Difference between democracy and liberalism. Features of certain types of democratic regimes

In Russia, liberal democracy has never been realized. According to the rating "Freedom in the World", the USSR in 1990-1991. and Russia in 1992-2004. were considered partially free countries, but since 2005 Russia was included in the list of not free countries.

In Russia itself, part of the population mistakenly associates the doctrine of liberal democracy with the ultranationalist LDPR party. Democracy generally attracts support, but most prioritize social rights over liberal ones. Chudinova I.M. Political myths // Socio-political journal. 2011. No. 6

Advantages

First of all, liberal democracy is based on the rule of law and universal equality before it. Therefore, it is under democracy that the highest level of law and order is ensured.

Further, liberal democracy ensures that the government is accountable to the nation. If the people are dissatisfied with the government's policy (due to corruption or excessive bureaucracy, attempts to circumvent laws, mistakes in economic policy, etc.), then the opposition has a high chance of winning the next elections. After her coming to power, the most reliable way to hold out is to prevent the mistakes of predecessors (dismiss corrupt or ineffective officials, observe laws, attract competent economists, etc.) Thus, liberal democracy ennobles the desire for power and forces the government to work for the good of the nation. This ensures a relatively low level of corruption - which under an authoritarian regime can only be achieved at the cost of an extremely harsh dictatorship.

Since politically important decisions are accepted by elected representatives - professionals from the political elite - this frees the people from the need to spend time studying and discussing a variety of government issues. At the same time, a number of countries (Switzerland, Uruguay) and regions (California) are actively using elements of direct democracy: referendums and plebiscites.

Constitutional protection against majority dictatorship is an essential asset of this regime and distinguishes it from other varieties of democracy. In fact, every person on some grounds belongs to a certain minority, therefore, in conditions of full submission to the will of the majority, civil rights are suppressed. In a liberal democracy, however, this has the opposite consequences, since it forces the current majority to view itself as a temporary coalition and therefore pay attention to the point of view of the current minority.

Thanks to the fact that the minority is able to influence the decision-making process, liberal democracy provides protection of private property for the wealthy, social protection for the poor, and smoothing out cultural, ethnic and religious conflicts. The most democratic countries in the world are characterized by the most low level terrorism. This effect may even extend beyond the region: statistics show that since the late 1980s, when many countries in Eastern Europe took the path of liberal democracy, the total number of military conflicts, ethnic wars, revolutions, etc. in the world decreased sharply.

The ability to change a government or its policies peacefully and without violence contributes to stability and certainty in society. This is facilitated by the fact that democracy forces the government to work openly, to communicate its strategic goals and to report on the current measures to achieve them. Freedom of speech also allows the authorities to be better informed about the real state of affairs in the state.

The consequence of liberal democracy is the accumulation of human capital, low inflation, less political and economic instability, and relatively low government interference in the activities of entrepreneurs. A number of researchers believe that these circumstances (in particular, economic freedom) contribute to economic recovery and an increase in the level of well-being of the entire population, expressed in GDP per capita (eng.). At the same time, despite high rates of economic growth, several liberal democratic countries are still relatively poor (India, Costa Rica, Estonia), and a number of authoritarian regimes, on the contrary, are flourishing (Brunei).

Research also shows that liberal democracies are more efficient in managing available resources when they are limited than authoritarian regimes. Thus, liberal democracies are characterized by higher life expectancies and lower child and maternal mortality rates, regardless of the level of GDP, income inequality or the size of the public sector.

The democratic regime of government has become widespread in many countries of the world. The movement towards democracy is an objective trend in the development of human society. There are many definitions of democracy. Here are some of them:

Juan Linz:"Democracy ... is the legitimate right to formulate and defend political alternatives, which are accompanied by the right to freedom of association, freedom of speech and other fundamental political rights of the individual; free and non-violent competition of the leaders of society with a periodic assessment of their claims to govern the society; inclusion in the democratic process of all effective political institutions, ensuring conditions for political activity for all members of the political community, regardless of their political preferences ... Democracy does not require a mandatory change of ruling parties, but the possibility of such a change should exist, since the very fact of such changes is the main evidence of the democratic nature of the regime. "

Ralph Dahrendorf:"A free society maintains differences in one hundred institutions and groups to the level of truly enabling divergence; conflict is the lifebreath of freedom."

Adam Przeworski: "Democracy is such an organization of political power ... [which] determines the ability of different groups to pursue their specific interests."

Arendt Liipjart:"Democracy can be defined not only as government through the people, but also, according to the famous formulation of President Abraham

Lincoln as management in accordance with popular preferences... democratic regimes are characterized not by an absolute, but by a high degree of responsibility: their actions are in relatively close accordance with the wishes of the relative majority of citizens over a long period of time. "

Roy Makridis:"Despite the growing interdependence between the state and society, as well as the growing activity of the state (especially in the economy), democracy, in all its varieties, from liberal to socialist, pays special attention to the separation of the spheres of activity of the state and society."

