An authoritarian regime is characterized by. Political regimes

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

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

In the scientific literature there are two types of political regime:

democratic;
antidemocratic.

Signs of a democratic regime:

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

Signs of an anti-democratic regime:

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

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

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

Typology of political regimes:

Characteristics of political regimes

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

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

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

In large areas, direct democracy is too difficult to implement. Therefore, government decisions are made by special elected institutions. This kind of democracy is called representative, since the elected body (for example, the State Duma) represents the people who elected it.

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

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

Totalitarian political regime

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

Signs of a totalitarian political regime:

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

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

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

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

Totalitarian regimes traditionally include communist and fascist regimes.

Authoritarian political regime

The main features of an authoritarian regime:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Authoritarian regimes include:

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

Democratic political regime

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

Basic principles of a democratic regime of government:

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

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

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

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

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

Democratic regimes include:

presidential republics;
parliamentary republics;
parliamentary monarchies.

Authoritarianism is another model of a dictatorial-type political regime, significantly different from totalitarianism. If totalitarianism presupposes the complete subordination of all spheres of life to the state, then an authoritarian regime allows limited pluralism, if this does not contradict the interests of preserving the existing system.

Authoritarianism occupies an intermediate position between totalitarianism and democracy. What it has in common with totalitarianism is the autocratic nature of power, not limited by laws, and with democracy - the presence of autonomous public spheres not regulated by the state, and the preservation of elements of civil society.

Historical experience shows that authoritarianism arises, as a rule, in countries where there is a change in the social system, accompanied by a sharp polarization of political forces; in countries where there are long-term economic and political crises, overcoming which through democratic means becomes impossible.

The emergency conditions in which authoritarianism arises determine the main goal it puts forward - to restore order in the country and ensure normal living conditions for society. This goal determines the means of achieving it - the concentration of political power in a single decision-making center.

In modern political science, the following main features of authoritarianism are distinguished:

Alienation of the people from power. Its carrier is one person or a group;
Lack of a unified ideology;
Reliance on strength;
Monopolization of politics;
Refusal of complete, total control over society;
The formation of the ruling elite is not democratic, but through appointment from above.

So, authoritarianism - (from French. « autontaire» - imperious, from lat. « autoritas» - power) is a political regime, the basis of which is the dictatorship of one person or group of persons, which does not allow political opposition, but maintains the autonomy of the individual and society outside the political sphere. Consequently, authoritarianism is associated with respect for all other individual rights, except political ones.

If we try to imagine in more detail the characteristic features of an authoritarian regime, we get the following:

autocracy (unity or a small number of power holders). They can be one person (monarch, president, military dictator) or a group of people (military junta, oligarchic group);
unlimited power, its uncontrollability by citizens. At the same time, the government can rule with the help of laws, but it adopts them individually at its own discretion;
reliance on strength. The government has sufficient power resources to suppress the opposition if necessary;
monopolization of power and politics, preventing real political opposition and competition. However, authoritarianism, unlike totalitarianism, allows the existence of a limited number of parties, trade unions and other organizations, but only if they are under the control of the authorities. Often the lack of opposition under authoritarianism is caused not by opposition from the authorities, but by the unpreparedness of society to create political organizations, the lack of need among the population for political self-organization;
refusal of total control over society, non-interference or limited intervention in non-political spheres, primarily in the economy. The state's focus includes issues of ensuring state 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;
recruiting the political elite through co-optation, appointment from above, rather than competitive struggle in elections.

Authoritarian political regimes are extremely diverse. These include both traditional forms: monarchies, despotism, tyranny and relatively new forms: reactionary, conservative and liberal authoritarian regimes. IN reactionary authoritarian regimes(military dictatorial and one-party) with a totalitarian tendency, the mechanism of political power is exercised by the head of state, who is at the same time the leader of the only political party. This regime is characterized by unlimited presidential power and acts as a brake on social progress.

Conservative authoritarian regimes are focused on preserving and maintaining historically traditional, established forms of state and social life. At the same time, political power is in the hands of the head of state (president, prime minister), who controls not only the executive, but also the legislative branch.

Liberal authoritarian regimes are authoritarian regimes with a democratic tendency. Recognizing the basic principles of democracy, the rights and freedoms of citizens, separation of powers, private enterprise, free competition, etc., such regimes require constant state intervention in all spheres of society to create favorable conditions for its further development.

