Introduction
The main part. The political content of democracy
Doctrine of liberal and pluralisticdemocracy
Concept ofcorporate political science, and other varieties ofproletarian democracy
Conclusions
Introduction
Home contradiction of democracy — a contradictionbetween the idea of democracy as the authority of the people and the impossibilityof its practical implementation. The famous British philosopher Karl Popper believeddemocracy is not only impossible but also irrelevant. Indeed, democracy in its directsense (as direct people power) is impossible even purely technically, because thereare no mechanisms to provide direct narodopravstvo with any government issue atall levels. Moreover, such narodopravstvo inappropriate and in terms of efficiencyof state power, since the absolute majority of people incompetent in dealing withspecific cases of government and society. Moreover, the ruling majority, as peoplein general, under certain conditions may be as a tyrant, as sole despot.
In the western world today many common conceptionof democracy. All of them one way or the extent take into account the nature ofsociety as a post. Most political analysts basedon the fact that the fundamental characteristic of democracy is open decision-makingthrough representative government, that this process at any level is the participationof elected representatives of the people. Democracy, which exist today inthe western world, anyway partly based on the principles of classical liberal democracythat emerged in the eighteenth century. Through a long search found a politicalthought in her form of government that is best designed to combine the freedom,democracy and law.
In an ideal democracy understand that its currentstandard by which assess various forms of democratic governance. It is the startingpoint for the «construction» of various concepts (in theory) and differentmodels (in practice) democratic system. Dependingon how people imagine themselves to the democratic ideal that the most value andwhy accentuate the notion of democracy depends on their commitment to certain conceptsor certain kinds of democracy.
The main part. The political content of democracy
The concept of democracy has been two and ahalf thousand years. In different centuries in the history of political thoughtwas given to the term ambiguous interpretation. With the complication of politicalstratification and pictures on her political doctrines that appeal to democracy,the latter took on various interpretations.
However, there are similarities, that allowto determine the general features that characterize this or that system as democratic,and in particular on quantitative parameters — as more democratic or less democratic.
The classical definition of democracy is inextricablylinked to its etymological origin. The term comesfrom the Greek word, which in turn consists of two words: demos — the people andkratos — the power of government. Born in antiquity, democracy literallymeans «people power» or «the people» [4].
In political science the term «democracy»is used in four senses:
how people power;
as a form of structure of any organization basedon principles of equality of its members, selectivity and decision making by majority(party-Profsoyuzna, youth, etc.);
as an ideal social order and its associatedworldview and value system;
as a movement for democracy (social democratic,Christian democratic, etc.) [2].
However, over the longer one century in thehistory of political thought in the concept of «nation» by different authors,academic schools and concepts fit different meaning. The same can be said aboutthe different interpretations of the mechanism of democracy.comparison of democratic practice to the concepts of democracyshows that the latter, on the one hand, often followed the empirical material, onthe other — have sought to develop an ideal model of democratic system which takesinto account the experience of the historical development of its negative and positiveeffects. Therefore, if you deeply analyze the essence of democracy, it wouldbring under real political system with the real needs of social development.
All this necessitates Typing theoretical modelsof democracy, which in turn resulted in a real practice of political development.One of the first attempts typification of these models was made by Canadian politicalscientist S. McPherson. Explorer problem is the English political scientist J. Held,who in his work «model of democracy» singled out different types of democracy:classical, ancient democracy (democracy in ancient Greece, Athenian democracy),republicanism (republicanism in ancient Rome and the medieval city Republic), theprotective democracy, democracy, developing the theory of mortality of state (Marx);elitaryzm competitive, pluralistic democracy, democratic theory partitsypatornoyi;legal model of democracy [4].
