among the population, he executes not only for expressed disobedience, but also for the discovery of intent to this effect. Tyrannical power is perceived by the people as oppression, and the tyrant as an oppressor, tormentor.

5.military regime.

This is a political regime in which the head of the state is a military group (junta), which received its power as a result of a coup d'état.

So, I have already talked about two elements of the form of the state. Let me remind you once again of the scheme.

Today we will talk about the third and most important element - the political regime.

The political regime is a system of methods and techniques by which the leadership of the state exercises its power. This is a very voluminous concept that includes answers to many questions: what are the relations between the leadership of the country and the population, what tasks does the leadership set for itself, how is the conquest and transfer of power, etc.

Since ancient times, thinkers have tried to classify political regimes in different ways. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle divided them into tyranny, oligarchy, democracy, monarchy, aristocracy and polity. The British political scientist Andrew Heywood in his book Political Science identified "Western polyarchy", "new democracies", "East Asian regimes", "Islamic regimes" and "military regimes". The Russian political scientist Grigory Golosov in his book "Comparative Politics" described the "traditional regime", "competitive oligarchy", "authoritarian-bureaucratic regime", "egalitarian-authoritarian regime", "authoritarian-inegalitarian regime" and "liberal democracy". Other researchers can find a different classification.

All this variety of models in legal science is simplified and reduced to two or three options. It is believed that there are two types of political regimes: democratic and non-democratic, and non-democratic, in turn, is divided into two subspecies - authoritarian and totalitarian.

The category "political regime" is very subjective and ambiguous. And if we talk about this topic not in the abstract, but with concrete examples, then the story will inevitably become politicized. But it’s hard to figure it out without going into politics, so we’ll have to touch it anyway.

Democracy and its types

The word "democracy", as many people know, in Greek means "power of the people" or "democracy".

Democracy is often understood as a method of collective decision-making with equal influence of participants on the outcome of the process. In this sense, one can speak of democracy in the family, trade union, religious, public or commercial organization, and in general in any group of people. If, when solving an important problem, we ask all interested participants and choose the option that is supported by the majority, then we can talk about democracy.

For example, a group of tourists get lost in the forest and cannot decide which way to go. Some say that you need to go north, others say that you need to go south. There is only one tent for everyone, so they cannot be separated. In this situation, everything can be discussed and voted: which option will be the majority, the group will go there.

This simple principle was apparently followed by all primitive communities of people. Adult members of the tribe gathered and decided the most important issues: where to spend the winter, what to do with food supplies, who to send for hunting. In some places, until the late Middle Ages, the tradition of such popular meetings was preserved - when the free inhabitants of the city (usually only men) gathered and made decisions. Such meetings ("veche") were in some ancient Russian cities, including Novgorod and Pskov. This system is called direct democracy- under it, all people with the right to vote discuss and resolve issues important to everyone.

The disadvantages of such a system were noticed even in antiquity. There were too many people, everyone had different interests and activities, and the number of problems to be solved increased hundreds and thousands of times. As a result, almost everywhere people's assemblies fell into decay, and instead of them, all issues began to be decided individually by leaders and kings.

However, the ancient Greeks who lived in Athens came up with a very simple idea: if it is not possible to gather the inhabitants of the city and jointly resolve all issues, then you can choose people who will deal with these issues on an ongoing basis. It is desirable, of course, to elect them for a certain period, moreover, several and with different powers, so that no one tries to subdue everyone else. It was no longer straight, but representative democracy. Under it, citizens elect special people for various positions with strictly defined powers. The system of representative democracy is the most widespread in the modern world, and it is she who is usually remembered when talking about a democratic regime.

Something between direct and representative democracy - plebiscite democracy. This is when people do not directly discuss the decisions and laws that need to be adopted, but simply vote - for or against the decision. The term "plebiscite" comes from the Latin words plebs (common people) and scitum (decision, decision). Initially, this system arose in the same Ancient Athens. A special body worked there - the Council of Five Hundred, which was involved in the preparation of bills for the people's assembly. Residents of the city could only decide - they are for the proposed law or against it.