For thousands of years, all authoritarian regimes relied primarily on traditional and charismatic legitimacy. Since the 20th century, nationalist ideology and formal, government-controlled elections have also become widely used for legitimation purposes. Therefore, authoritarianism is often defined as a mode of government with limited pluralism.

The impact of authoritarianism on social development has both weak and strong sides. Weaknesses include the complete dependence of politics on the head of state or a group of senior leaders, and the limited institutions for the articulation of public interests.

At the same time, an authoritarian regime also has its advantages, which are especially noticeable in extreme situations. Authoritarian power has a high ability to ensure political stability and public order, mobilize public resources to solve certain problems, and overcome the resistance of political opponents. A number of countries with authoritarian regimes, including China, Chile, South Korea, and Vietnam, have demonstrated their economic and social efficiency and proven their ability to combine economic prosperity with political stability, strong power with a free economy, personal security and relatively developed social pluralism. All this makes it an effective means of carrying out radical social reforms. Therefore, in modern conditions of post-socialist countries, the most optimal would be a combination of authoritarian and democratic elements, strong power and its controllability by society.

All authoritarian regimes are characterized by both general and specific features, which allows for their differentiation and typology. Let us present a typology of authoritarian regimes proposed by the famous Polish political scientist E. Wiatr.

1. Military rule. The military seizes power. Political activity is either completely prohibited or severely limited. Thus, with the military junta led by Pinochet coming to power in Chile in 1973, all parties were banned.

3. Personalized mode when power belongs to a political leader without strong institutions of power (except the police). Such regimes do not allow the leader to remain in power for a sufficiently long time.

The main distinguishing feature of modern authoritarian systems is that their institutional structure significantly reduces the level of political competition. The essence of authoritarianism is that authoritarian governments are unwilling to take the risks associated with allowing organizations into the “political market.” Michael J. Roskin notes that the philosophy of authoritarianism was summed up by King Henry V in one of Shakespeare's plays: “The duties of every subject are the king's property, but the soul of every subject is his personal property.” But this does not mean that personal freedom is possible under authoritarian regimes, because power, obedience and order are valued more under an authoritarian system of government than freedom, consent and participation of the people. Another distinguishing feature of authoritarianism from totalitarianism, according to the American political scientist J. Kirkpatrick, is that an authoritarian regime allows for some changes, but as soon as a totalitarian regime takes root in a country, no changes are possible.

Totalitarian systems can be viewed as systems of an authoritarian type. However, the totalitarian logic of social life presupposes something more than the simple abolition of political competition. If authoritarianism only limits political pluralism, then totalitarian systems strive to abolish all pluralism in the structure of society, to establish a single, “totalitarian” model of social interaction.

- Autocracy (autocracy) or a small number of power holders. They can be one person (monarch, tyrant) or a group of people (military junta, oligarchic group, etc.).
- Unlimited power, it is not under the control of citizens, while the government can rule with the help of laws, but it adopts them at its own discretion.
- reliance (real or potential) on strength. An authoritarian regime may not resort to mass repression and may be popular among the general population. However, he has sufficient power to, if necessary, use force at his discretion and force citizens to obey.
- Monopolization of power and politics, preventing political opposition and competition. Under authoritarianism, the existence of a limited number of parties, trade unions and other organizations is possible, but only if they are under the control of the authorities.
- Refusal of total control over society, non-interference in non-political spheres and, above all, in the economy. The government is primarily concerned with ensuring its own security, public order, defense, and foreign policy, although it can influence the strategy of economic development and pursue a fairly active social policy without destroying the mechanisms of market self-government.
- Recruitment of the political elite by introducing new members into the elected body without holding additional elections, through appointment from above, rather than competitive electoral struggle.

The richness and diversity of authoritarian political systems, which are essentially an intermediate type between democracy and totalitarianism, have also determined a number of universal, fundamental distinctive features of these political orders.