You can easily continue the list of such definitions, but in modern political science, democracy acts as a synonym for democracy, the form of the state, the form and principle of organization of political parties and social movements, political regime, political worldview and political value.

Democracy is democracy, a form of government of the state, characterized by the recognition of the people as a source of power, equality of citizens, election of government bodies, respect for the rights and freedoms of citizens.

In the history of politics, you can find many democratic forms of organizing public life: Athenian democracy in ancient Greece, republican Rome, urban democracies of the Middle Ages, including the Novgorod Republic, parliamentary forms of democracy in England, democracy in the North American states, etc. Modern democracies inherit many of the traditions of historical democracies, but at the same time differ significantly from them.

All modern theoretical models of democracy can hardly be described.

Conceptual democracy has given rise to a huge variety of options: according to some sources, we can talk about the existence of 550 "subtypes" of democracy. In fact, the modern theory of democracy breaks down into a set of internally related concepts, generalizations, classifications, models of democratic processes, institutions, behavior and relations. Summarizing the various approaches, we can single out a number of models that most often come to the attention of researchers. Note that all the variety of theoretical models of modern democracy, if we talk about their ideological foundations, one way or another gravitates towards two main theoretical paradigms formed by the classics of political thought of the 17th-19th centuries: we are talking about liberal-democratic and radical-democratic theories (Table 8.2).

Table 8.2

Signs of Liberal Democratic and Radical Democratic Theories of Democracy

Liberal Democratic Theory	Radical Democratic Theory
Morally autonomous individual	Social person
Personal sovereignty	Sovereignty of the people
Society as a sum of individuals	Organic society
Everyone's interest	General interest
Pluralism of interests	Unity of interests
Freedom of man	The primacy of the common good
The primacy of human rights	Unity of rights and obligations
Representative democracy, elections	Immediate democracy
Free mandate	Imperative mandate
Separation of powers	Separation of functions
Subordination of the minority to the majority with the protection of the rights of the minority	Submission of the minority to the majority

Both theories arise as an attempt to solve the so-called Hobbes problem, the essence of which can be briefly defined as follows: a person, passing from the state of "war of all against all" (the state of nature) to the contract on state and public life (the social state), entrusts himself to the power state, since only it can guarantee compliance with the treaty. How to preserve human freedom in a public state?

This question is where the "Hobbes problem" knot lies. Consequently, the theoretical task was to substantiate the boundaries of the state's activities that ensure the preservation of human freedom.

Representatives of the liberal-democratic and radical-democratic directions considered man to be a rational being, but interpreted this anthropological premise of democratic theory in different ways. They were unanimous in the interpretation of the origin of the state from the agreement adopted by reasonable individuals, but they distinguished the source of this agreement. They defended human freedom, but they understood it in different ways and interpreted its foundations in different ways.

V liberal democratic concepts human freedom meant his moral autonomy to rationally determine his life and the rules of communication with other people, which should not violate his individual rights. The state, which arises on the basis of a contract between people as morally autonomous individuals, is limited by law, i.e. an equal external measure of freedom for each individual. Thus, this democratic paradigm was based on the premise of an autonomous individual. At the same time, society was interpreted as a set of free individuals, and public interest - as the interest of all. Private life is valued here more than public life, and law is higher than public good. The pluralism of individual interests and the interests of the emerging associations of individuals (civil society) was accompanied by a conflict between them, the resolution of which was possible in the form of a compromise. In principle, the state cannot and should not interfere in the process of communication between autonomous individuals and their voluntary associations. It was called only when the intervention of an arbitrator was required. Liberal-democratic conceptions admit only a "limited state", a "night watchman" state. Such a state is impossible without an agreement between people, and representatives of the state are elected by the population. Consequently, great importance is attached here to the electoral process and representative democracy, in which the elected representatives are bound only by their conscience and constitution (free mandate). Freedom in such a state is limited only by law, and the state itself (so that there is no usurpation of state power by individual bodies or individuals) should be built on the principle of separation of powers. The principle of a majority vote, lawful in voting, is complemented by the principle of protecting the rights of the minority.

In accordance with radical democratic concepts a rational person could exist autonomously only in a natural state, while in a social state he becomes a social being, i.e. rationally accepting the values of society. The state, which arises on the basis of a treaty, is guided by the values of society, the bearer of which is the people, it is limited by the "sovereignty of the people." Freedom of a person in a social state can be ensured only when the people are free, having the will to change the laws of the state.