If talking is that the historical genesis ofdemocracy a long and controversial. Born in ancient Greece the idea of democracyis not found there ardent supporters among philosophers. Concept of the brightest representatives of the time ofPlato and Aristotle were based on the opposition between «right» and«distorted» forms of government and power. Democracy they zarahovuvalyto «distorted» form. In the next century as dominated skeptical of democracy.After the French bourgeois revolution, it became clear that democracy is the wayit is more reasonable political and social organization of society, the state government.In the nineteenth century. in a democracy had its ups and downs, but in general,to it was negative. After the publication of the Alexis de Tocqueville's book (1805-1859)«Democracyin America» began to form positive attitudes to democracy. In the early twentiethcentury. practically no time left political doctrines,including Bolshevism and fascism, which is based in their ideological constructionsnot be laid for democracy all sorts. After the 1917 revolution in Russia was proclaimed a dictatorship of the proletariat as a higher type of proletarian democracy.
Great significancein strengthening the modern norms of democracy played Declaration of Human Rightsadopted by the UN (1948), Helsinki Meeting (1975), the human rights movement inpost-socialist countries, the Paris meeting of the heads of European governmentsand adopted its «Charter of Paris for a New Europe» (1990) [5, 421].
One of the basic principles of democracy isthe principle of majority. Majority rule is the essence of the doctrine of popularsovereignty, under which the people declared source of supreme power in a democraticsociety. Democracy presupposes free activities of all political parties, socio-politicalassociations, organizations, movements, acting within the law. For democratic governmentcharacterized by multi.
An important attributeof democracy — the principle of separation of powers in the system of government.According to this principle of legislative, executive andjudiciary are separate and quite independent of one another. However, they constantlyinteract and counterbalance one another. The indispensable condition of democracyis transparency of all activities of state bodies, political parties and publicorganizations. The independent status of the media — is also an attribute of a democraticsociety.
In a democratic society a significant role inthe system of government is given to local government, is a rational division ofcompetence and powers of various levels of government. That local government closestto the people and of its action depends on the daily lives of citizens. Therefore,the degree of democratic society is measured by the fact that the status and scopeof local authorities, as well as its level of accessibility for people [1, 125].
In our work we are not able to examine in detailall the concepts of democracy. Therefore, we will cover only those concepts thatare associated with the theory and practice of modern democracy that goes back tothe XVII-XVIII centuries.Doctrine ofliberal and pluralistic democracy
In public consciousness of democracy is equatedwith democracy. This form of government in terms of the mechanism of expressionof popular sovereignty serves as a direct and representative democracy. The firstinvolves the direct expression of associations of individuals — government officials- or those of the life of this association, such as the referendum. Apparatus ofpower will take the role of organizer and guarantor of the general will. It is determinedby people power takes the political decision, specifying and protecting the publicwill. Representative democracy assumes that the maindecisions taken by the authorized representatives of the People's Assembly (parliament,the National Assembly, the Congress) are elected government officials. Thisrepresentative institutions, their activities are controlled by associations [7,215].
Different theoretical solution contradictionsbetween the ideal of democracy and its reality is meaning the existence of diverseconcepts of democracy. Historically, the first suchconcept and form of its practical implementation was a classical liberal democracy,which is the most comprehensive measure is based on the principles of democracy(equality, freedom, popular participation in state government, majoritarism, civicconsensus, elected government, protection of minorities).
The main idea of liberalism — the idea of individual freedom. According to her liberal democracy to the forefrontof putting civil liberties like privacy of an individual's independence from politicalpower. Ensuring civil freedom is based primarily on the implementation of individualrights and freedoms of the individual: the right to life and personal immunity,freedom and resistance to violence, property rights and free economic activity,freedom of private life — the inviolability of home and privacy of correspondence,freedom of movement and choice accommodation and so on. But the presence of individual political rights and freedoms gives him theopportunity to participate in the exercise of state power to influence the stateto meet the personal and common interests and needs.
Liberal democracy does not deny the will ofthe people directly, but prefer representative democracy that allows the most completeway to combine the ideal of democracy and the possibility of its practical implementation.Accordingly, democracy understood as a responsible government, government can makedecisions and bear responsibility for them. The mainelements of representative democracy, constitutionality and defined limits of politicaldomination. So called liberal democracy still a constitutional democracyin which the will of the people shown do not fully and openly, directly, but delegatedto representatives who are in the process of political decision-making that willexpress themselves and under own responsibility.