In its most general form, authoritarianism has the appearance of a system of strict political rule, constantly using coercive and forceful methods to regulate basic social processes. Because of this, the most important political institutions in society are the disciplinary structures of the state: its law enforcement agencies (army, police, intelligence services), as well as the corresponding means of ensuring political stability (prisons, concentration camps, preventive detentions, group and mass repressions, mechanisms of strict control over the behavior of citizens). With this style of government, the opposition is excluded not only from the sphere of decision-making, but also from political life in general. Elections or other procedures aimed at identifying public opinion, aspirations and requests of citizens are either absent or used purely formally.

The persistent disregard for public opinion and the formation of state policy without the involvement of the public in most cases make the authoritarian government unable to create any serious incentives for the social initiative of the population.

The narrowness of the social support of power, which relies on coercion and isolation of public opinion from the centers of power, is also manifested in the practical inaction of ideological instruments. Instead of systematically using ideological doctrines that can stimulate public opinion and ensure the interested participation of citizens in political and social life, authoritarian ruling elites mainly use mechanisms aimed at concentrating their powers and intra-elite coordination of interests when making decisions. Because of this, the main methods of coordinating interests in the development of public policy are backroom deals, bribery, secret collusion and other technologies of shadow rule.

An additional source for preserving this type of government is the use by the authorities of certain features of mass consciousness, the mentality of citizens, religious and cultural-regional traditions, which in general indicate a fairly stable civic passivity of the population. It is mass civic passivity that serves as the source and prerequisite for the majority of the population’s tolerance towards the ruling group, a condition for maintaining its political stability.

However, the systematic use of strict methods of political management and the authorities’ reliance on mass passivity do not exclude a certain activity of citizens and the preservation of their associations of some freedom of social action.

Authoritarian regimes are formed, as a rule, as a result of coups d'etat or “creeping” concentration of power in the hands of leaders or individual intra-elite groups. The type of formation and administration of power that emerges in this way shows that the real ruling forces in society are small elite groups that exercise power either in the form of collective domination (for example, in the form of the power of a separate party, a military junta), or in the form of a regime of autocracy of one kind or another. , including a charismatic leader. Moreover, the personalization of the ruling regime in the guise of one or another rule is the most common form of organization of authoritarian orders.

But in any case, the main social support of an authoritarian regime, as a rule, are groups of military personnel (“siloviks”) and the state bureaucracy. However, while effectively acting to strengthen and monopolize power, they are poorly suited to ensure the functions of integrating the state and society and ensuring the connection of the population with the authorities. The resulting distance between the regime and ordinary citizens tends to increase.

Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that authoritarianism is a political regime in which unlimited power is concentrated in the hands of one person or group of people who do not allow political opposition, but maintain the autonomy of the individual and society in non-political spheres. Authoritarianism is fully compatible with respect for all other individual rights, except political ones.

This political regime occupies an intermediate position between totalitarianism and democracy.

Authoritarianism does not have a single ideology that is binding on everyone; it allows limited pluralism if it does not harm the system. A citizen is not subject to repression if he is not an active opponent of the regime: it is not necessary to support the regime, it is enough to tolerate it (ritual confirmation of loyalty and the absence of a direct challenge); under authoritarianism, the central role is played not by worldview, but by the preservation of power;

unequal degree of regulation of various aspects of public life: under totalitarianism, all spheres of public life are controlled, authoritarianism is characterized by the deliberate depoliticization of the masses, their rather weak political awareness;

under totalitarianism, the center of power is one party (party bodies permeate the entire state apparatus, public organizations and production structures); under authoritarianism, the highest value is the state as the focus of power functions (the idea of the state as a supra-class supreme arbiter);

authoritarian dictatorships prefer to preserve traditional class, estate or tribal barriers that are alien to totalitarianism (during its formation, totalitarianism destroys the previous social structure, breaks traditional social ties, “transforms classes into masses”);

under totalitarianism, systematic terror is carried out legally and in an organized manner; under authoritarianism, the tactics of selective terror are used.

Autocracy (autocracy) or a small number of power holders. They can be one person (monarch, tyrant) or a group of people (military junta, oligarchic group, etc.). At the same time, the government can rule with the help of laws, but it adopts them at its own discretion.

Complete or partial ban on opposition activities. The certain political uniformity inherent in this regime is not always the result of legislative prohibitions and opposition from the authorities. It is often explained by the unpreparedness of society to create political organizations, the lack of need among the population for this, as was the case, for example, for many centuries in monarchical states. Under authoritarianism, the existence of a limited number of parties, trade unions and other organizations is possible, but only if they are under the control of the authorities.

