2. What role do the media play in political life?
3. Why is the political elite so important in politics? What are the ways of its formation?
4. What is characterized by political leadership? What are the functions of a political leader?
5. What problems does the demographic situation in our country? What are the ways to solve them?
6. What is the order of consciousness of religious associations and what is their relationship with the state? What is the meaning of freedom of conscience?
33. What are the typologies of society accepted in science, what is a pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial society?
34. What is the manifestation of social, scientific and technological progress?
35. How would you characterize the global problems of mankind?
36. What is the world community?
37. How does a person turn into a person?
38. What is socialization and education?
39. What human needs did you meet?
40. How does a person know the world and himself?
41. What is the spiritual life of man?
42. How are freedom and responsibility related?
43. How does a person in a group behave?
44. What is interpersonal relationships and the process of communication?
45. How do conflicts arise in society?
1 Which elections, in the opinion of the polled citizens, most influence theira life?
Explain why
2. What elections, according to the respondents, most affect the life of the country?
Explain why.
3. What is the difference between citizens' assessment of the impact of any election on their life and the life of the country?
4. Is it right to conclude that a significant part of citizens do not see the impact of elections on their own life and the life of the country?
Argument your answer using survey data.
What are the types of political systems that differ in political regimes. 8. What is the difference between totalitarian and authoritarian political regimes? 9. What are the basic principles and values \u200b\u200bof a democratic political system? What are its advantages over other types of political systems? What are the contradictions of democracy? 10. What are the main changes in the Russian political system in the 1990s. What hinders the development of democracy in Russia?
One form of social consciousness is political consciousness. Political consciousness is directly related to the thoughts and experiences of a participant in the political process.
Political consciousness
The subjective internal attitude of people to objective political conditions, functions and roles in political life is usually called political consciousness. The reflection of political phenomena in the mental process of people, feelings and feelings - this is political consciousness.
This type of consciousness is based on the negative or positive significance of political relations. Moreover, the political consciousness of each person is completely differently formed and in a certain way reflects objective political processes.
Reflection occurs at two levels: ordinary practical or ideological and theoretical.
Political ideology
The interests of different social groups are reflected in political ideology. Such an ideology contains the views of a particular group on the actions of the authorities, on the government itself, on political life and on the use of power in their own interests.
With the help of political ideology, one can determine what state power should be and what policy should be pursued by it. In other words, political ideology is a system of ideas and concepts that reflect the view on the political life of a particular subject.
Political ideology operates in the minds of citizens and it is precisely this that ultimately determines the political behavior of citizens. And the strength of ideology can be determined by the degree of its development by citizens and the measure of its implementation.
Political psychology
One of the main elements of political consciousness is psychological psychology. By this concept is understood political feelings, moods and emotions, other psychological components of the political life of society.
Political psychology is formed in everyday life, it is formed in the process of interaction of citizens with various institutions of power. This happens at the level of everyday consciousness.
One can speak of political psychology as a practical type of consciousness. This type of consciousness is an unsystematic and sometimes contradictory set of views and subconscious elements.
Relatively stable part of political psychology includes mores, common sense, mentality. Emotions, moods, expectations and experiences are usually classified as more variable.
All these components of political psychology have a direct impact on the political behavior of a person.
These types of political psychology are distinguished: personality psychology (for example, the leader’s personality), small group psychology, and the psychology of a large social group and communities. They also distinguish the political psychology of the masses and mass moods.
The nature of the functioning of the institutions of power, the forms of behavior of various subjects, and all other manifestations of human activity are directly dependent and are formed on the basis of his ideas, views, feelings and other phenomena. The most general category, reflecting the totality of a person’s perceptions mediating his relations with political structures, is political consciousness. Currently, there are two points of view on the essence of political consciousness. Supporters behavioral of the approach, they consider political consciousness as a form of rational thinking of a person, all of the totality of his views and ideas that he uses in the exercise of his roles and functions in the sphere of power, i.e. the political consciousness with this approach appears as though the thinking of a person superimposed on politics. Second, axiological the approach refers to political consciousness as a certain level of social thinking. From this point of view, it also includes various ordinary, universal views and values \u200b\u200bof a person, but the essence of the political consciousness of people is determined by their ability and ability to isolate their group interests, compare them with other group needs, and also see ways and means of using the state to solve problems on their implementation.
Political consciousness performs three most important functions: 1) cognitive (reflecting the needs of society in the constant updating of knowledge to perform and modify the functions of political entities), 2) communicative (ensuring the conscious interaction of subjects with each other and with institutions of power); 3) ideological (awareness of the interest of subjects in acquiring and popularizing their own vision of the political world).
Political ideology is one of the most influential forms of political consciousness.
Ideology - a certain doctrine justifying the claims of a particular group of people for power (or its use), seeking in accordance with these goals to subordinate public opinion to their own ideas. As a means of ideological support for group interests, political ideology is primarily an instrument of the elite strata, which with its help consolidate group associations of citizens, provide communication with the lower classes, and build a certain sequence of actions in the political space. Acting as a means of ideological embodiment of the group, ideology systematizes and therefore, to a certain extent, coarsens reality. The image of group goals and values \u200b\u200bcreated in this way can be used to primitize the political consciousness of citizens, manipulate and even deceive the population. But on the whole, the positive direction of such a schematization is to fix certain criteria for assessing political reality, create a normative model for perceiving the world of politics, and make a difficult situation of political dynamics simple and understandable for an ordinary person. Through ideology, people enrich their individual views with group ideas about their “homeland,” “sense of duty,” and other collective beliefs.
The main functions of political ideology are: the ideological mastery of public consciousness; implementation of non-proprietary criteria for assessing the past, present and future; creating a positive image in the eyes of public opinion of the goals and objectives of political development proposed by the party, movement or other forces; stimulation of targeted actions of citizens in the name of support and fulfillment of tasks; actively opposing competing doctrines and teachings. Along with these tasks, researcher A. Gertz also notes the need for the ideology to carry out the tasks of “releasing steam from the boiler” (that is, easing tension by transferring the opposing parties to the field of ideological polemics), constructing and maintaining group values, as well as solidarity, t .e. strengthening the internal cohesion of the group. In addition to rational, any ideology, especially oppositional, preaches those goals and ideals that it offers to take on faith.
Political history has demonstrated the origin and decline of many political doctrines. Consider some of them, popular in the last one and a half to two centuries.
Liberalism and neoliberalism. Having inherited a number of ideas of the ancient thinkers Lucretius and Democritus, liberalism as an independent ideological trend was formed on the basis of the political philosophy of the English Enlightenment J. Locke, T. Hobbes, J. Mill, A. Smith. By linking individual freedom with respect for fundamental human rights, as well as with the private ownership system, liberalism laid the foundation for its concept of the ideals of free competition, the market, and entrepreneurship. The fundamental criterion for assessing the development of society is personal freedom. The leading political ideas of liberalism have been and remain the legal equality of citizens, the contractual nature of the state, as well as the conviction that was formed later on of equal rights of professional, economic, religious, political associations competing in politics. Since its inception, liberalism has upheld a critical attitude towards the state, the principles of high political responsibility of citizens, religious tolerance, pluralism, and the idea of \u200b\u200bconstitutionalism. In the XX century. along with traditional liberalism, its directions were formed, trying to combine its basic values \u200b\u200bwith total reliance on the state, or with socially oriented ideas, or with ideas that completely denied the social orientation of the state (“conservative liberalism"), etc. Among them is neoliberalism, which adapted the traditional values \u200b\u200bof liberalism to the economic and political realities of the second half of the 20th century. the most important advantage of the political system in it was proclaimed justice, and governments - orientation to moral principles and values. The neoliberal political program (R. Dahl, C. Lindblum and others) was based on the ideas of consensus of the governing and the governed, the need for the participation of the masses in the political process, and the democratization of political decision-making.