All three types of democracy can be present in modern states. Direct democracy is possible at the lowest level of government. Thus, Russian law provides for an analogue of a people's assembly or veche - a "gathering of citizens." Such a gathering can take place in settlements where no more than 300 residents with the right to vote live (part 1 of article 25 of the Federal Law “FZ “On the general principles of organizing local self-government in the Russian Federation”). Accordingly, the inhabitants of such a settlement can feel like ancient Greeks or Novgorodians - gather on the main village square and jointly resolve some issue. Of course, it will no longer be possible to declare war on the Persians or the Swedes, but there are other important issues - for example, the construction of a common cowshed.

Plebiscitary democracy manifests itself during a referendum - voting on certain issues. In Russia, however, referendums are very rare. The last nationwide referendum was held in 1993 and the Russian Constitution was adopted. Since then, the country's authorities have not trusted citizens to decide any important issue.

But the most common form of democracy is representative. It is she who prevails at all levels of government: people elect presidents, governors, mayors, deputies of parliament, as well as regional and municipal assemblies. And it is with this procedure that the concept of “democratic political regime” is usually associated.

Democratic regime

The main feature of a democratic regime is that in it decisions on the administration of the state depend on the opinions of the citizens of this state. People under such a regime directly influence what laws are passed and who is in power.

In general, the democratic regime does not have a clear definition. Like the state, it is defined through a number of features. That is, when the state has all or most of these features, then the regime can be called democratic.

Here are the signs.

Democracy. This means that the people are the only source of power and exercise it through direct, plebiscitary and representative democracy.

Separation of powers. I have already spoken about the essence and purpose of the separation principle.

Election and turnover of public authorities. All persons ruling the country come to power through competitive elections without falsifications (violations) in the counting of votes. "Competitive" is an election in which all significant candidates and political forces are admitted.

Decentralization of state power. I have already spoken about this feature, talking about the forms of state-territorial structure. The democratic regime does not try to concentrate all power in the capital, but seeks to transfer maximum powers to the regions and cities.

Multi-party system and freedom of speech. One of the indispensable conditions of a democratic regime is the opportunity for citizens to register their party and take part in elections, as well as the right to express their opinion about the situation in the country and its leadership.

Freedom of the individual in the economic sphere, including freedom of enterprise. If a person cannot independently engage in the production and sale of goods or services, then the country is not completely free. Therefore, a market economy is considered one of the necessary conditions for a free society.

A large amount of rights and freedoms that are guaranteed to citizens. In a democratic state, basic rights and freedoms are not only proclaimed, but actually exist - freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, the right to elect and be elected, the right to privacy, etc.

The first democratic regimes were apparently the ancient Greek city-states, the most famous of which is Athens. Later, the democratic regime, together with the republican system, was established in Ancient Rome.

In the 1st century BC e. Rome became an authoritarian monarchy. After that, for nearly two thousand years, Europe and the rest of the world were dominated by largely undemocratic regimes. There were, however, exceptions - some cities and small countries with a republican system (Iceland, San Marino, Venice, Dubrovnik, Novgorod, Pskov). Also in some countries, the power of the king from some point began to be limited by parliament, as happened, in particular, in England in the 13th century.

But the real wave of democratization began in Europe and North America at the end of the 18th century. and continues to this day. Today, the United States, Canada, all EU countries, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Mexico, Brazil, India and a number of other countries can be attributed to democratic states.

Non-democratic regimes

Non-democratic regimes have as long a history as democratic ones. Probably, even in the primitive world in some tribes, one or more strong warriors seized power and commanded all the rest. And if other members of the tribe were weak and divided, they were forced to obey. This is how the first leaders, kings, kings and other such leaders appeared.

The main feature of a non-democratic regime is that all the fundamental decisions on the management of the state are made by its leadership, and the people can hardly influence them in any way. Also, a non-democratic regime can be defined through the absence of signs of a democratic regime. That is, for example, if there is no multi-party system in the country, freedom of speech, decentralization of state power, etc. - all this means that the regime in the country is undemocratic.

There are two main types of non-democratic regimes: authoritarian and totalitarian.

Word " authoritarian" comes from the Latin auctoritas (power, influence). Under an authoritarian regime, the state is led by one person or a narrow circle of people, and the people are removed from government. The main task of people in power under an authoritarian regime is enrichment and the preservation of personal power. Such people do not set any global goals for themselves: they do not want to transform society, conquer the world or build heaven on earth. Therefore, the level of violence is relatively low: only those who actively show discontent are imprisoned. The state almost does not interfere in the private life of citizens.