The liberal-democratic and radical-democratic paradigms are presented here only in the most general form, but they allow us to see behind the external diversity of existing modern models democracy, unity in its origins. Many theoretical constructions develop certain provisions of the presented paradigms. Western political scientist D. Held notes that democratic regimes can be correlated with the following models:

protective (protecting) democracy, which is described by T. Hobbes, J. Locke, C. Montesquieu. Such a democracy considers the main reason for its own existence to be the protection of citizens - both from the arbitrariness of the authorities and from the lawlessness of individuals. The separation of the state from civil society and non-interference of the authorities in many spheres of life, primarily in the economy, are important for this model of democracy;
developing democracy(J.-J. Rousseau). J.-J. Rousseau believed that democracy is not only a state mechanism, but also develops and improves people through the direct participation of all citizens in political life. He was a staunch opponent of factory production and a supporter of small property, which, in his opinion, should be evenly distributed among all citizens, each of whom would become responsible for his own business, which would contribute to his development;
model of "withering away of the state"(K. Marx). K. Marx saw the liberation of people in the cessation of economic exploitation. Since the system of exploitation is supported by the state, the task of building "true democracy" (and the young K. Marx was a democrat) is to create conditions for the gradual "withering away" of the state. These conditions - the abolition of private property, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, complete social equality, the election of all organs of power - can be created as a result of a social revolution;
"competitive elitism"(M. Weber, J. Schumpeter). The creators of this model of democracy spoke about the selection of the most gifted and competent elite, capable of both legislative and administrative activities. Democracy, according to M. Weber and J. Schumpeter, prevents the appropriation of power by one of the struggling, "competing" groups within the elite. This model provides for a strong executive power, control of the ruling party over parliament, and a competent bureaucracy independent of the political leadership. The role of the masses is reduced to participation in elections;
"pluralistic "democracy(D. Truman, R. Dahl). This model presents society as an aggregate of a large number of small groups, each of which seeks to influence the decision-making process. The government acts as an intermediary in the process of competition between these groups. Therefore, she sees the main asset of democracy in the protection of the rights of minorities and in the impossibility of any elite group to constantly remain in power. The masses can interfere in the political process, but they do it rather passively (for example, only in elections), leaving the government and leaders of interest groups to solve the problems of society;
"legal" democracy(F. Hayek, R. Nozick, "New Right"). It is understood as a form of government that protects the freedom and power of the majority. Yo, in order to ensure a wise and just government, this principle must be limited to placing the law above the will of the people, i.e. build a legal state, separate civil society from state institutions and reduce, on the one hand, bureaucratic state regulation, and on the other, the activity of trade unions in the economy that regulates wages to a minimum. According to F. Hayek, peoples find themselves on the road to slavery when they replace democracy with collectivism;
participatory democracy(N. Poyalantsas, K. Patman, B. Barber, "New Left"). This is a participatory democracy, in which the authors of this model see the main factor of competent, motivated problem solving, combining individualism and collectivism. Participation doesn't just mean voting. It consists in the creation of self-government at the local level, including in production, in the democratization of political parties and social movements, institutions of power. This model is based not so much on the rule of law as on constant change and democratization of the whole society.

Liberal regime. A limited democratic liberal political regime provides people with freedom of personality, conscience, speech, press, and ensures the safety of citizens. The management of society through laws, and not through people, historically goes back to the ancient principle of the equality of all before the law. It was embodied in the political regimes of England in the 17th century. and was widespread in Europe during the Enlightenment and was especially evident in American constitutionalism, which added a decisive support to the government in the form of legal control over the implementation of laws. Now liberal regimes in their purest form exist in Japan, Israel, Greece, in some countries of Latin America. In general, liberalism and democracy are close in meaning, as are totalitarianism and authoritarianism. But for a liberal regime, the category of "freedom" is more suitable (to look for work and leave it, buy and sell goods, including labor, earn and spend money, elect and re-elect the government, form various associations), while for a democratic regime the main category is "justice ". Although democracy attracts people to government through fair elections, some believe that electoral participation should be separated from government participation. The political elite should govern the society, but it can win the right to do so only in free and open competition.

Thus, a democratic regime is a way of functioning of power, based on the recognition of the people as a source of power, on their right to participate in state and public affairs, on endowing citizens with the widest range of political rights and freedoms.

Democracy is divided into direct, plebiscite and representative, depending on how the people participate in government, who and how performs power functions.

In a direct democracy, all citizens themselves are directly involved in the preparation, discussion and decision-making. Such a system can only exist with a relatively small number of people. The first direct democracy in the world was carried out in Ancient Athens, when important decisions were made at general meetings of 5-6 thousand people.

The difference between plebiscite and direct democracy is that direct democracy involves the participation of citizens at all stages of the process of exercising power - in preparing, making political decisions and monitoring their implementation, while in a plebiscite democracy the possibilities for political influence of citizens are relatively limited. For example, in referendums, citizens can approve or reject a particular draft law or other decision, which is usually prepared by the president, government, party or initiative group. Opportunities for the participation of the bulk of the population in the preparation of such projects are very small. Representative democracy is the most common form of political participation in modern society. Its essence lies in the fact that citizens elect their representatives to government bodies, who are called upon to express their interests in making political decisions, laws and implementing social, cultural and other programs. Electoral procedures vary from country to country, but elected officials in a representative democracy hold office on behalf of the people and are accountable to the people in all their actions.