Conservatism and neoconservatism. Conservatism is a dual spiritual phenomenon. On the one hand, this is a psychological attitude, a style of thinking associated with the dominance of inertia and habit, a certain temperament in life, a system of protective consciousness that prefers the old system of government. On the other hand, this is a corresponding model of behavior in politics and life in general, and a special ideological position with its own philosophical foundation, containing well-known guidelines and principles of political participation, attitudes towards the state, social order and associated with certain political actions, parties, unions. As an ideology, conservatism has evolved from the defense of large feudal aristocratic strata to the defense of the entrepreneurial class and a number of fundamental principles of liberalism (private property, state non-interference in society, etc.). A prerequisite for the emergence of these basic ideas was the attempt by the liberals to radically restructure society after the French Revolution (1789). Shocked by the violence that accompanied this process, the spiritual fathers of conservatism - J. de Mestre, E. Burke, and later H. Cortes, R. Piel, O. Bismarck and others tried to confirm the idea of \u200b\u200bthe unnaturalness of the conscious transformation of social orders. Conservatives proceeded from the full priority of society over man. In their opinion, a person’s freedom is determined by his obligations to society, they considered political problems as religious and moral, and they saw the main issue of transformations in the spiritual transformation of a person organically connected with his ability to maintain the values \u200b\u200bof family, church and morality. The preservation of the past in the present is capable, as they believed, of all tension and therefore should be regarded as a moral obligation to future generations. Thus, the system of views of conservatives was based on the priority of continuity over innovation, on the recognition of the inviolability of the naturally formed order of things, predetermined above the hierarchy of the human community, and therefore the privileges of well-known sections of the population, as well as the relevant moral principles that underlie family, religion and property . Conservatives are characterized by such political guidelines as the attitude to the constitution as a manifestation of higher principles, the conviction of the need for rule of law and the mandatory moral foundations of an independent court, the understanding of civil law obedience as a form of individual freedom, etc. The basis of the political order, according to conservatives, lies gradual reformismbased on a compromise.
In the first half of the 1970s. conservatism mainly began to appear in the guise of neoconservatism (I. Kristol, N. Podgorets, Z. Brzezinski, etc.), which gave its answer to the economic crisis of that time, to the expansion of Keynesianism, and mass youth protests that reflected a certain crisis in Western society. In the conditions of a variety of lifestyles, the strengthening of a person’s comprehensive dependence on the technical environment, accelerated pace of life, environmental crisis, etc., neoconservatism offered society the spiritual priority of family and religion, social stability, based on the moral interdependence of the citizen and the state and their mutual assistance, on respect for law and distrust of excessive democracy, strong state order. Maintaining an external commitment to market economy, the privileges of individual strata and strata, the neoconservatives clearly focused on the preservation of purely human qualities in society and citizens, universal moral laws, without which no economic and technical development of society could fill the spiritual vacuum formed in human hearts. The main responsibility in these conditions of the human principle was assigned to the individual himself, who was supposed to rely primarily on his own strengths and local solidarity of the family and his inner circle. Such a position was supposed to maintain viability in the individual, initiative and at the same time prevent the state from becoming a “cash cow,” a force corrupting a person with his help. At the same time, the state should strive to maintain the integrity of society, to ensure the necessary living conditions for the individual on the basis of law and order, providing citizens with the opportunity to form political associations, to develop civil society institutions, and to maintain balanced relations between nature and man.
Communist and socialist ideology. The ideas of socialism have been known since ancient times. The first attempts to outline this ideal were made by the thinkers of the New Time T. Mor and T. Campanella, and at the turn of the XVIII – XIX centuries. - Utopian socialists A. Saint-Simon, J. Fourier and R. Owen. In the middle of the XIX century. K. Marx and F. Engels gave a theoretical justification for socialism, interpreting it as a certain phase of the historical formation of a more distant stage in the development of society - communism. The internal inconsistency of Marxist doctrine led to various versions of its political and ideological evolution. So, V.I. Lenin developed the doctrine of the stages of the socialist revolution, the demolition of the "bourgeois state machine", the "dictatorship of the proletariat", the "new type" party, leading society to the "heights of communism". Subsequently, Leninist fundamentalism served as the basis for the emergence of the Stalinist regime, the theoreticians of which, putting forward the idea of \u200b\u200bintensifying the class struggle as socialist construction, created the ideological basis for ensuring social transformations by means of terror and genocide of the civilian population. Another attempt to build socialism was made in China. Mao Zedong (hence Maoism) took as a basis the Stalinist idea of \u200b\u200bthe need to combat external and internal enemies, coloring it with the theory of "guerrilla warfare", which made Maoism very popular in several countries of Indochina, Africa and Latin America. Moreover, the main historical force of the movement towards socialism was the peasantry, called upon to “re-educate” the intelligentsia and other sections of the population in a revolutionary spirit. Another evolutionary (or revisionist) line of Marxism is connected with the activities of K. Kautsky, A. Bebel, E. Bernshtein, who positively interpreted the role of the state (democratic republic) in the formation of a socially just society, and affirmed the priority of peaceful means of achieving goals and class reconciliation. These basic ideas and approaches were realized over time, not only in the political movement of social democracy, but also in the politics of a number of states (for example, Yugoslavia), which sought to strengthen the socialist system without the presence of foreign states oriented toward peaceful coexistence with capitalist states, etc. In the second half of the XX century. ideas of Eurocommunism appeared (to unite communism and social democracy - M. Adler, G. Petrovich, P. Tolyatti and others - “humanistic Marxism”). In addition, the ideas of "environmental" and "Christian" socialism, etc. were developed.
History, along with the general humanistic content of socialism, has also revealed its flaws. So, it turned out to be unacceptable the attitude of socialists to the economic inequality of individuals, to competition, etc., due to differences in abilities, in education, etc. Desiring to correct the "injustice" of society, the socialists tried to replace them with mechanisms of unearned income distribution, political regulation of economic processes, recognized the need for the state to consciously establish the principles and norms of social equality. Therefore, in the ideology of socialism, the state always towered above the individual, conscious control - over the evolutionary course of development of society, politics - over the economy.
Social democracy. The greatest influence on public consciousness in the XX century. (mainly in European countries) had a social democratic ideology, which was a branch of socialist ideology, split at the beginning of the century in connection with their own assessments of the First World War and the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. Throughout its existence, she defended the priorities of the social and interstate world and linked the ideals of a just social system with the principles of freedom and labor solidarity. The ideas about the gradual reform of bourgeois society were inextricably correlated in its doctrine with the rejection of the class struggle (social partnership in return), with the principles of democracy of the people, the social protection of workers and the promotion of workers' self-government ("welfare state").