Most of the political regimes in world history have been precisely authoritarian. Such states exist in many today. Most of them are in Africa and Asia. Examples of pronounced authoritarian regimes are China, Vietnam, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan.

It must be borne in mind that authoritarianism is a very unstable regime. Over the past half century, many authoritarian regimes have been replaced by democratic ones as a result of the death of the head of state, revolutions and other emergencies: in Greece - in 1974 after an attempt by the military regime to start a war in Cyprus, in Portugal - in 1974 as a result of the "Carnation Revolution" , in Spain in 1975 due to the death of the dictator Franco, in the socialist countries of Eastern Europe - in the late 1980s - early 1990s. after a series of so-called "velvet" revolutions, in Chile - in 1989 after a referendum on the issue of maintaining the power of the dictator Pinochet, in Serbia - in 2000 after the "Bulldozer Revolution".

Word " totalitarian" comes from the Latin totalis, which means "whole, whole, complete." This concept arose during the reign of dictator Benito Mussolini in Italy. Moreover, Mussolini himself used it in a positive sense and directly stated that his goal was the creation of a totalitarian state in Italy (stato totalitario). At the same time, two other similar regimes existed in Europe - Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union. They found a lot in common between them, and therefore combined them into one concept.

Mussolini in his article "The Doctrine of Fascism" (1931) called a totalitarian regime such a regime where the state ideology has a decisive influence on citizens. The slogan of such a regime is "Everything is inside the state, nothing is outside the state, no one is against the state." In other words, the whole life of a person must be subject to state power.

The leadership of a totalitarian state does not just want to retain power and get rich. It wants the complete victory of a certain ideology: communism, national socialism, fascism, Islam. All of them directly concern every citizen, his family life, work and worldview. Everyone in the country must restructure their private lives in accordance with the state ideology and actively fight for the victory of this "only true" doctrine. Under such a regime, there are a lot of victims: one does not need to be an opposition member to go to jail or be shot. Sometimes it is enough to have the wrong nationality, origin or lifestyle.

Thus, the totalitarian regime is distinguished by the dominance of one ideology, mass repressions and state control over the private life of citizens and the economy.

Totalitarian regimes flourished in the first half of the 20th century. in Germany, Italy, the Soviet Union, China, after which they gradually weakened and were replaced by authoritarian or democratic ones. Today, only North Korea and the Islamic State (ISIS) can be called totalitarian states.

Perhaps the main difference between a totalitarian regime is that it needs the victory of the state ideology and, accordingly, active citizens who will fight for it: go to rallies, knock on the dissatisfied and even deal with them themselves. It is necessary to fight both with internal enemies and with external ones - after all, almost the rest of the world lives incorrectly (not according to Islam or not according to Marx). Therefore, the population also needs to identify spies and saboteurs, guard the border and prepare for war. All this allows you to keep citizens in a state of mobilization.

But the authoritarian regime, on the contrary, educates citizens inaction. If the totalitarian regime seems to be telling people: “You will live as we say!”, then the main message of the authoritarian regime is: “Live as you want, just don’t get into politics.” An authoritarian regime usually does not have any clear ideology: most often it is concerned with “traditional values”, which means the family, the church and the army. And directly the repressions concern only those who fight against the regime.

Authoritarian regimes have recently also been referred to as "hybrid" in the sense that they are a hybrid between having freedom and not having it at all. "The hybrid regime is trying to solve its main task - ensuring the irremovability of power - with a relatively low level of violence," writes Ekaterina Shulman in the book "Practical Political Science". - He has at his disposal neither the moral capital of the monarchy, nor the repressive machine of totalitarianism. It is impossible to deploy a "flywheel of repression" without the active participation of citizens. But citizens of hybrid regimes do not want to participate in anything. Characteristically, state propaganda in hybrid regimes does not mobilize anyone. It unites citizens on the principle of passivity.

Look at the Russian 87% who approve of everything from military incursions to food sanctions. To the question “do you approve?”, they answer “yes”. But at the same time they do nothing. They don't sign up for volunteer battalions, they don't go to pro-war rallies. They don’t even go to the polls much, which is why the hybrid regime has to endlessly worry about false turnout and falsified results.”

Democracy or not?