Democracy emerges and persists under certain conditions. First, it is a high level economic development... Studies conducted by S. Lipset, D. Jackman, D. Kurt and others have convincingly proven that stable economic growth ultimately leads to democracy. In terms of economic indicators, democracies are significantly ahead of authoritarian and totalitarian states. Such a prerequisite as a high degree of urbanization of the country directly depends on the degree of industrial development. Residents of large cities in to a greater extent tend to democracy than the rural population, which is more conservative, adherence to traditional forms of government.

One of the conditions for the development of democracy is the level of development of mass communications. It is characterized by the prevalence of newspapers, radio and television. The media make it possible for citizens to make competent judgments about politics: decisions made, parties, candidates for elected office, etc. In the conditions of modern states, large in terms of territory and population, without mass communications, democracy is practically impossible.

Secondly, an important condition for the development of democracy is a relatively high level of citizens' well-being. It allows you to smooth out social conflicts, it is easier to achieve the consent necessary for democracy.

The development of democracy is facilitated by a large middle class, since this class consists of various groups that are similar in terms of the most important indicators: income, property, education, etc. The middle class has high level education, personality development, feelings dignity, literacy of political judgment and activity. He, more than the lower and upper strata, prefers a democratic development system. By virtue of his position in society, he is interested in political stability, highly values freedom and human rights, prefers compromises, and has moderation in political demands.

In addition to the middle class, the backbone of a democratic regime is entrepreneurs - a competitive bourgeoisie connected to the market. The formation of democracy is more successful in large states with a developed domestic market and a competitive bourgeoisie.

Thirdly, the general condition of democracy is the literacy of the population, its education in general. The competence of a person's political judgments, his intellectual development, freedom of thought, and self-esteem directly depend on culture and education. An illiterate person, in essence, stands outside politics and outside of democracy, is an object of manipulation by the authorities or other political forces. Education is one of the conditions for the formation of a democratic culture.

The prevailing political culture in society largely influences the economic and social factors of the state structure. She represents the mentality, i.e. ways of perceiving and understanding politics, revised into human consciousness the experience of people, their attitudes, value orientations and models of behavior that characterize the attitude of citizens to the authorities.

Religion has a great influence on the behavior of citizens and political culture. In many ways, by shaping the mentality, religion can both slow down the transition to democracy and stimulate it.

Fourth, foreign policy conditions are of great importance for democracy. They manifest themselves in two ways: through direct political, economic, cultural, informational and other influence and through the influence of the example of democratic states. As history has shown, democracy can be the result of not only internal development, but also the result of external influence, including with the help of force. In dozens of former colonies, democratic institutions were created under the direct influence of the metropolises, and in some states, for example, in the Dominican Republic, Germany, Iraq, after military occupation. However, if it is brought in from the outside, democracy will not be stable and viable until the necessary internal preconditions are created for it.

The most famous and studied by political science regimes are democratic, authoritarian and totalitarian (Table 8.3).

Table 8.3

Typology of political regimes

Specifications
Specifications	Democratic		Totalitarian
Measures to exercise power	Power represented by law	Dialogue of power with independent groups, but its result determines power	The existence of public structures uncontrolled by the authorities	Universal unlimited control and violence
The attitude of people to power	The choice of specific holders of power by the people	The influence of society on power	Alienation of the people from power	The fusion of the public people with the government
Status of horizontal structures	Horizontal social structures - the basis of the political system	Permission of any organizations, including those claiming power	It is possible to exist in professional spheres, but not of a state nature	Destruction of any horizontal structures
The nature of the prohibitions	Anything that is not prohibited by law is allowed	Everything is allowed, including the change of power	Anything that has nothing to do with politics is allowed	Only what is ordered by the authorities is allowed
Ideals of power	Morality, observance of laws	Morality, competence, strength	Competence, strength	Omnipotence
Ideals of Political Behavior	Morality, obedience to the law, professionalism, activity	Activity, critical conformism, professionalism	Professionalism, obedience, powerlessness	Enthusiasm, typical

The process of democratization is facilitated by the proximity to influential democratic powers and their many-sided assistance. Most countries in the world, having embarked on the path of industrial development and have not escaped a more or less prolonged period of authoritarian rule, are democratic or are moving in this direction. For authoritarian regimes, the process of transition to democracy is greatly facilitated by the fact that here we see the presence of private property, a market, a certain sphere of civil society, the admission, within certain limits, of pluralism of ideological views, legal opposition, political rights of citizens and socio-political organizations.

Democracies are different, but they have common unifying features:

- democracy - the recognition of the people as the source of power, the sovereign;
- government is based on the consent of the governed;
- majority rule while respecting the interests and opinions of the minority;
- guarantees of fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens;
- free and fair elections;
- equality before the law and fair trial;
- constitutional restriction of the government;
- pluralism in all spheres of society.