Fascism today understood in two ways. Some scholars understand it as specific varieties of political ideologies that formed in Italy, Germany, and Spain in the 1920–1930s. and serving as a populist means of overcoming these countries from the post-war crisis. The ancestor of fascism was the leader of the left wing of the Italian socialists B. Mussolini. His theory, based on the elite ideas of Plato, Hegel and on the concept of an “organic state” (justifying the aggressive actions of the authorities for the benefit of the people devoted to him), preached extreme nationalism, the “limitless will” of the state and the elitism of its political rulers, glorified war and expansion. A characteristic feature of fascism was the national socialism of A. Hitler. The German version was distinguished by a greater share of reactionary irrationalism (the “German myth”), a higher level of totalitarian organization of power and outright racism. Using the ideas of racial superiority of A. Gobino, as well as a number of philosophical tenets by I. Fichte, A. Schopenhauer, F. Nietzsche, theorists of German fascism built their ideology on the priority of the social and political rights of the mythical people - “Aryans”. In accordance with the recognition of its privilege, a policy of supporting states of "culture-creating races" (Germans, British, Swedes ...), restrictions on living space for ethnic groups, "supporting culture" (Slavs, residents of some states of the East and Latin America), and merciless were proclaimed. the destruction of "culture-destroying peoples" (blacks, Jews, gypsies). Here, the state was already given a secondary role, and the main place was occupied by the race, the integrity of which assumed and justified a policy of expansionism, discrimination and terror.
The concrete historical interpretations of fascism make it possible to see its political outlines in addition to the aforementioned states in Francoist Spain, Japan in the 1930s – 1940s, Portugal under A. Salazar, Argentina under President Perron (1943–1955), and Greece in the late 1960s. ("Regime of black colonels"), during certain periods of rule in South Africa, Uganda, Brazil, Chile. Its most characteristic features are visibly manifested in such ideological varieties as neo-Nazism (based on the principles of racial purity and the ideal of the superman), national liberalism (preserving the same ideas of racist God-chosenness and ethnic hegemony, but more tolerant of individualism and a number of other bourgeois values) and neo-fascism (in which there is no idea of \u200b\u200bethnic messianism, but at the same time the philosophy of individualism is also denied, the main importance here is given to the ideas of the "soil", people, patriotism MA, underpinning a “natural state” with a “merciless government”). In the framework of this approach, the characterization of fascism is directly connected with the description of various kinds of nationalistic and especially totalitarian regimes. From another point of view, fascism is interpreted as an ideology that does not have a certain ideological content and is formed where and when the goals of suppressing democracy come to the fore in the ideological and practical aspirations of political forces, and the thirst for violence and terror sometimes overshadows the ideas of seizing and using power . The political line of such a movement is inextricably linked with the ideas of the superiority of various racial, ethnic, class, country and other groups of society, the aggressiveness of political demands, the features of national militarism, and the appeal to base human feelings and prejudices.
Ideological discourse. This is the interaction of ideologies in the political space.
The role of spiritual factors in politics is by no means limited to the impact on people of ideological doctrines and programs. Of considerable importance is also political psychology - a set of predominantly emotional-sensory feelings and representations of people about political phenomena that take shape in the process of their political behavior and direct interaction with institutions. Without a doubt, it plays a crucial role in the political process. For example, many people, building their activities, despite any facts, assure themselves that they did the right thing, chose the best of possible solutions. The same facts of mental distortion include a person’s perception of reality on the basis of a speculative scheme (prototype). By virtue of such a programmed perception, all new information is interpreted by him on the basis of a previously constructed approach. Experience has shown that extrovert and introvert, romantic and rationalist, people prone to violence or humanity, conformism or non-conformism, etc. carry out their political roles in different ways. Political psychology pays great attention to the role of irrational mechanisms, which play the greater role, the less one understands the essence and principles of political events. Moreover, under certain conditions, physiological feelings can generally supplant all other forms of assessment and regulation of behavior. For example, hunger or fear can cause riots, riots, or revolutions. But in some cases, social feelings can overcome the influence of social drives. Thus, the actualized need for order, discipline, and rallying into a tightly controlled community can help people overcome self-doubt and disappointment in power.
It is known from history that many rulers deliberately arouse people's irrational feelings, using them to strengthen their commitment to the authorities and ideological doctrines. The Nazis, in particular, used for these purposes a variety of theatrical gatherings, night torchlight processions, complex political symbols - all this, with their mystery and grandeur, was supposed to help them form an unaccountable worship of the inhabitants of the Führer and Reich. The purpose of activating subconscious feelings and emotions can be served by excessive planting of monumental sculptures in society, the organization of magnificent political ceremonies and rituals, as well as other actions of the authorities, seeking such methods to increase the political loyalty of citizens.
The most important feature of political psychology is its ability to form various political actors, especially the "masses" and "crowds", carrying out actions such as riots, revolutions, rallies, processions, uprisings, the seizure of buildings, etc. So, E. Canetti connects the emergence of the mass with the growing feelings of solidarity and fear among people. The crowd also has a purely psychological foundation, into which a group of people turns into a force of a jointly experienced emotional, sharply experienced factor (causing a mass state of anger, joy, aggression, etc.). The famous Russian scientist V.M. Bekhterev emphasized that the mutual suggestion and self-excitement of people is much more driven by the behavior of the crowd than any ideas proclaimed by it. Crowds do not arise for balancing actions, they are impulsive, volatile and irritable, intolerant of outside views, controlled by an unconscious beginning, malleable to suggestion and gullible, one-sided and prone to exaggerating assessments and events. The constantly maintained influx of emotions, as a rule, determines the one-dimensionality of thinking and action of the crowd. If in life a person can belong to different groups, then in a crowd - only to one, since in it a person has no balances, he is passionate about the power of association. The crowd does not tolerate any reflection or objection. The normal state of a crowd that comes across an obstacle is rage. At the same time, one or another factor (a sudden event, the speech of a bright speaker) is able to change the state of the crowd with a new suggestion, infect it with fresh emotions. Left to its own devices, it quickly gets tired, snows and strives to obey any calls.
Political behavior It is the most important external form of expressing the place and role of political psychology in the political sphere. It is here that psychology acts both as a mechanism and as a specific factor in human activity in political life. And above all, in motivating the behavior of political actors, psychology reveals its transformative potential, contributes to changes in processes and institutions.
Currently, science has formed several points of view on the nature and essence of political behavior. A significant part of scientists proceeds from the fact that political behavior is set of all actions (actions and interactions) carried out in the political sphere and varying in their degree of influence on the government. Very common and situational interpretation of political behavior, focusing attention on factors external to the person that affect the content of his actions. As a rule, in this case we are talking about the physical, organic and social environment. In connection with this understanding, R. Merton raises the question of various ways of adapting to the external environment: conformism, meaning a person’s acceptance of the established order of things, innovationpresupposing the preservation of activity and independence of a person’s position in relation to the environment, and ritualexpressing the symbolic and non-critical position of a person in relation to the external conditions of activity. A number of scientists in the characterization of political behavior emphasize subjective the intentions of a person, manifested in his actions. So, M. Weber singled out in this connection goal-rational, value-rational, affective and traditional actions taking place in the political sphere. These approaches make it possible to define political behavior as the totality of subjectively motivated actions of various actors (actors), realizing their status positions and internal attitudes. For the most part, behavior actualizes various forms of people's awareness of their needs and interests. In this sense, Z. Freud believed that people were driven by pleasure, T. Adorno - power, A. Ungersma - meaning, and D. Dollard and V. Miller - frustrations (frustration and frustration resulting from the obstacles to satisfy interests). The famous American scientist A. Maslow in the 50s. formulated a classic list of hierarchical needs of a person underlying his practical actions: physiological needs, need for security (confidence, stability, freedom from fear), love, recognition and self-affirmation, as well as self-realization.