A highly centralized power structure that is focused on one person or group.

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

Lack of opportunities for non-violent change of power.

Using security forces to maintain power. An authoritarian regime may not resort to mass repression and may be popular among the general population. However, he has sufficient power to, if necessary, use force at his discretion and force citizens to obey.

Military regimes- regimes that rely on purely military force, systematic coercion and repression. Military-style authoritarianism has always been common in Latin America, the Middle East, Africa and Southeast Asia. In the period before and after World War II, military dictatorships also formed in Spain, Portugal and Greece. Generally, in a military regime, power shifts to the military according to their position in the military command hierarchy; in this case, traditional political and constitutional institutions are suspended, and all institutions through which public opposition can be expressed, such as parliament and the press, are weakened or banned. In some dictatorships, the army assumes direct control of the government. The classic expression of this variety is the military junta. A junta is a form of collective military rule where everything is decided by a council of command, usually representing three branches of the military (land, sea and air force).

Another form of military regime is a personal dictatorship with military support. In such cases, one person stands out in the junta; Often there is a cult of personality involved (General Pinochet in Chile after the military coup of 1973).

Military regimes most often arise as a result of coups d'état. The reasons for the seizure of power by the military are the crisis of political structures, political instability, fraught with acute conflicts.

The establishment of military dictatorships, as a rule, is accompanied by the abolition of the previous constitution, the dissolution of parliament, a complete ban on any opposition forces, and the concentration of legislative and executive power in the hands of the military council. A distinctive feature of military dictatorships is the wide scope of terrorist activities carried out by the army, police and intelligence services. As a rule, military regimes are unable to ensure economic efficiency. They fail to mobilize the masses to solve social problems, secure support for themselves, and solve problems associated with the institutionalization of power.

Oligarchic regimes are based on the hegemony of the bloc of bureaucracy and the comprador bourgeoisie (Cameroon, Tunisia, the Philippines under Marcos (1972–1985), etc.). Often, oligarchies hide behind the façade of representative government bodies, the functions of which are quite formal, while real power is in the hands of the bureaucracy, expressing its own and corporate interests of the comprador bourgeoisie. At the same time, legislative bodies, since they are created “from above,” do not have mass support and are illegitimate in the eyes of the people. The economic efficiency of such regimes is very limited. Focusing on the export of raw materials and developing raw materials-extracting industries, the bourgeoisie shows virtually no interest in the development of national production. The social result of the policy of the oligarchic bloc is a sharp polarization of the population: differentiation of society into an impoverished majority and a rapidly growing rich minority. Deep discontent covering wide sections of the population serves as a good basis for strengthening the opposition and mass anti-government actions under the leadership of military-political and rebel organizations. The instability of oligarchic regimes results in military coups and civil wars.

Populist regimes are distinguished by the “leadership” of one person, warmly approved and loved by the people. This type of regime is characterized by ideological mobilization of the masses aimed at supporting a national leader. The main means of legitimizing power used by the regime:

manipulation of the plebiscite;

involving the people in politics through mass demonstrations, demonstrations, and support rallies;

exaltation of “little” people;

unity of society in the face of “international imperialism” and cosmopolitan capitalism. The authorities are inclined to seek support from the middle class, which has no sympathy for the oligarchy.

A specific feature of the populist regime - the strengthening of statist (statist) principles in economic, social and spiritual life - reflects the paternalistic expectations of the broadest masses. The basis of the social bloc of the ruling forces is made up of statist-oriented circles and the large industrial bourgeoisie, whose political competitors are, on the one hand, the oligarchy, and on the other, liberal democratic forces. The statist policy of the ruling elite sooner or later results in high inflation and a deep economic crisis. Vivid examples of populism include the regimes of Vargas in Brazil, Nasser in Egypt, and Gaddafi in Libya.