Once upon a time, it was easy to distinguish a democratic regime from a non-democratic one. The state either had a king who decided all issues (non-democratic regime), or one form or another of the republic, where people participated in solving national issues (democratic regime). When a regime ceased to be democratic, it immediately became obvious: the people who seized power canceled elections, banned all parties except the ruling one, and sometimes dispersed parliament.

Today things have become more difficult. Almost all states call themselves free, legal and democratic. Freedom of speech and a multi-party system are proclaimed everywhere, elections are held, and citizens are granted numerous rights and freedoms under the constitution.

However, we consider some of these states to be democratic and some not. How to distinguish the first from the second?

There is no universal answer here. It is necessary to study the whole set of features and decide whether they are implemented in the country or not. For example, the sign of "democracy" can be considered absent if only one candidate is put up for elections, or well-known politicians are not allowed to participate in them, or the counting of votes occurs with numerous falsifications and violations.

That is, periodic elections are not a sufficient condition for democracy. We need to understand how the election procedure is filled with real content. It is also desirable to study how the law prescribes the process of registration of political parties and candidates for elections, what acts are considered criminal under the law, what are the powers of various authorities, etc.

When there is no time to study all this information, you can use a simple, but almost infallible way to determine the political regime. If a country has been ruled by the same person or group of people for more than ten years, most likely it will be an authoritarian regime. There are exceptions to this rule, however. For example, in China, the regime is authoritarian, but capable of self-renewal: every ten years, the leadership of this country completely changes.

It is not always possible to clearly separate democracy from authoritarianism. There is also something in between. In my opinion, Russia in the 1990s combined features of both regimes. On the one hand, the Constitution adopted in 1993 did not implement the principle of separation of powers, so almost all significant powers were in the hands of President Boris Yeltsin. On the other hand, there was a real multi-party system and freedom of speech in the country: different political parties operated, opposition candidates participated in elections at all levels, and the activities of the leadership were freely discussed on federal television.

However, since the early 2000s Russia gradually got rid of democratic elements. Electoral laws now allow any objectionable candidate to be denied registration, and political party laws allow any party to be liquidated. In the Criminal Code, rubber norms have multiplied that allow citizens to be punished for expressing their opinion. Thus, Russia has become a completely authoritarian state with a series of procedures that are formally similar to elections, but in fact have no meaning.

One of the most interesting questions in political science is why an authoritarian regime should imitate democratic procedures. The fact is that most modern dictatorships regularly hold presidential and parliamentary elections. They are consistently won by the same candidate or the same party. It would seem that if the result is known in advance, why carry out this expensive event?

The thing is that elections in such a system become an important ritual that regularly demonstrates support for the current government.

This is easy to achieve. The country's leadership simply does not register or does not allow potentially popular candidates and parties to participate in elections. In addition to the leader of the country and the ruling party, only those who accept the role of loser, do not try to attract votes and are doomed to failure are allowed to act in politics.

As a result, the incumbent president and several obviously weak candidates are nominated in the presidential elections, and a strong party and several weak, almost caricature political forces are nominated in the parliamentary elections. Accordingly, the incumbent president or the ruling party receives an overwhelming majority of votes, and all the rest - 5-10% each.

"Opposition parties" should be under the control of the authorities and be unattractive to voters, writes political scientist Grigory Golosov in the book Democracy in Russia: Assembly Instructions. - In the optimal case, they should be "niche" parties, obviously capable of attracting the votes of narrow, by definition, limited sections of the population. With childish spontaneity, this approach is implemented in Gabon, where the main "opposition" party is called the "National Association of Lumberjacks". Of course, only a few Gabonese are lumberjacks, and not all lumberjacks will vote for this party. But that's the way it should be."

If a potentially strong party is not registered and not allowed to participate in the elections, then the majority of voters will not know about it. People are offered to choose only from what is. And from what is, it is difficult to choose something other than the current government.

This is how the important political function of elections is manifested: the leaders of the country convince the population, foreign observers and, perhaps, even themselves that they have strong support, and no alternative force can compete with them.

However, sometimes this system fails. For example, in Russia in 2011, due to the popular slogan “Vote for any party except United Russia”, the ruling party almost lost its majority in parliament. In addition, the predictability of the result gives rise to indifference to politics among citizens, and they stop going to the polls. Therefore, even in this system, the authorities constantly falsify data on turnout and voting results.

Democratic vs Non-Democratic Regimes

Much has been written about the advantages and disadvantages of democracy and authoritarianism. I will not delve into this topic, I will list only the most obvious things.