In domestic political science since the mid-90s. XX century attempts to determine the specifics of the current political regime in modern Russia continue. The definition of the regime as a post-communist or post-totalitarian democracy turned out to be quite widespread. It fixes two features of the modern political process. On the one hand, it is emphasized that Russia has irrevocably departed from its communist past, and in this sense the term "democracy" is used as the antipode of the concept of "totalitarianism". On the other hand, it is obvious that the political system that has emerged in today's Russia is significantly different from the classical Western models of democracy. Domestic political scientist M.A.Vasilik notes the following differences of the Russian political regime in the 90s. XX century;

a) the absence of a developed and numerous middle class;
b) lack of consensus in society on basic values;
c) underdevelopment of market relations;
d) the hypertrophied role of the state and bureaucracy;
e) corruption in all echelons of power;
f) the very limited role of the representative bodies of power;
g) actual lack of public control of the authorities;
h) preservation and reproduction in society of relations and connections of the patronage-client type, as opposed to horizontal connections.

The categories "post-communist" and "post-totalitarian" indicate certain differences between Russian democracy and classical models. It is also obvious that such a regime is of a transitional nature and can evolve. In modern Russia, such features of a democratic society as the development of legal statehood and civil society are becoming increasingly apparent; electivity and turnover of power; system of separation of powers; the existence of political opposition; a free and competitive market with a variety of forms of ownership.

The choice of an alternative to development will largely be determined by the political preferences of Russian society, including the political position of young people entering social and political life.

A. P. Tsygankov Modern political regimes: structure, typology, dynamics. Moscow: Interfax, 1995. P. 96–97.
Vasilik M.A. Political science: a textbook for universities. M., 2009.S. 252.

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education

"East Siberian State University of Technology and Management"

Institute of Economics and Law

Faculty of Law

Department "Theory and history of state and law. Constitutional law"

Course work

on the topic: Types of democratic regimes

Ulan-Ude, 2014

Introduction

Chapter 1. Democratic regime: concept, types, theory

1 The Mechanism of Formation of a Democratic Regime

2 Concept, signs of a democratic regime

Chapter 2. Features of certain types of democratic regimes

1 Liberal Democratic regime

2 Social democratic regime

Conclusion

List of sources of information used

Introduction

Relevance of the research topic. Among the significant issues of modern theory and practice of political processes, one of the priority places is given to the problem of a democratic regime. Therefore, the study of the socio-political factors of the emergence of the main historical stages, the identification of the laws of the process of the democratic regime now has not only important scientific and theoretical, but also significant practical significance. From a wide range of political issues actively discussed in scientific literature, from our point of view, it is necessary, first of all, to subject the study to topics that are of interest from the point of view of their theoretical and methodological significance.

An analysis of the literature existing in social science and historical experience show that the democratic regime has its own rather long history. Naturally, the emergence of a democratic regime occurs simultaneously with the emergence of the state in society. At the same time, it is characteristic that for the establishment of a political regime, first of all, strong economic, socio-political and spiritual-ideological factors are needed, which were considered by researchers in the historical-psychological, philosophical-legal aspects, as well as from the political point of view; they are still the subject of lively discussions. At the same time, based on the analysis of the literature, it can be argued that there is still no consensus on the problem of the concept of a democratic regime.

Currently, a democratic regime is considered as a kind of political regime. A democratic regime is a regime based on the recognition of the principle of equality and freedom of all people, the participation of the people in government.

The purpose of this term paper is a detailed disclosure of the concept of "democratic regime", the study of the essence, features and types of a democratic regime in modern society.

The implementation of the above goals is the implementation of a number of tasks:

study the mechanism for the formation of a democratic regime;

to reveal the concept of a democratic regime;

consider the signs of a democratic regime;

explore the types of democratic regime.

The object of the research is the social relations that develop under a democratic regime.

The subject of the research is the concept, essence, features and types of democratic regimes.

The methodological basis of the research is the general scientific dialectical method of cognition and the following from it private scientific: the comparative method; studying the regulatory framework; study of monographic publications and articles; analytical method.

When performing this work, educational and scientific sources were studied, as well as regulatory material was analyzed.

The work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of used sources of information.

Chapter 1. Democratic regime: concept, types, theory

.1 Mechanism for the Formation of a Democratic Regime

The formation of a democratic political regime is carried out with the help of appropriate political, economic, social, cultural, religious, foreign policy and other conditions.

The political conditions of a developed civil society include the stability of political power, the existence and functioning of political parties and movements as powerful levers in order to influence socio-political and social processes, political pluralism.

Economic conditions include a high level of industrial and economic development, high degree urbanization, development of mass communications, competitive market economy, pluralism of forms of ownership.

Political conditions provide direct military, political, economic, cultural and informational impact; the impact of the example of democracies; stable friendly relations with other states, no military threat.