A type of authoritarian regime is bureaucratic authoritarianism. Power under this regime is exercised by a bloc consisting of three political forces: the bureaucracy, in which technocrats occupy a predominant place; the national bourgeoisie, which controls the largest national companies and at the same time connected with international capital, and the military. This regime sets two main goals - the restoration of order and stability in society and the normalization of economic life. To achieve these goals, various methods are used: excluding the masses from political life and reducing social and political activity to a minimum by eliminating civil and political rights; “blocking” all channels of representation of social interests; “recovery” of the economy through “shock therapy”, a sharp reduction in government subsidies in unprofitable sectors of the economy, mass bankruptcy of unprofitable enterprises, active privatization of state property, cuts in social spending; violent suppression of any form of social protest. Therefore, under bureaucratic authoritarianism, the army and intelligence services play an exceptional role. Bureaucratic authoritarianism persists as long as the ruling bloc exists. As the national bourgeoisie strengthens and the economy stabilizes, the political union of the ruling forces begins to disintegrate, the army “goes into barracks,” and a period of liberalization begins. An example of bureaucratic authoritarianism is the Pinochet regime in Chile (70s of the 20th century).

A type of authoritarian regime is theocracy - a political regime in which power belongs to the church. In theocracies, the separation between the private and public spheres of life is violated, since a set of church rules is proposed as a code of conduct - for the personal and political spheres. The head of a theocratic state has virtually unlimited power: this does not require either public consent or a constitution. An example of a theocracy can be considered Iran, led by Ayatollah Khomeini (1900–1989).

Many political scientists have recently begun to distinguish as a separate variety development authoritarianism, the main feature of which is to promote and stimulate social and economic modernization. The degree of authoritarianism is determined by the need to maintain the unity and integrity of society with the growth of conflicts caused by modernization. The state becomes the initiator of changes in economic and social life that occur under its control. Examples of this type of regime can be modern China, South Korea of the 70–80s, Thailand, etc.

Some political scientists identify transitional (hybrid) regimes that combine the features of authoritarianism and democracy. Their varieties include dictatorship and democracy. Dictocracy arises in cases of liberalization without democratization. This means that the ruling elite agrees to some individual and civil rights without accountability to society. Such a regime favors a political minority that controls a significant portion of resources, to the detriment of the political majority. Such a regime has developed, for example, in Kenya and Cote d'Ivoire, as well as in other African states.

Democracy presupposes democratization without liberalization. This means that elections (assuming they are held at all), multi-party systems and political competition are allowed only to the extent that they do not threaten the power of the ruling elite. In fact, the political participation of the majority is seen as a direct demonstration of support for the ruling elite. Examples of such regimes include El Salvador and Guatemala, where since the mid-1980s. elections were held in violation of political and civil rights.

The mode can also be called hybrid delegated democracy. Unlike representative democracy, under this regime the electorate is given the role of delegating rights and powers to the executive branch, limited only by the constitutional term of its powers and existing power relations. A leader who wins the presidential election receives the power to govern the country as he sees fit. The popularly elected president becomes the main spokesman for national interests as he understands them.

In domestic political science since the mid-1990s. Attempts to determine the specifics of the political regime that has developed in modern Russia do not stop. The definition of the regime as a post-communist or post-totalitarian democracy turned out to be quite common. It fixes two features of the modern Russian political process. On the one hand, it is emphasized that Russia has irrevocably moved away from its communist past; in this sense, the term “democracy” is used as an antipode to the concept of “totalitarianism.” On the other hand, it is obvious that the political system that has formed in today's Russia differs significantly from the classical Western models of democracy.

The Russian political regime is distinguished by:

a) lack of a developed and large middle class;

b) lack of consensus in society on basic values;

c) underdevelopment of market relations;

d) exaggerated role of the state and bureaucracy;

e) corruption in all echelons of power;

f) highly limited and minimized role of representative authorities;

g) the actual lack of control of government bodies by society;

h) preservation and reproduction in society of relationships and connections of the patron-client type as opposed to horizontal ones.

Therefore, the concept of “democracy” in its classical form is not applicable to modern Russia. The categories “post-communist” or “post-totalitarian” indicate significant differences between Russian democracy and classical examples.

Some political scientists argue that the political regime in Russia is authoritarian in nature, and define it as oligarchic authoritarianism. There are indeed grounds for such an assessment. First of all, there is undoubtedly a significant influence of the comprador bourgeoisie on the political elite. The national bourgeoisie (entrepreneurs associated with domestic production) do not have serious political weight. Society has little influence on political institutions. The process of articulation and aggregation of interests is intermittent. Therefore, decisions made often meet narrow corporate interests. The result of the policies pursued was a significant stratification of society.