The essence of liberal democracy in concentratedform was reflected in the proposed U. S. President Abraham Lincoln's formula: governmentof the people, by the people, for the people (government of the people, electedby the people and for people).
Characterized by emphasis on individual freedomof liberalism leads to social polarization of society, the aggravation of classstruggle, generates political instability, etc. [6].
Designed to overcome the shortcomings of liberalismconcept of a pluralistic democracy (from Lat. Pluralis — plural) as a kind of modernliberal democracy. Such a democracy is based on consideration of all the plurality,diversity of social interests. The main feature is its open nature of decision-makingthrough representative government. Adoption of theauthorities or those making under such conditions is the result of interaction andcompetition among various political forces, especially political parties and diverseinterest groups.
The concept of a pluralistic democratic politicalsystem of society is considered as a mechanism that balances the interests of class,ethnic, demographic, professional, regional, religious and similar groups and organizations.Each of them affects the policy-making, but none have a monopoly. There dribnennyapolitical power between state and public institutions. Various social interests, the interests of workers zokremai so closely considered.If it is any social group believes that what politics does not correspond to itsinterests, it has the ability to pursue an open discussion of relevant issues andtake the necessary political decisions.
concept democracypolitical proletarian
The concept of a pluralist democracy was themost powerful in the 60's — early 70's of XX century. At first glance, pluralisticdemocracy — a democracy for all. However, it is notdevoid of some drawbacks. One of them is that for the interests and needsof certain social groups such as youth, women or the poorest, a real equal opportunitiesfor their participation in the exercise of state power to these groups to providecertain benefits and privileges. But fixing any privilegesand benefits for these or those social groups contradicts one of the basic principlesof democracy — equality of all citizens before the law. Expansion of actual equalityjeopardizes a fundamental principle of democracy as freedom.
In addition, the concept of pluralistic democracyabsolyutyzuye opportunities for political representation of social interests throughpolitical parties and organizations as diverse interest groups. Ordinary membersof parties and NGOs really play a secondary role in them, and the main decisionsadopted by their leaders, and not always for the same rank and file members.
Finally, the facility itself is unreal conceptionof pluralist democracy that the whole population will be represented in the partiesand interest groups, these associations are equal in their political influence.The greatest influence on policy in countries with developed market economies havea variety of business entities, especially national, sectoral and cross-industryassociations. They have tremendous material and financial resources to influencethe authorities. Appreciable influence on politics and trade unions have, whichare the most massive organizations of employees.
One of the attempts to get out of the contradictionsof the theory of pluralist democracy is the theory formulated by R. Dahl polyarchy- a multiplicity of power centers, and hence the elite groups in a democratic society.This implies that instead of a single center of sovereign power should be pluralityof such centers, none of which can not be fully sovereign. Democratic is a systemwhere the government dispersed power in contrast to the few — the dictatorship.
R. Dahl believes that the term «democracy»is suitable only for the characteristics of an ideal society. Valid state systemthat approaches the ideal state — a polyarchy. Of course, such a system is not withoutfaults compared with democracy. But it is better than most unlimited authority orpower elite. Overall, according to Robert Dahl, Democracy and autocracy is moreor less theoretical education. In final form, they actually never been implemented.
Polyarchy doctrine comes from the fact that,according to the requirements of liberal democracy, consensus and political equalitymust be active and such developing countries. To do this, every citizen should havean inalienable right to formulate and demonstrate publicly whom he prefers. Thatis what increases the possibility of guaranteeing equality in the governance ofsociety.
Polyarchy enhances and complements the principlesof democracy. Office of the majority is due to the improvement of people's representation,stronger guarantees of minority rights, the use of electoral and other devices tocontrol the majority of representatives, eliminating various kinds of politicalinequality [4].Concept of corporate political science,and other varieties of proletarian democracy
Growing political influence of business associationsand trade unions led to the emergence of the concept of corporate democracy. Corporation(from Lat. Corporatio — Association) — a collection of individuals united throughguild, caste, commercial and other interests. In Western countries known corporations,including joint stock companies, trade associations and organizations of local authorities(municipalities). According to the concept of corporate democracy policy shouldbe made with the state and the limited number of most popular and influential organizations,especially business associations and trade unions as to express the interests ofthe general population. This policy was called the policy of social partnershipand tripartism. In many Western countries created based on representation of entrepreneurs,trade unions and the state special trypartystski bodies that define the basic parametersof socio-economic strategy of the state.