The cultural conditions for the literacy of the population are its education, in general, civic political culture and democratic traditions.

Justification of assumptions and mechanisms for building a democratic regime, determines the conditions for the transition to this method of organizing public power, in the country proceeding from the extremely difficult problems political theory. In the current political situation, their decision is largely associated with an understanding of the specifics of developing countries that have adopted this type of power as the so-called "third wave" of democracy. However, these problems have other more common points contact.

Currently, there were two main approaches in science, which in turn establish the conditions for the formation of democratic systems and regimes. Thus, the supporters of the structural direction are based on the fact that a democratic regime is formed under the dominant influence of macro factors, which include economic and social structures, legal orders in common traditions, customs, etc. For example, Marxists are the main factor in the formation of political orders, considered in property relations, the qualitative changes that took place in production, distribution, exchange and consumption in society. According to this approach, a democratic regime must be prepared, associated with socio-economic development of society, serve as a political structure of the main processes that occur in the social sphere.

The adherents of the procedural approach who oppose such ideas, although they believe that "the prerequisites for the implementation of a democratic regime should not be ignored," nevertheless, believe that the main conditions for the transition to democracy and the nature of its ruling elites, their political values and ideals are the most important technology. In this sense, according to, for example, A. Przeworski, F. Schmitter, D. Linz and others, the democratic regime serves as a kind of "political project", which is already being implemented in the current conditions of the country. The degree of the country's internal readiness for a democratic political order is seen as a factor that can either accelerate or slow down the formation of such a system of power.

A classic example of the procedure of a democratic regime can be the formation of the appropriate order in post-war Germany, when, despite some adherence to the same values of the population, the new leadership of the country has the right to consciously establish the necessary structures and mechanisms of power, establish an appropriate constitutional and legal order, and consolidate democratic relations between states. members and society.

Judging by the prevailing practice today, we can say that the specific prerequisites of a democratic regime as a relatively stable political high level of economic development of the country, the existence of market relations and an industrial economy, urbanization, the development of mass communications, assistance is embodied in democracy foreign countries.

The last two to three decades have revealed another powerful factor of democratization, namely the demonstration effect of Western democracies, economic and social progress not only command respect from many peoples, but is also perceived in many countries as a direct result of a democratic type of political regime.

The ideological basis of a democratic regime is formed by numerous and constantly updated theories of a democratic regime, the development of which has contributed to modern political democracy. As a result, a social order is formed and is expressed in constitutions of a democratic type. It differs from authoritarian and totalitarian political regimes in the following formal legal principles:

the ownership of power to the people, to the people is the source of power, it is ultimately decisive;

equality before the law: legal equality, empowerment of the same institutions of social and political rights and freedoms, including the equal right to participate in the management of society and the state;

acceptance by the majority of the rule, with respect for the interests and opinions of the minority;

the right to a variety of political associations and political programs and others.

1.2 Concept, signs of a democratic regime

power democracy pluralism totalitarian

The concept of a democratic political regime includes not only the state regime, but also such political forces of society as the activities of political and public organizations, political worldview, as reflected in the consciousness of citizens of the very content of democracy.

A democratic regime is a political regime based on the recognition of the people as a source of power, their right to participate in the management of society and the empowerment of citizens, which has a fairly wide range of rights and freedoms. A democratic regime is based on the principles of democracy, freedom and equality of citizens. In the context of this regime, the people exercise power directly through representative bodies formed by state authorities.

The main features of a democratic regime:

Decisions taken by the majority in the interests of the minority;

There is a rule of law and civil society;

State bodies and bodies of local self-government are elected and are accountable to voters;

The security forces (military, police) are under civilian control;

Methods of persuasion, compromise are widely used;

There is political pluralism, including a multi-party system, legal political opposition;

Publicity is spread, there is no censorship;

In fact, the principle of separation of powers is being implemented.

The experience of developed countries shows the effectiveness of a democratic form of government, which, despite national identity, is nevertheless characterized by recognized standards that correspond to democracy. Demands for democracy do not arise spontaneously as a result of the rational choice of the people and the elite.

However, the road to building a democratic state is long and unpredictable. Democracy by itself cannot feed people, ensure a decent standard of living, solve most of the socio-economic problems that are most sensitive to people. This can create only the necessary political institutions, and the practice in the application of which can be the least painful way for society in solving accumulated problems in the interests of broad social strata.

A democratic regime can be characterized by the following features.

The sovereignty of the people. Recognition of this principle means that the people are the source of power, that they elect their representatives of power and periodically replace them.

Periodic electoral bodies provide a clear mechanism for the legal succession of power. Government is born out of fair and democratic elections, and not through military coups and conspiracies.

Power is elected for a specific and limited period.

Universal, equal and secret suffrage. Elections presuppose real competitiveness of various candidates, alternative choices, implementation of the principle: one citizen - one vote.

A constitution that enshrines the priority of individual rights over the state, as well as provides citizens with an approved mechanism for resolving disputes between an individual and the state.