The variety of areas of political life, the multiplicity of roles and functions of individuals and groups in the sphere of relations with state power gave rise to many types of political behavior. So, ideologically oriented actions of citizens, as a rule, relate to autonomous type of political behavior, reflecting the relatively free choice by people of political goals and means of achieving them. This type of behavior resists mobilized forms of activity that characterize the compulsion of acts performed by a person under the pressure of external circumstances (power structures, party organs, power of public opinion). Where the influence of ideology stimulates the routine, often repeated motives and actions of citizens, it is customary to highlight traditional forms of political behavior and opposing them innovative ways to achieve political goals in practice. However, the forms of behavior that correspond to the values \u200b\u200band norms of the “political game” generally accepted in the political system, have the greatest practical importance for organizing political orders. regulatory forms of political behavior. At the same time, the most problematic is the regulation and control of political actions that deviate from the principles and norms of political relations, or deviant behavior.
Similar information.
Political ideology and political psychology - partially coincide in content with theoretical and everyday, respectively, but they also have their own specifics. The distinction between political ideology and psychology goes on the same basis - the depth and adequacy of the reproduction of political reality. However, ideology is not identical with theory, and political psychology goes beyond ordinary consciousness.
Ideology is usually understood as a system of theoretical views, ideas expressing the interests and goals of certain social groups and aimed at maintaining or changing existing social relations. Political ideology, respectively, is a theoretical understanding of political reality from the point of view of the interests and goals of a social group (class, nation, etc.).
The volumes of the concepts of “political ideology” and “political theory” partially overlap each other, since ideology analyzes political reality by means of theory - this is a systematized, logically consistent, pretending to objectivity knowledge developed by professionals in the field of spiritual production. However, ideology does not fit entirely into the framework of the theory, because it represents knowledge not only about what exists (about what is), but about what is due (about what should be) in society, which deprives it of a solid theoretical ground.
The central position of ideologies in the structure of political consciousness was initially determined by a number of distinctive features of their formation and functioning, which usually include: integrity, systematic knowledge presented in ideology, the use of knowledge of the theoretical level; the emergence as a result of the activity of ideologists, professionals of intellectual activity (spontaneously, “by itself” ideology does not add up); initial focus on changing or consolidating existing political relations and institutions; conditionality by the interests of various social groups (classes, strata, classes, elites, etc.); appeal to the goals and values \u200b\u200bof public life as one of the main arguments; propensity for some varnishing of reality.
The leading functions of ideology include: the goal-oriented formulation of the goals of social development, which give meaning and justification to the claims of social groups to power; program-practical - the translation of theory into practice: the development of specific programs, tools, methods for achieving power and its use; integrative - cohesion, the formation of the unity of a social group; motivating - encouraging people to political activity; communicative - the formation of a special language of political communication - signs, symbols, rituals, according to which adherents of ideology identify their supporters and separate "strangers".
The main functions of ideology can also include cognitive, axiological (value), propaganda, apologetic (defending the political image of the ruling elite), etc. This is the whole purpose of ideology in the modern world.
The most influential ideologies of our time include liberalism, conservatism and socialism. All of them have long historical traditions and today they are branched complexes of ideas, principles, and attitudes that form the basis of the programs and strategies of various political forces. These systems of views turn out to be so powerful that they actually step over the formal framework of the political sphere itself and turn into peculiar types or ways of thinking that determine the attitude of people to the whole world around them.
Another level of political consciousness, paired ideological, is political psychology - a set of political feelings, opinions, moods that arise in various social groups based on a common political needs and interests. Being unsystematized and spontaneously forming spiritual education, political psychology is a kind of analogue of everyday consciousness. But there is no complete coincidence between them, since the concept of “political psychology” includes, along with rational ones, also irrational ones, that is, unconscious, not controlled by consciousness elements - motives, preferences, attitudes, etc.
The sphere of political psychology includes the following phenomena: socio-political foundations of psychological activity (needs, motives, interests, aspirations), psychological mechanisms of interaction with the political environment (attitudes, stereotypes, prejudices), psychological states of people, caused by political realities (moods , expectations, feelings, emotions); sustainable political and psychological forms and products of activity (traditions, skills, habits); psychological processes of political communication (suggestion, imitation, persuasion, rumors), etc.
In general, the following features are inherent in this level of political consciousness: spontaneous, little-controlled formation process; the predominance of sensory-emotional components of consciousness; the interposition of rational and irrational spiritual elements; known inconsistency and inconsistency of personal elements; performance of mainly adaptive and motivating functions; mobility, variability, quick adaptability to the current situation, etc.
In contrast to ideology, political psychology is less amenable to theoretical analysis due to the presence of many irrational elements in it. But even they, as the development of the science of psychology in the 20th century has shown, can become the object of theoretical consideration and practical recommendations.
More on the topic 27. Political ideology and political psychology, their distinctive features, subjects and the nature of the relationship:
- § 2. Political practice of Hindu nationalist organizations. Hindutva ideology in the political arena.
Theme 7. Political ideologies. Part I. Political Consciousness
1. The essence of political consciousness
1.1. Concept and content
In the political sphere, the nature of the functioning of the institutions of power, the forms of behavior of various subjects, and all other manifestations of human activity are directly dependent and are formed on the basis of his ideas, views, feelings and other spiritual phenomena. The most general category that reflects the totality of sensory and theoretical, value and normative, rational and subconscious representations of a person that mediate his relationship with political structures is “political consciousness”. That is, the political consciousness reflects all those ideals, norms and other views of a person that he is oriented to and which he uses to adapt to the mechanisms of power and fulfill his political functions.
Thus, in its content, political consciousness reflects all the non-institutional components of the political sphere of public life. Thus, it shows that changes in the activities of the bodies of power and administration, the establishment of inter-party relations and other political processes in one way or another are due to the subjective positions of the elite and non-elite strata. A variety of moving and changing human views forms multidirectional political processes, that stereo-logic of political interactions, which represents a many-shaped stream of human life in the public sphere. This genetic dependence of politics on political consciousness turns it into a continuous process of objectification of ideas and ideas (the embodiment of certain views and ideas in human actions, the functions of institutions) and their distribution (reflection of political phenomena in certain assessments, doctrines, views) .
Political consciousness is defined as the totality of mental phenomena in which the perception of politics by the individual subject of the political process is expressed. It should be noted that political consciousness, along with values, attitudes, etc., includes the psychological mechanism of their development, the search for their own position.