The content of the concept of corporate democracyis close to the concept of pluralistic democracy. The main difference between themis that pluralistic democracy involves political representation of all the diversityof social interests, and corporate democracy is a limit of only the most powerfulunions. If proponents of pluralist democracy believe that the optimal impact onnational policies have a varied group of competing interests, corporate supportersof democracy recognize such an impact only a limited number of organizations thatdo not compete, but cooperate under state control. Under such conditions, corporateacquire exclusive rights to political representation, not only members of theseassociations and other groups. Given that in Western countries more than half ofemployees are not members of trade unions, it means that they have their own politicalrepresentation in corporate democracy.
The main feature of the Marxist notion of democracyis to consider it in close connection with the material conditions of society andits class structure. Marxism believes that the class society is an expression ofdemocracy dictatorship economically ruling class. Under exploitative system — slave,feudal and bourgeois — served as the institutions of democracy and serve the class,in whose hands were and are the means of production: slave, feudal and bourgeois.
Marxism at the same time believes that bourgeoisdemocracy is the most developed historical type of democracy is exploitative societythat put an end to absolutism and formally declared the most important rights andfreedoms of individuals.
The highest type of political democracy, Marxismrecognizes socialist or proletarian democracy. The main difference from the bourgeoissocialist democracy is seen that it is the power of most of society — workers (thedictatorship of the proletariat), directed against the exploiting minority, whilebourgeois democracy is the power a small minority — the owners of the means of production.Socialist democracy is based on public ownership of means of production, servingthe economic basis for establishing social equality of people and their true freedomas liberation from capitalist exploitation. It is believed that unlike the bourgeoisdemocratic socialist democracy is not only proclaims the freedom of political andsocio-economic rights, but also guarantees them safe. Along with the representativedemocracy of socialism by using different forms of direct democracy, which findsexpression in the activity of NGOs in the system of control, in practice, most publicdiscussion of draft laws, etc.
The real socialism established by authorityof the people do not, and absolute power of one political party, which is due tonon-democratic construction of the party is turning into absolute power of partyleadership. Socialist democracy denies the separation of powers. Executive authoritiesthough popularly elected, but under strict party control [6].
Besides these, in democratic theory, there arealso other concepts of democracy: market, plebistsytarna consensus (the community)and others. A separate group is elitist conception of democracy as an attemptto combine incompatible at first glance, the theory of democracy and theory ofelites.
Since concordant pluralisttheory of democracy elitist conception of democracy. The political elite is definedas an independent, privileged group or set of groups directly linked to dominationor pressure on the government. Predecessors of modern democracy were elitist Plato,Karleyl, Nietzsche and others. Modern classical conceptof the elite were formulated in the early twentieth century. V. Pareto, G. Dep, P. Michels. The most common traits sharedby elite theory are:
division of society into elite and mass;
interpretation of political inequality as thebasis of social life;
knowledge of powersupplies due to the «chosen minority;
consideration of social history as a set ofcycles, characterized by the domination of certain types of elites.
Thus, elitist concept of democracy says thatthe ideal of democracy in modern times (still) not implemented substantially. Thepeople representing political power in the ruling elite [2].