The principle of separation of powers (legislative, executive and judicial) in the construction of the state apparatus.

The presence of a developed system of representation (parliamentary).

Guarantee of fundamental human rights. Three groups of rights have been identified that are associated with the growth of citizenship: civil (equality of all citizens before the law, freedom of speech, religion, freedom to change their place of residence); political (the right to elect and be elected, freedom to vote, the right to organize); social (the human right to a minimum level of well-being, the right to ensure living conditions and social security guarantees). Social rights are exercised by the state through social programs. Individual and group freedoms are protected by an independent, impartial judicial system... Taking into account the prospects for the development of democracy, a number of authors point to renewal in the future, requiring guarantees of equality in the field of ecology.

Political pluralism (from lat. Pluralie - plural), which allows legal action not only for political and social movements that support government policy, but also for opposition parties and organizations.

Freedom of expression of political opinion (ideological pluralism) and freedom of association, movement, complemented by many different sources of information, independent media.

Democratic decision-making procedure: elections, referendums, parliamentary voting and other decisions taken by the majority, while respecting the rights of the minority, to disagree. A minority (opposition) have the right to criticize about the ruling power and promote alternative programs. Peaceful resolution of conflicts.

A characteristic feature of all modern democratic regimes is pluralism (from Latin pluralis - plural), which means recognition in social and political life of many different interconnected and at the same time autonomous, social, political groups, parties, organizations, ideas and attitudes of which are in constant juxtaposition, competition, competition. Pluralism as a principle of political democracy is the antipode of monopoly in any of its forms.

The essential features of political pluralism include:

the multiplicity of subjects and policy in the field of competition, separation of powers;

Elimination of the monopoly on political power of any one party;

multi-party political system;

a variety of channels for expressing interests, free access for everyone;

free struggle of political forces of opposing elites, the possibility of change;

Alternative political views within the law.

Characteristic features of a democratic regime:

Sovereignty of the people: it is the people who elect their representatives and the authorities can periodically replace them. Elections must be fair and competitive, and must be held regularly. By "competitive" means having different groups or individuals to run freely in elections. Elections will not be competitive if some groups (or individuals) are able to participate and others are not. An election is considered fair if there is no fraud and a special fair play mechanism exists. An election is unfair if the bureaucratic machine belongs to one party, even if that party is tolerant of other parties during the election. By using its monopoly on the media, the party in power can influence public opinion to such an extent that elections are no longer fair.

Periodic election of the main organs of the state. The government is born out of elections for a certain, limited period of time. For the development of democracy, it is not enough to hold regular elections; it is necessary that it be supported by an elected government. In Latin America, for example, elections are held frequently, but many Latin American countries are out of democracy, and the most common way to compensate the president is a military coup, not an election. Thus, a prerequisite for a democratic state - the persons exercising supreme power, are elected and elected for a certain, limited period of time, the change of government should be the result of elections, and not at the request of the whole.

Democracy protects the rights of individuals and minorities. The majority opinion is expressed in democratic elections, this is only a necessary condition for democracy, however, not insufficient. Only the combination of majority rule and the protection of minority rights constitute one of the basic principles of a democratic state. When discriminatory measures are used in the minority, a non-democratic regime becomes, regardless of the frequency and fairness of elections and the change of a legally elected government.

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

The above description of the democratic regime and its principles seems to be very attractive. However, one should not forget that this is a collective nature of the synthesis, which includes the most essential features of this regime, which is not necessarily inherent in the specific regimes of certain states.

An important feature of a democratic regime is political pluralism, which implies the possibility of forming a bipartisan or multiparty system, competition between political parties and their influence on people, and the existence of a legitimate political opposition, both in parliament and outside it.

According to A. Leipyartu, democratic regimes can be described in terms of the degree of a multiparty system of government (the minimum number of parts that make up the ruling coalition of the parliamentary majority). On the basis of this criterion, the majority will be considered the regime in which the parties replace each other, and the ruling party is formed by the principles of the majority. On the other hand, the consensus of a democratic regime, as a ruling coalition, is formed on the basis of proportional representation of the parties. Examples of majority and consensual democracy are Great Britain, respectively, the United States (Westminster model) and the Scandinavian countries.

Experts distinguish three features of consensus democracy, in comparison with the majority: 1) low level of opposition to existing state rules and methods of conflict resolution; 2) low level of conflict on the existing state policy; 3) a high degree of consistency in the conduct of state policy. According to Leipyart, regimes can vary depending on the level of centralization of state power - for federal and unitary states. Thus, in democratic institutions there can be different ways of organizing work.

The democratic regime is characterized by the high importance of the realization of human rights. These include the norms, rules and principles of relations between the state and citizens.

World political science has not yet provided an exhaustive definition of the essence of a democratic regime as a multifaceted phenomenon of public life. Since the days of Ancient Greece, the concept of a democratic regime has often been viewed as a form of state, opposite to authoritarianism in all its manifestations. Meanwhile, the state regime of power is a narrower concept that includes only the methods of political power of the state apparatus.