Political consciousness is closely connected with political behavior, is its preparatory stage, fills political behavior with meaning, and also makes possible political interaction between the subjects of the political process. One can characterize political consciousness as “internal” political behavior that affects a person’s “external” behavior, that is, his activity and activity.
What does political consciousness include? Usually, analyzing political consciousness, two main groups of the components of this phenomenon are distinguished: cognitive and motivational. Cognitive include knowledge of politics, interest in political phenomena and beliefs. To motivational ones are needs, values, feelings and attitudes. In fact, it is quite difficult to single out one or another element of political consciousness in its pure form and unambiguously attribute it to a cognitive block or a motivational one. All these elements are quite closely intertwined and have a mutual influence on each other.
1.2. Political Consciousness Approaches
In science, two points of view on the essence of political consciousness have now developed. So, supporters of the behavioral approach consider political consciousness as a form of rational thinking of a person, all of the totality of his views and ideas that he uses in the exercise of his roles and functions in the sphere of power. In other words, from this point of view, political consciousness appears as a person’s thinking that is developed and as if imposed on politics. With this approach, there are no special requirements for a person to develop his own positions or assess political events. And consequently, the problem of the formation of political consciousness is also removed.
The second, axiological approach refers to political consciousness as a certain level of social thinking. From this point of view, it also includes various ordinary, universal views and values \u200b\u200bof a person, but the essence of a person’s political consciousness is determined by his ability and ability to isolate their group interests, compare them with other group needs, and also see ways and ways to use the state to solve the problems of their implementation. Thus, political consciousness is understood as that level of ideas that a person can rise to optimize his political participation and perform the necessary functions in the sphere of power.
Within the framework of such an approach, it becomes possible to distinguish, based on the ideas that a person uses in the sphere of power, two types of forms of consciousness - political and pre-political (potestas, from Latin potestas - power), guided by different principles and criteria of reflection reality. Political forms of consciousness presuppose a person’s ability to isolate the dynamics of an intergroup struggle for power in social life, the ability to develop an assessment of political relations taking into account the goals of rivals, the means and degree of their achievement within the short-term or long-term development prospects, and the skills to predict the conditions for losing (winning) and other parameters of this interaction. Such views, supplemented by ethical judgments, allow people to realize the limitations of political methods of struggle, to classify themselves as supporters of left or right political movements.
In contrast, pre-political forms of consciousness are based on exclusively moralistic criteria for evaluating political changes, which capture only external social relations and therefore interpret all interests within the framework of emotional and moral preferences: bad / good, fair / unfair. Due to this perception of political reality, on this basis the idealization of political life is constantly developing, painful ethnophobia, aggressiveness, apathy, rebellion are born.
1.3. Functions and ways of formation
Political consciousness as a non-institutional element of politics has three crucial functions:
cognitive (i.e., the function of reflecting the needs of society in the constant updating of knowledge to fulfill and modify the functions of political entities); communicative (i.e., the function of ensuring the conscious interaction of subjects among themselves and with the institutions of power); ideological (i.e., the function of recognizing the interest of subjects in gaining and popularizing their own vision of the political world).
The degree of completeness and the nature of the implementation of these functions may vary significantly depending on the nature of the political processes. For example, in transitional processes, when various actors are actively involved in political life, having their own vision of political changes and future politics, looking for the logic of their power behavior, then, as a rule, the communicative function of political consciousness is weakened, but it is simultaneously activated its ideological function.
Political consciousness, being interwoven into various types of activities, is internally structured, being divided into various elements and formations. Currently, the entire set of spiritual entities serving political activity is mainly studied in the framework of three fundamental structures:
epistemological (cognitive), revealing the differences between the elements of political consciousness in terms of the reliability of their reflection of reality. In other words, the epistemological structure of consciousness suggests that all views of subjects are regarded as knowledge, reflecting various aspects of the world of politics with varying degrees of completeness. In this aspect, they consider: the relationship between political truth and lies, the fallacy of political intelligence and the power of its penetration into the secrets of the political world, the correlation of mythological, utopian and scientific types of reflection, etc .;
axiological, reflecting the spiritual phenomena of the political sphere in terms of their acceptability or unacceptability for the cognizing subject. In other words, in this structure, political representations are interpreted as diverse judgments and assessments that embody one or another value priorities of the subject knowing the politics. Therefore, the same institutions, norms, processes, and other phenomena by one subject (for example, a representative of a democratic worldview) can be evaluated positively, and by others (professing other ideals and principles) negatively. The totality of the differing assessments will fill the entire volume of political consciousness;
sociological (functional), characterizing all the elements of political consciousness in terms of the place they occupy, as well as the role they play in the process of realizing spiritual phenomena in practice. On the one hand, in the framework of this structure, various forms of individual, group, or mass consciousness are described, and on the other, the components of the process of moving the content of human thinking into the sphere of practice, namely: ideals, principles, norms, attitudes, motives, etc. .d. In this sense, political ideology and political psychology are considered as the most generalized elements of political consciousness, each of which plays an important, extremely complex specific role in political life.
The ways of forming political consciousness are complex and contradictory. It would be a great simplification to consider, as Marxists believed, that it was introduced to the masses by the ideological representatives of the party and class. In fact, the formation of political consciousness is carried out in a complex process of critical reflection by people of social reality, generalization and gradual rationalization of sensory representations; awareness of the goals of a party or other political movement, joining already formed assessments and norms of the political process; emotional involvement in the belief in the justice of certain political ideals. Naturally, not one of the named paths guarantees the formation of political views. This is only a prerequisite for the emergence of the ability to carry out imperious group identification. Only practice can give an answer whether a person has elevated his views to the level of political consciousness.
Political consciousness is open to the perception of different experiences, to constantly refine the estimates of past and present, to re-interpret a variety of political phenomena. However, political consciousness cannot be worked out exclusively in a “book way”, without a person entering into real political relations. Political thinking is not a logical, not speculative form of thinking. Its development depends not so much on the increment of special knowledge, but on the variety of forms of political participation of citizens in real processes of political competition. Therefore, the narrowing of opportunities for citizens to participate in the administration of power deadens the political consciousness and at the same time contributes to the degradation of the mechanisms of power.
- Structure of political consciousness
2.1. The characteristic of mass, group and individual political consciousness
From the point of view of the subject in world political science, mass, group and individual political consciousness are distinguished.
In the first dimension, political consciousness is defined as the mass consciousness of society on issues that have relevant political content and are fraught with certain political consequences. In this sense, political consciousness is a special, politicized segment of mass consciousness. Structurally, mass political consciousness includes static (like values \u200b\u200band "general orientations") and dynamic (like mass moods) components. In concrete terms, this is, firstly, the level of people's expectations and their assessment of their ability to influence the political system in order to realize their existing expectations; secondly, the socio-political values \u200b\u200bunderlying the ideological choice (for example, justice, democracy, equality, stability, order, etc.); thirdly, rapidly changing opinions and moods associated with assessments of the current situation, government, leaders, specific political actions, etc. Mass political consciousness determines the type and level of political culture of a society and determines the most typical, mass variants of political behavior. The most common way to identify mass political consciousness is through opinion polls on political issues.