However, this point of view is not controversial. After 1993, the authorities practically did not resort to open political violence, and the country regularly holds elections (albeit according to constantly changing rules).

In this regard, it seems a successful attempt to apply the concept of delegative democracy to the analysis of the political regime in Russia. With this approach, many characteristic features of delegative democracy are revealed in Russian political reality.

A number of authoritarian states (South Korea, Chile, China, Vietnam, etc.) have practically demonstrated their economic and social efficiency, proven their ability to combine economic prosperity with political stability, strong power with a free economy, personal security and relatively developed social pluralism.

Weaknesses include:

complete dependence of politics on the position of the head of state or a group of senior leaders;

the lack of opportunities for citizens to prevent political adventures or arbitrariness;

limited institutions of articulation and political expression of public interests.

At the same time, the authoritarian political system also has its advantages, which are especially noticeable in extreme situations. Authoritarian power has a relatively high ability to ensure political stability and social order, mobilize public resources to solve certain problems, and overcome the resistance of political opponents. All this makes it a fairly effective means of carrying out radical social reforms.

In modern conditions of post-socialist countries, “pure” authoritarianism, not based on active mass support and some democratic institutions, can hardly be an instrument of progressive reform of society and can turn into a criminal dictatorial regime of personal power, no less destructive for the country than totalitarianism. Therefore, the combination of authoritarian and democratic elements, strong government and its controllability by citizens is the most important practical task on the path to constructive reform of society.

a) preservation of the traditional type of society with a focus on familiar and stable forms of social life and authorities;

b) reproduction of client relationships in the social structure of developing societies;

c) preservation of the patriarchal and subservient types of political culture as the predominant ones: the population does not strive to actively influence the political system;

d) the significant influence of religious norms (primarily Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism) on the political orientation of the population;

e) economic backwardness;

f) underdevelopment of civil society;

g) high degree of conflict in developing societies.

The reasons listed above can be divided into socio-economic and socio-cultural. TO socio-economic factors include: economic underdevelopment, immaturity of civil society, preservation of the traditional type of social relations and significant conflict in society. Let's look at them in more detail.

Economic backwardness and weakness of civil society, and therefore the underdevelopment of the mechanisms of self-regulation of society, determine the expansion and increase in the functional load on the state. This means that it is forced to take on those functions that society, due to its weakness, is not able to perform. In addition to its specific functions, the state has to carry out administrative intervention in the economy and its regulation, distribute material goods and economic resources, and support national culture and education. The underdevelopment of market relations and private property place the individual in strict economic dependence on the state.

The authoritarian nature of power is influenced by the presence in non-Western societies of primarily not horizontal, but vertical social connections of the patron-client type, in which the relationship between patron and client is built on mutual obligations. The significant conflict potential in relations between various ethnic, professional, clan, social and other groups with the almost complete absence of institutional forms of conflict resolution predetermines almost the only way to integrate society and maintain its stability - the use of force by the state.

TO sociocultural factors include: the great influence of religion on society and the characteristics of political culture in countries of non-Western civilization. Religion sanctions and reinforces existing social and spiritual norms on which authoritarianism rests. In political science, there is a point of view according to which a certain relationship can be traced between religion and the type of political regime. Thus, democracy arose initially in Protestant and then in Catholic countries. Hence the conclusion is drawn that non-Christian religions are more value-oriented not towards the democratic, but towards the authoritarian nature of relations.

One of the most common types of political systems in history is authoritarianism. According to its characteristic features, it occupies an intermediate position between totalitarianism and democracy. What it usually has in common with totalitarianism is the autocratic nature of power, not limited by laws, and with democracy - the presence of autonomous public spheres not regulated by the state, especially the economy and private life, and the preservation of elements of civil society. An authoritarian regime is a system of government in which power is exercised by one specific person with minimal participation of the people. This is a form of political dictatorship. The role of dictator is played by an individual politician from an elite environment or a ruling elite group.