First of all, the more people can influence government decision-making, the more likely it is that these decisions will improve their lives, not worse. And the leaders of the country will be better at solving the problems of the state if they are stimulated to do so. Such incentives can be: the probability of losing the next election; the need to coordinate their actions with an independent parliament; the possibility of being held accountable by an independent court; free discussion of politics in the media.

If the leaders of the country know that there will be no fair elections, no disputes in parliament or court, no discussion in the media, then this frees them up to solve their own problems.

Of course, in a non-democratic regime, good people can come to power, and in a democratic regime, bad people. It's just that the democratic regime creates a flexible and stable system in which bad people are more likely to be removed from power. Under an authoritarian regime, there are no levers of influence on bad leaders - and the population can only humbly ask the authorities to do something good and useful.

Another important advantage of a developed democratic regime is stability and predictability. In a democratic state, not specific individuals rule, but organizations and procedures. There is a separation of powers, each state body has its own powers and acts independently of the others. This gives stability to the entire state apparatus. If the head of state dies, falls ill or goes insane, it will not affect anything: a new person will take his place, and parliament, judges, governors and mayors will not notice the difference at all.

In turn, non-democratic regimes are extremely unstable. They usually do not create any system of separation of powers and transfer of power. The state in them rests on the orders of one particular person. And if something happens to him, everything in the state can collapse.

It is interesting that this thesis is often used by supporters of specific dictators: they say, do not touch him, he must remain in power, otherwise a mess will begin in the country. At the same time, for some reason they forget one simple thing: all people are mortal, and so are dictators. Sooner or later, a person will go to another world anyway. So why put off solving a problem when it will inevitably arise? It will be better if we immediately create a system where everything rests on more than one person.

Democracy and universal suffrage

No one has ever believed that all citizens can influence important decisions. In any state, there have been and still are so-called "electoral qualifications" - restrictions for those who cannot participate in elections and referendums. Previously, slaves, women, or insufficiently wealthy citizens were not allowed to vote. Later there was a massive movement for universal suffrage, and today most of these restrictions have disappeared.

However, even now in any country there are some electoral qualifications. For example, children (in Russia - up to 18 years old) and the mentally ill cannot vote and be elected. Thus, it is recognized that not everyone can solve national issues, but only certain categories of the population - those who are able to make an informed and reasonable choice. However, today the only criterion for awareness and reasonableness is age and the absence of mental illness.

Meanwhile, each of us knows adults and mentally healthy people who do not know anything about the structure of the state, do not distinguish one party from another, and are not able to meaningfully vote in elections. The presence of such people in any society - especially where the level of education is low - leads to the fact that in the most honest elections, incompetent politicians come to power. Not only that, such politicians continue to be re-elected, skillfully convincing voters that the country's problems are not connected with their inability to lead, but with American machinations and other mythical reasons.

Recently, journalists and political scientists are increasingly discussing the possibility of introducing different electoral qualifications and other measures that would help increase the competence of voters.

So, Leonid Volkov and Fedor Krasheninnikov in the book "Cloudy Democracy", describing the system of electronic democracy, proposed restrictions on knowledge of the foundations of the constitutional system. The point is that before voting begins, a citizen will have to pass an extremely simple test about the structure of the state. “Let 95% pass this filter, and not only 5% of voters who are in a state of complete inadequacy to the surrounding political reality pass. Nevertheless, the elections become something honorable and significant, and their results become much more meaningful.”

Another electoral qualification is the "commercialism test". This amusing method was invented by journalist Yulia Latynina while observing the presidential elections in 2012. In this case, citizens are not restricted in any way, but those who do not see the point in elections are easily excluded from this procedure. “After all, what does a “carousel” [a person who receives money from one of the candidates if he votes for them] do? He is selling his vote. But if he is a voter and if he wants it, we must give him such an opportunity! The will of the elector is sacred! Let him come to the site and say: "I don't want A or B, I want money." And he receives the money that is due to him for waiving the right to vote (say, 1000 rubles), but his vote is canceled and does not participate in voting, just as treasury shares do not participate in joint-stock meetings ”(“ Voter’s Right to Vodka ”).