In the second dimension, political consciousness is seen as a generalized consciousness of the concrete - large (social classes, ethnic groups, groups and segments of the population) and small (for example, the political elite, the "government military junta", the political bureau of the ruling party, various lobbying groups such as pressure groups etc.) groups related to politics. Based on the objective place of the group in the socio-political system and the characteristics of group self-awareness, such political consciousness is interpreted as a set of ideas that determine the content, orientation and intensity of the political activity of the group. Structurally, special attention is paid to the political positions and ideological preferences that dominate the group political consciousness. The most common way to identify such a political consciousness is to analyze documents of a political nature emanating from interest groups.
In the third dimension, political consciousness is interpreted as a property and quality of an individual, a “political person,” capable of perceiving politics in one way or another, more or less accurately assessing it, and acting relatively politically on a political basis. Here, the most bizarre interest is the subjective psychological features, typical characteristics and structural components of human consciousness and behavior in politics as a special area of \u200b\u200bactivity, as well as the study of the processes of political socialization of a person, the methods used by an individual to master mass and different group political consciousnesses, as well as to develop own political consciousness on an individual level. An analysis of the mechanisms governing the functioning of political consciousness at this level allows us to distinguish two blocks of components in it: motivational (political needs, values, attitudes, feelings and emotions) and cognitive (knowledge, awareness, interest in politics, beliefs). The most common way to identify such political consciousness is a personality-psychological study, as well as the identification of socio-political personality types in relation to political consciousness.
2.2. Description of the ordinary and scientific-theoretical political consciousness
An important functional area of \u200b\u200bthe study of political consciousness is the study of its everyday and theoretical and ideological forms. Everyday political consciousness is distinguished by a number of specific properties: substantial diffuseness, fuzziness, “vagueness”, confusion and inconsistency, fragmentary, unsystematized, increased emotionality, in many ways a coincidence of its components, spontaneity of formation and development under the influence of everyday ideas and political judgments within the framework of called worldly common sense. At the same time, it is characterized by stability and a special kind of inertia of influence on political behavior: even if it conflicts with the parameters of a theoretically-ideologized political consciousness, ordinary political consciousness can continue to determine such behavior.
In contrast to it, the theoretical and ideologized political consciousness proceeds from strict and harmonious ideas that make up an integral rational system of views and judgments, a certain worldview that explains the political reality surrounding a person on the basis of an ideological concept and comes down to an expanded interpretation of ideology to be recognized spheres of life. Consciousness in the form of ideology, science, propaganda and agitation allows you to establish causal relationships between various social and political phenomena, explain and understand political reality, and orient yourself in political life.
The main bearer of this consciousness is the political elite. Through various institutions, such as communication, initiation, mystery, religion, tradition and tradition, education, education, the media, agitation and propaganda, art, etc., this knowledge is projected onto the population in various ways and with various goals. This can be rallying the population to achieve a universally valid goal, and brainwashing to realize the goals of the adventurous policies of temporary workers in power. On the basis of this, mass co-knowledge is formed, which also includes knowledge at the level of common sense as an understanding of individual or collective experience.
The dialectic of the transition of certain components of political consciousness from one form to another is an essential indicator of socio-political development.
2.3. Political Ideology and Political Psychology
The most influential forms of political consciousness are political ideology (for details, see topic 25) and political psychology.
Political psychology is often more significant for politics than other forms of political consciousness. It is a set of primarily emotional-sensory feelings and ideas of people about political phenomena that take shape in the process of their (people) political behavior and direct interaction with institutions.
The recognition of such a spiritual education directs scientific research to the transition from considering a person as a bearer of certain political functions, statuses, rights and doctrines to an analysis of his specific feelings and psychological mechanisms that govern the behavior of individuals, groups and mass communities. In this respect, it is not the properties of the abstract “political man” that are taken into account, but the specific abilities of individual or group actors for interpersonal (intergroup) communication and cohesion, the peculiarities of their perception of political phenomena, the intensity of expectations, temperament features (sociability, sensitivity, anxiety of consciousness), mechanisms attracting attention and suggestion, imitation and infection, the structure of preferences (sociometric structure) and other mental reactions.
Many scientists spoke about the fundamental importance of political feelings and emotions in politics. For example, Aristotle, believing politics as a form of communication between the state and the citizen, wrote that the rulers "... need to know the mood of the people who raise the uprisings ... what actually causes the political unrest and strife"; Descartes wrote about the six feelings that move a person in the world and power; Machiavelli, who argued that “to rule means to force people to believe,” specifically pointed out that differences in moods are the main cause of “all the turmoil occurring in the state.” Many scientists were convinced of the existence of a “soul of the people” (V. Wund, G. Lebon), described “psychic epidemics” (for example, during revolutions), attacks of popular mob justice, intoxication of people with freedom or thirst for revenge, mass psychoses, etc. .
Political psychology generically characterizes similar (from individual to mass) affects. At the same time, it includes both universal feelings and emotions of a person that are specifically manifested in political life (for example, anger, love, hatred, etc.), and those feelings that are found only in political life (feelings of sympathy and antipathy for certain ideologies or leaders, feelings of subservience to the state, etc.). However, the different role of these feelings and emotions predetermines the dual significance of psychology in political life.
On the one hand, it acts as a spiritual phenomenon that mediates all varieties of political thinking and human behavior, gives shape to all subjective manifestations of his mental and practical activity. In this regard, political psychology is the internal mechanism of the transformation of human ideas that is organically woven into the political process, but at the same time may not play any independent role in human behavior.
The inevitability of the political activity of universal mental ways of interaction and communication of people turns psychology into a kind of universal measure of the whole of politics. In other words, power, state, parties, various political actions of subjects, as well as other political phenomena are presented as one or another form of psychological interaction between people. In this regard, a whole direction has developed in political science, whose representatives absolutize the role of psychological factors. They unequivocally reduce all the causes of revolutions and tyranny, democratization or reform of the state and society to the psychological foundations of the political behavior of people. Even mass political processes are explained by the psychological qualities of an individual or a small group (E. Fromm, G. Allport, E. Bogarus, etc.). In this case, “political man” is understood as a product of personal psychological motives transferred to the public sphere (G. Lasswell). Politics itself is practiced as “a psychological phenomenon in the first place, and then ideological, economic, military, etc.”.
On the other hand, political psychology is a genetically primary, emotionally-evaluative reaction of political consciousness and that specific spiritual factor that has an independent effect on the development of motives and political behavior of a person, differing from the influence, for example, of his rational or value impulses. As J. Heyzinga wrote, “direct manifestations of passion”, creating sudden effects, are capable of “invading political life on such a scale that benefit and calculation ... are pushed to the side”. It is well known that calm feelings, the emotional addiction of people to the situation in the state is the main factor in the stability of the regimes. It is not by chance that, as a number of Russian scientists have noted, “the authorities are not interested in the opinions of society ... but in sentiments,” which “can reach millions. ... The mood that swept the mass is enough for everything to change. ”
- Components of political consciousness
3.1. Political Values \u200b\u200band Attitudes
One of the important components of political consciousness is political values. Compared with other components, in particular with political attitudes, values, as a rule, are considered as more fundamental mental formations, as abstract ideals not related to a specific object or situation, as a kind of person’s idea of \u200b\u200bide -al models of behavior and ideal ultimate goals. Thus, values \u200b\u200bare an assessment of an ideal object in terms of “good”, “bad”, an idea of \u200b\u200bwhat is desirable and necessary.