One of the varieties of elitism adversarialmodel is the theory of democracy plebistsytarnoyi M. Weber. According to the logicof reasoning veberskyh representation in parliament of individual independent deputiesin the development of liberal democracy is gradually being replaced by politicalparties. The latter, in turn, produce a single direction and establish strict discipline,becoming a bureaucratic organization. Power remains in the parties in those whoregularly worked in the party apparatus and eventually concentrates in professionalpoliticians. This party sets the machine control mechanism over their supporters,including here and members of parliament. The result is a system where parties dominateparliament and the leaders dominate the party. „This circumstance, — noted M. Weber — is of particular importance for theselection of leaders of the party. Becomes the leader of only one particular andacross the head of parliament who is subject machine. In other words, the creationof such machines means domination plebistsytarnoyi democracy“ [1, 218]
As an alternative against the elitist conceptionof democracy is the theory partitsypatsiynoyi democracy. By „partitsypatsiyeyuin western political science understood all kinds of participation (voluntary andinvoluntary) in political life to influence and pressure on decision-making power.The authors interpret the concept of the necessity of most people not only in electioncampaigns, referendums, but in other kinds of political process, including the formationof power groups and the nomination of political leaders. German political scientistsHuhhenberher B. and D. Nolen partitsypatsiynoyi consider the theory of democracyas one of the following critical democratic theory in its center — an analysis ofpolitical reality from the perspective of the ideal of individual self-determinationand autonomy of the individual targeting [5, 423].
The concept of democracy is closely adjacentpoliarhichnoyi communitarian model of democracy, ie a model of democratic developmentin several countries, different polysyllabic nature of social structure in whichsociety is divided into many segments. This model of society differs by two mainfeatures: vertical segmentation of the population into different linguistic, ethnic,racial or ideological community; institutionalize the process of interaction, whichis at the elite communities.
Theoretical model of communitarian democracywas developed by American researcher A. Leyphartom Dutch origin. Based on empiricalresearch in comparative politics political experience of some countries (Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands and Switzerland) AG Leyphart questioned the typology of politicalsystems G. Almond, associated mainly with homogeneous or heterogeneous cultures.If Anglo-American system is characterized by uniformity, European continental systemsdiffer fragmentation of political culture. The latter may be a factor in politicalinstability in the society [3, 284].
In the kaleidoscope of political theories ofdemocracy there is also the economic theory of democracy. It is based on image rightsfully informed, talented and act rationally to achieve maximum benefit for themselves.Economic democracy — a realm of market relations, which reduced the political andpower relations. Liberal-minded theorists and politicians connected tie togetherdemocracy and market. American President Bill Clintoncalled modern western democracy market democracy.
Thus, the analysis of contemporary theoreticalconcepts of democracy shows the diversity of approaches to the definition of democracy.Each direction has a conceptual and normative character, that characterizes thisor that kind of democracy in the ideal. However, theoretical analysis based on actualexperience — an empirical approach [7, 218].
Conclusions
Democracy — the most civilized and developeda political profile. Most modern population of the world deeply and consciouslyperceived support democratic values and ideals. To develop, democratic forms ofpolitical life needed social, economic and cultural base. Without them in the politicalprocess is undemocratic forms. This is — first, a high level of economic development,diversity of ownership, the presence of a developed market, competitive producers.In fact, democracy itself resembles a political market with its competition of ideas,programs and positions. Second, a high degree of political culture. Culture andsociety in general, especially in political life, is a powerful catalyst for democraticprocesses.
When all possible deviations from the trendamong leading public increasingly confirms the understanding of the universalityof the principles and values of liberal democracy. The realization that democracy- is not only the traditional set of principles of parliamentarism, pluralism andmultiparty system. This is the first real democracy. Last comes only when democracy grows from the bottom, not imposed from above,when a deputy for each of imperative mandate is actually united by common interestsgroup of people — self-governing collective labor, government committees neighborhoodassociation of consumers, trade unions, etc. All this requires an appropriate political and civic culture in particular,genuine civil society and many other conditions which provides a lot of effort bythe political forces of national revival.
With Ukraine, here as in other post-totalitarian, post-communist countries, the strengthening ofliberal democracy — taking into account national traditions — a long and difficultLiberal democracy is impossible without the development of an appropriate politicalelite to ensure its interaction with the institutions of democracy.
Discrepancy betweeninstitutional and procedural areas of popular culture, society or it shape the politicalvalues as the periodic crises in developed democracies, and the inconsistency andcontradictions of democratization in transitional societies. Similarly, many existingmodels of democracy or to emphasize some of the above aspects of democracy, or oncertain values (eg value of political competition J. Schumpeter).