autocracy(autocracy) – a small number of power holders. They can be one person (monarch, tyrant) or a group of people (military junta, oligarchic group, etc.);

unlimited power, its lack of control by citizens. The government can rule with the help of laws, but it adopts them at its own discretion;

reliance (real or potential) on force. An authoritarian regime may not resort to mass repression and may be popular among the general population. However, he has sufficient power to force the citizens to obey if necessary;

monopolization of power and politics, preventing political opposition and competition. Under authoritarianism, the existence of a limited number of parties, trade unions and other organizations is possible, but only under the condition of their control
authorities;

refusal of total control over society, non-interference in non-political spheres, and above all in the economy. The government is mainly concerned with ensuring its own security, public order, defense, and foreign policy, although it can also influence the strategy of economic development and pursue a fairly active social policy without destroying the mechanisms of market self-government;

recruitment (formation) of the political elite by introducing new members into the elected body without holding additional elections, by appointment from above, and not as a result of competitive electoral struggle.

Based on the above, authoritarianism is a political regime in which unlimited power is concentrated in the hands of one person or group of persons. Such power does not allow political opposition, but maintains the autonomy of the individual and society in all non-political spheres.

Authoritarian regimes are preserved with the help of an apparatus of coercion and violence - the army. Power, obedience and order are valued in an authoritarian regime more than freedom, harmony and popular participation in political life. In such conditions, ordinary citizens are forced to pay taxes and obey laws without personal participation in their discussion. The weaknesses of authoritarianism are the complete dependence of politics on the position of the head of state or a group of senior leaders, the lack of opportunities for citizens to prevent political adventures or arbitrariness, and the limited political expression of public interests.

Democratic institutions existing in authoritarian states have no real power in society. The political monopoly of one party supporting the regime is legalized; the activities of other political parties and organizations are excluded. The principles of constitutionality and legality are denied. The separation of powers is ignored. There is a strict centralization of all state power. The head of state and government becomes the leader of the ruling authoritarian party. Representative bodies at all levels are turning into decoration covering authoritarian power.

An authoritarian regime ensures the power of individual or collective dictatorship by any means, including direct violence. At the same time, authoritarian power does not interfere in those areas of life that are not directly related to politics. Economy, culture, and interpersonal relationships can remain relatively independent, i.e. Civil society institutions operate within a limited framework.

The advantage of an authoritarian regime is its high ability to ensure political stability and public order, mobilize public resources to solve certain problems, overcome the resistance of political opponents, as well as the ability to solve progressive problems related to the country’s recovery from the crisis. Thus, authoritarianism was the desired regime in a number of countries after the Second World War, against the backdrop of acute economic and social contradictions that existed in the world.

Authoritarian regimes are very diverse. One of the types is military dictatorial regime. Most Latin American countries, South Korea, Portugal, Spain, and Greece experienced it. Another variety is theocratic regime, in which power is concentrated in the hands of a religious clan. This regime has existed in Iran since 1979. Constitutional-authoritarian The regime is characterized by the concentration of power in the hands of one party with the formal existence of a multi-party system. This is the regime of modern Mexico. For despotic regime It is characteristic that the top leader relies on arbitrariness and informal clan and family structures. Another variety is personal tyranny, in which power belongs to the leader and there are no strong institutions (the regime of S. Hussein in Iraq until 2003, the regime of M. Gaddafi in modern Libya). Another category of authoritarian regimes is absolute monarchy(Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia).

In modern conditions, “pure” authoritarianism, which is not based on active mass support and some democratic institutions, can hardly be a tool for progressive reform of society. It is capable of turning into a criminal dictatorial regime of personal power.

In recent years, many non-democratic (totalitarian and authoritarian) regimes have collapsed or been transformed into democratic republics or states on a democratic basis. The general disadvantage of non-democratic political systems is that they are not under the control of the people, which means that the nature of their relationships with citizens depends primarily on the will of the rulers. In past centuries, the possibility of arbitrariness on the part of authoritarian rulers was significantly restrained by the traditions of government, the relatively high education and upbringing of monarchs and aristocracy, their self-control based on religious and moral codes, as well as the opinion of the church and the threat of popular uprisings. In the modern era, these factors either disappeared altogether or their effect was greatly weakened. Therefore, only a democratic form of government can reliably curb power and guarantee the protection of citizens from state arbitrariness. For those peoples who are ready for freedom and responsibility, respect for the law and human rights, democracy truly provides the best opportunities for individual and social development, the realization of humanistic values: freedom, equality, justice, social creativity.