Values \u200b\u200b- a characteristic of individual consciousness, having a pronounced social nature. In other words, it can be said that political values \u200b\u200bare social-group ideas acquired, adapted by the individual (under the influence of personal interest, situation, etc.). These ideas are assimilated by the person in the process of socialization and form specific political attitudes.
What is the difference between political values \u200b\u200band political attitudes? Values \u200b\u200bare a person's idea of \u200b\u200ban ideal object or a series of objects (for example, a political party in general or freedom of speech), while attitudes characterize people’s attitude mainly to specific objects (this division is, of course, conditional). In addition, values \u200b\u200bhave a significant impact on the formation of specific political attitudes, and therefore can be considered as one of the elements of the settings.
The key role in the relationship between “internal” and “external” human behavior is played by the political attitude: it precedes the action, being its initial stage, the mood for action.
What is a political attitude? In relation to the political level, the settings should be understood as a person’s attitude to certain political objects (institutions of the political system, leaders, etc.), his subjective willingness to behave in a certain way in relation to these objects.
At the same time, it is important to note that the formation of a political setting is significantly influenced by the social context: political settings are an expression of deep socially determined motivational needs, such as feelings of inclusion in the structure of social ties, proximity to the social environment, safety, self-knowledge and self-affirmation, etc.
An important function of the installation, in addition to converting needs and motives into actions, is also an assessment and orientation function: it provides a person with the ability to respond to a situation and external objects (for example, to a situation of an unmet need and objects that contribute or impede its satisfaction ) based on past experience. The installation activates mental processes and practical actions that are adequate to the situation and objects, because it contains a pre-existing situation ready model of these processes and actions. Another essential function of attitudes is their ability not only to objectify needs arising at unconscious depths of the psyche, but also to practically act as relatively independent needs and motives.
Installations are heterogeneous in their origin and objects. In political science and other social sciences, there are various points of view regarding their structure and typology. One of the widespread approaches to typology is based on such a criterion as the nature of the elements that underlie one or another attitude. As a rule, three elements are distinguished in the structure of the installation:
1) cognitive (associated with knowledge about political objects or phenomena and their normative assessment);
2) affective (associated with the feelings experienced by the indie kind in relation to the object);
3) behavioral (a tendency to a certain behavior in relation to the object).
The upper level of the system of attitudes is formed by a system of political and other values \u200b\u200brelated to political phenomena, which characterizes the orientation in a person’s perception of certain political phenomena. The average level is the level of attitudes that characterize the attitude of citizens towards the institutions of the political system and political leaders and groups, as well as the assessment of their place and role in relations with the political system (orientation towards the political system and “their” relations with it). The third level - behavioral attitudes (preparedness for action) in relation to specific political objects in specific conditions.
3.2. Political identity
Closely connected with the concept of “political consciousness” is the concept of “political identity,” which is one of the products of political consciousness. At the same time, political identity is also a product of objective factors, such as, for example, the structure of the political space and its dynamics.
Political identity itself can have a significant impact on the specifics of political consciousness. Therefore, under certain conditions and with certain reservations, it can be considered as a component of political consciousness.
Political identity plays a significant role in the process of formation of the “external behavior” of an individual: with the help of political identity, an individual or group becomes the subject of political relations and the political process.
Political identity should be understood as the identification by the subject of the political process of himself with a certain political position, recognized by other subjects of political relations.
Identity is formed under the influence of three types of phenomena: the psychological activity of the subjects, the system of values \u200b\u200band stereotypes that are internalized by the subjects, and the specifics of the political position (its functional features, as well as the “meaning” attached to it by the participants in the political process) .
Political identity, as well as social, has a group nature. It manifests itself in a feeling of belonging to a group (for example, a party, ideological trend, etc.) and / or as an identification of a group with a political position and recognition of this by other actors in the political process (for example, the struggle of parties for the opportunity to form a government and pursue a certain political course, as well as its subsequent behavior as a ruling party in order to prove its compliance with this position). Political identity and identification are also closely linked with legitimacy and legitimation, because identity and identification presupposes recognition of the legitimacy of the taking of a particular position by other subjects of political relations.
Researchers identify various types of political identity.
By the object of identification with a certain group, one can distinguish the identity of a member of a group of interests, a party, an ideological trend, a resident of a city or region, a citizen of a state, etc. It should be noted that, as a rule, mixed identification prevails in people. So, a resident of Petrozavodsk can feel himself both a communist and a resident of the city. He may feel that he belongs to the Republic of Karelia as a state entity within the Russian Federation and to Russia as a whole. In countries where the state does not possess all the features of the modern, where the process of forming a national-state identity has not yet ended, where there are strong regional, social, cultural contradictions and special traditions, the political identity associated with a feeling of belonging to any social group, region, local settlement, etc.
A rather important issue is the problem of identifying citizens with certain ideological and political directions, representatives of certain ideological trends. Most often, to characterize this identification, the left-right scale is used. This axis is traditionally used to describe the structure of the political space: the positions of various political forces, political preferences of voters, etc.
The division into left and right has a rather long history since the time of the French French bourgeois revolution; these words were used to characterize the ideological position of political forces. The left was usually called those who advocated social change, equality and social justice, the right - those who were supporters of the status quo, opposed the values \u200b\u200bof individualism, private property, and against social equality.
However, in each individual country, the meaning invested in these concepts is somewhat different. These differences are due to historical traditions, for example, the form and content of the main political split. In addition, the semantic content of these concepts left their mark on the features of social conflicts and socio-political problems at certain stages of development.
3.3. Political myths
Appeal to myths in politics in various periods of historical development is characteristic of all states. It is associated with special socio-political and economic conditions that do not allow solving complex problems at the expense of real-life means and force politicians to use the myths to influence the mass consciousness of people and thereby distract them at least temporarily from ripened and difficult to resolve contradictions.
An attempt in theory to present myths as something archaic, which has lost its significance in modern conditions, has not proved itself in practice. Reality proves that some myths disappear, others appear.
Replacing some myths with others is a natural phenomenon for periods of revolution and reformation. It is explained by the fact that political goals are changing radically and require ensuring faith in a particular idea, as well as supporting the relevant political actions on the part of the people.
The further society moves in its development, the more sophisticated and attractive myths become, the more difficult they are to recognize. Myths are increasingly gaining relevance and a specific focus that meets the needs of the times. The myths about the “wise government policy”, “about possible changes for the better,” etc. are used as a strong argument for legitimizing power.
Researchers have shown interest in myths for a long time. E. Cassirer, 3. Freud, A. Rosenberg, J. Sorel, P. Sorokin, A. Camus and others studied this problem. However, the subject of their study was myths related to the field of culture. Of course, many of their arguments are quite applicable to political myths, since both of them have a common nature and similar properties: uncritical, emotionally colored perception of the world, the combination of reality and fiction, the adoption of a myth on faith without first checking and analyzing its contents.
However, political myths are a completely different phenomenon and cannot be considered as an integral part of human nature, the expulsion of which from the life of people would impoverish their existence.