Some propose to introduce a tax qualification. It consists in the fact that only those whose monetary relations with the state are in the nature of a “positive balance” can take part in the elections. Those. a person can vote only if he paid more taxes than he received money from the state in the form of benefits, scholarships or pensions. There is also a reasonable grain in this - after all, if a person has paid something to the state, then he has more rights when deciding on the fate of this money.

An interesting electoral qualification was described by Robert Heinlein in the science fiction novel Starship Troopers. In the distant future on Earth, only people who have served in the army have political rights. Moreover, military service is a purely voluntary matter. No one is forced to it, but on the contrary, all conditions are created so that a person breaks down and does not serve until the end of his term. “Under our political system, every voter and every state official is a person who, by hard voluntary service, has proved that he puts the interests of the group, the collective above his own interests. This is an extremely important difference. A person may not be so smart, wise, he may make mistakes. But on the whole, his activities will be a hundred times more useful to society than the activities of any class or ruler in the past.

All these ideas have recently been discussed not only in political studies, but also voiced from the stands. During the 2014 political crisis in Thailand, the opposition demanded the abolition of universal suffrage. The fact is that Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra spent taxpayer money on buying rice from poor peasants. The rice could not be resold anywhere, so it just lay and rotted in government warehouses. Representatives of the urban population said that the ruling party is de facto buying the votes of peasants at the expense of the budget, who are happy to vote for the desired party in exchange for a handout. Opposition leaders have offered to stop such irresponsible behaviour.

“In general, the essence of the proposal is to abandon the “one voter-one vote” system. Some oppositionists propose to introduce educational and/or property qualifications for voters. Others insist that only half of the parliament should be elected, and the other half of the deputies should be appointed from among all the same people who enjoy authority in the country. Their goal, however, is the same: to cut off the poor and the peasants from voting, whose brains are easy to wash and whose votes can be bought.

Summary

The political regime is a system of methods and techniques by which the leadership of the state exercises its power. This concept includes answers to questions, what are the relations between the leadership of the country and the population, how is the conquest and transfer of power, etc.

There are two types of political regimes: democratic and non-democratic, and non-democratic, in turn, is divided into two subspecies - authoritarian and totalitarian.

Democracy is a method of collective decision-making with equal influence of the participants on the outcome of the process. There is direct democracy - when citizens themselves gather and decide issues of public importance, plebiscitary democracy - when special people prepare the text of a law or other decision, and people express their approval or disapproval by voting, and, finally, representative democracy - when citizens elect people who will be in favor of them to make laws and decide matters of public interest.

The concept of "democratic political regime" is usually associated with the procedures of representative democracy. The main feature of a democratic regime is that in it decisions on state administration depend on the opinions of citizens. People under such a regime directly influence what laws are passed and who is in power. Other signs of a democratic regime: democracy; separation of powers; electivity and turnover of public authorities; decentralization of state power; multi-party system and freedom of speech; individual freedom in the economic sphere; a large amount of rights and freedoms that citizens have.

Under a non-democratic regime, all decisions on the management of the state are made by its leadership, and the people can hardly influence them in any way. Also, a democratic regime can be defined through the absence of signs of a democratic regime.

There are two types of non-democratic regimes: authoritarian and totalitarian. Under an authoritarian regime, the level of violence is relatively low: only those who actively express discontent are imprisoned. The state almost does not interfere in the private life of citizens. Under a totalitarian regime, everyone in the country must restructure their private lives in accordance with the state ideology, and there are many victims: people can suffer because of the wrong nationality, origin or lifestyle.

Today it is not so easy to immediately distinguish a democratic regime from a non-democratic one, because almost all states call themselves free, legal and democratic. Nevertheless, we can look at the totality of features of a particular regime and decide whether they are implemented in the country or not.

Most non-democratic regimes hold elections, admitting only obviously weak candidates to them. Such elections demonstrate to everyone that the incumbent leader and the ruling party have broad support.

The advantage of democracy is this: the more people can influence government decision-making, the more likely it is that these decisions will make their lives better, not worse. In addition, democratic regimes are more stable and predictable. In a democratic state, not specific individuals rule, but organizations and procedures. There is a separation of powers, each state body has its own powers and acts independently of the others. This gives stability to the entire state apparatus.

Since ancient times, all states have used "electoral qualifications" - restrictions on those who cannot participate in elections. Today, all adults and mentally healthy people can take part in elections, but many consider this to be insufficient and propose various measures that increase the responsibility of voters.