Political myths are characterized by the following specific features:
- they do not appear spontaneously, but are created artificially, consciously and purposefully;
- they are based on the collective aspirations and hopes conscious and cultivated by politicians, assimilated by the mass consciousness;
- they combine two diverse qualities: sober calculation and fanatical faith, allowing politicians to free themselves from all moral barriers;
- they cannot be destroyed with the help of rational arguments, and therefore their assessment as unscientific knowledge is quite legitimate. Political myths at best are half-truths;
- they are characterized by a direct relationship with political reality, they are called upon to justify a particular course of events, to ensure absolute confidence in the correctness of political actions;
- political myths appear much later than artistic myths, which is due to the creation of political structures and social differentiation.
Political myths have a certain contradiction,
On the one hand, they have special stability, which are based on: the interdependence of myth and mass consciousness: the myth is created and supported by the mass consciousness, mass consciousness is based on the myth; the vitality of the elements of primordial consciousness, which has a significant impact on the nature of myth perception and behavior (despite intellectual and cultural evolution); people's interest in politics and inability to discover its mythological nature; awareness of the possibility of finding the meaning of one’s own life through myth. Given the stability of political systems, there are stable (main) myths that require people to have a certain system of values \u200b\u200band behaviors (for example, in the USA such myths are the myth of American democracy and free enterprise).
Political myths, on the other hand, are very dynamic. They can disappear and reproduce again depending on the respective needs.
What causes political myths in our time?
Firstly, the necessary prerequisite for the production and reproduction of myths is the presence of collective mass consciousness, it is through it that collective desires are assimilated, which become the foundation for creating a political myth.
Secondly, for the appearance of myths, an appropriate psychological state of society, the presence of a tense situation, when you can easily believe in persecuted enemies and catastrophe and when you want to believe in it, are necessary.
It is no coincidence that most researchers came to the conclusion that there is a certain pattern - political myths are most easily established in countries where there are crisis situations, and people do not have an adequate level of political culture. In such conditions, any myths are assimilated, including contradictory, absurd and utopian ones.
However, the presence of this regularity does not exclude the affirmation of political myths in countries with a prosperous socio-political situation, where the desires and hopes of people as a collective unconscious, requiring appropriate designation (including myth) act as a prerequisite.
- Political mentality
4.1. Definition and essence
Mentality is a set of images and ideas that guide a person or group of people. The mentality lies between two forms of cognition: rational and religious, interacting with both the first and the second.
At one time, the concept of "mentality" was introduced into social science by representatives of the historical-psychological and cultural-anthropological directions L. Levy-Bruhl, L. Fevrom, M. Blok and some others. In the initial context, the mentality meant the presence of representatives of a given society, interpreted primarily as a national-ethnic and socio-cultural community of people, a certain general “mental toolbox”, a kind of “psychological tooling”, which allows them to perceive in their own way and be aware of their natural and social environment, as well as themselves. Over time, the concept of "mentality" began to be used to describe in a generalized form the properties and characteristics of the organization of social and political psychology of people, in particular, political consciousness and self-consciousness.
Researchers emphasize the relationship between mentality and mentality. The essence of this correlation is as follows: in contrast to mentality, mentality is understood as a partial, aspectual manifestation of the mentality not so much in the mindset of the subject as in its activities related to or resulting from the mentality. Therefore, in ordinary life, one most often has to deal with mentality than mentality, although the latter is more important for theoretical analysis.
There are various interpretations of the political mentality: these are the ideas and beliefs inherent in a certain social community; this is a set of attitudes that suggest an active perception of the surrounding reality both at the level of a separate social community and its subjects; it is also a special kind of construct of the "collective unconscious." The concept of "political mentality" is close to such concepts as "a picture of the political world" and "political consciousness." The “picture of the political world” includes both theoretical knowledge and knowledge arising from everyday experience, as well as the value orientations of political actors. Political consciousness is not only scientific theoretical knowledge, but also representations that arose during the realization of everyday life.
Political mentality is associated with experience, everyday life and includes: 1) ideas about political reality; 2) value political orientations that are both conscious and unconscious in nature; 3) political attitudes, spontaneous predispositions to react in a special way to the political situation.
In a generalized form, the mentality can be considered as a socio-political category, which is a reflection of the socio-psychological state of the subject (ethnic group, social group, person), which develops as a result of the historically long and fairly stable impact of natural-geographical, ethnic, socio-economic and cultural living conditions of the specified subject and manifests itself in various fields of activity. Developing, forming, being developed historically and genetically, the mentality is a difficult to change, stable set of socio-psychological and spiritual-moral qualities and traits taken in their organic integrity that determine all aspects of the life of this community and its constituent individuals.
4.2. Formation Features
Although the mentality is the most stable and stable part of a person’s spiritual culture (layer, class, society, people), he, while retaining in his traditional form universal human ethical and moral norms and requirements, nevertheless, is constantly changing under the influence of changes in public life . And these changes are all the more noticeable, the more decisively and radically changes a person’s life. Therefore, changes in the mentality are most clearly observed at critical stages in the life of society, when the emerging way of life is being redone for centuries. Having the habit of being late in their appearance, they continue to act even when social thought has already undergone radical changes.
From a functional socio-political point of view, a common mentality for a group helps to maintain the continuity of its existence and the stability of the behavior of its members, especially in relatively stable, but especially in crisis situations. The main feature of the latter is such a destructive effect on the mentality, which jeopardizes its integrity and rallying-unifying behavior of people, and, in the case of extreme, critical influence, can lead to destabilization, stratification and violation of generality of the mentality for group members, up to the complete destruction of such a political -psychological community. The anomie resulting from such situations leads to the appearance of numerous forms of deviant (deviant) behavior and acute psychological crises among the representatives of this community, which also entails socio-political consequences: the community becomes capable, first of all, of destructive socio-political behavior, sometimes fraught not only with the destruction of a social structure, but also with the self-destruction of such a community.
In such cases, a special, “crisis mentality” arises as an expression of a certain stage in the collapse of previously stable socio-political formations that determine the behavior of people in the structure of consciousness and in the psyche as a whole. Its main features are a peculiar mosaic, unsystematization, lack of integrity and stability, situationality and continuous variability. In contrast to the pre-crisis, fairly stable and structured mentality, the crisis is streaming, unstable. A mentality of this type, for example, appears in situations of a sharp transition from totalitarianism to democracy, characterized by the emergence of a number of forms of social life - in particular, socio-political pluralism, a multifaceted economy, a multi-party system, etc.
An example of this kind, in particular, is the attempt at various reforms in Soviet society related to the period of perestroika: the main factor in these reforms was to be the "human factor", i.e. a new, changed mentality of the whole society was supposed. The development of events showed, however, that the transformation of the mentality is a rather lengthy and painful process, which is associated, firstly, with the difficulties of abandoning the previous "psychological equipment", with significant inertia and a special kind of "resistance" of the previous mentality, and secondly, with the danger of destructive consequences as a result of its too rapid destruction and, thirdly, with the difficulty of forming a new mentality in the process, in fact, of forced adaptation of people not so much to new conditions as to the upcoming long period of reform. Difficulties of this kind lead to the fact that social transformations are deprived of support from the mass mentality of society and are forced to overcome additional resistance from the psychology of members of society.