Signs of a democratic regime:

Regular participation of the people in the development and implementation of state power through a referendum and free elections.

Decisions are made taking into account the interests of the minority.

Inviolability of private property.

Freedom of the media.

We solemnly proclaim and really enjoy the rights and freedoms.

The legitimacy of the authorities.

The structure of the armed forces, police, security agencies are under the control of society, are used only according to their direct appointment, their activities are regulated by laws.

Beliefs, negotiations, compromises, narrowed methods of violence, coercion, suppression dominate.

The existence of a civil society with its developed structure.

The actual implementation of the principle of the rule of law.

The principle "everything is allowed that is not prohibited by law."

Political pluralism, including multi-party competition of political parties, the existence of a legitimate political opposition, both in parliament and outside it.

Freedom of religion.

The principle of separation of powers.

The democratic regime is characterized by economic, political and ideological diversity (pluralism), monopolization in any of these areas is not allowed.

A democratic regime indicates a set of methods and means of exercising state power. They are very different and specify the main indicators of the form of government and structure in a particular country. General indicators of a democratic regime are:

a) the degree of protection and provision of guarantees for the rights and freedoms of citizens (political and ideological choice, economic freedom) and the degree of consideration of the interests of various social groups (including minorities), etc .;

b) ways of legitimizing state power;

c) the ratio of legal and non-legal methods of exercising power functions;

d) methods, intensity and legal validity of the use of power structures and other resources of power;

d) the mechanism of ideological pressure.

The study of the prerequisites for the democratization of society is very important issue... Why, given equal starting opportunities, some countries successfully follow the path of democratization, while in others, all attempts to establish democracy end in complete failure? Many scientists tried to find an answer to this question, but it still remains unresolved.

The number of prerequisites for a democratic regime include:

modernization, industrialization, urbanization, educational level, elements of capitalism and welfare;

the appropriate nature of the class structure of society;

democratic political culture, as well as a developed civil society;

the presence of certain institutional forms, among the most significant institutional factors are electoral systems, majority or proportional representation, the form of government - parliamentary or presidential, strong political parties and an established party system;

united state, boundaries are established, no ethnic or regional conflicts;

external factors: a peaceful international situation, the growth of interdependence of all countries and peoples of the world.

Chapter 2. Features of certain types of democratic regimes

.1 Liberal Democratic Regime

A liberal-democratic regime is a kind of democratic type of government, in which democratic methods, forms and methods of exercising state power are relatively incomplete, limited and inconsistent.

On the one hand, this regime is associated with a fairly high level of political freedom of the individual; on the other hand, the real objective and subjective conditions in countries significantly limit the ability to use democratic means and methods of state and political governance. This ensures that a liberal democratic regime should be attributed to a democratic state type of ruling power and at the same time a special kind of democratic regime differs from de facto democratic or developed democracies.

The liberal state-political regime is the embodiment of the socio-political principles and ideals of liberalism (from the Latin liberalis - free) - one of the most important and widespread ideological and socio-political trends, which finally took shape in a special, independent direction in the 30-40s. XIX century, although the ideological origins of liberalism go back to the XVII-XVIII centuries. (J. Locke, C. Montesquieu, J. J. Rousseau, T. Jefferson, B. Franklin, I. Bentham and others). Historically, classical liberalism developed in the struggle against feudal enslavement of the individual, against class privileges, hereditary state power, etc., for freedom and equality of citizens, equal opportunities for everyone and everyone, democratic forms of social and political life.

Liberal democratic regimes exist in many countries. Its meaning is such that some scientists believe that a liberal-democratic regime is actually not the implementation of the regime of exercising power, but, on the contrary, is the condition for the existence of civilization itself at a certain stage of its development, even the final result, which ends the entire evolution political organization, the most effective form of such an organization. But it is difficult to agree with the last statement, at present the evolution of political regimes is even in such forms as a liberal-democratic regime of power.

New trends in the development of civilization, the desire of man to escape from environment, nuclear and other disasters give rise to new forms of exercising state power, the role of the UN is increasing, international rapid reaction forces are emerging, but at the same time, contradictions between the rights of humans and nations, peoples, and so on are growing.

In the theory of the state, such political methods and methods of exercising power that are based on a system of the most democratic and humanistic principles are called liberal.

These principles are primarily characterized by the relationship of the economic sector between the individual and the state. In a liberal-democratic regime, a person has property, rights and freedoms, economic independence, and on this basis they become politically independent. In relation to the individual and state priority are reserved for the interests, rights, freedoms of the individual and others.

The liberal-democratic regime supports the values of individualism, opposing it to the collectivist principles of organizing political and economic life, which, according to some scholars, ultimately leads to totalitarian forms of government.

The liberal-democratic regime determines, first of all, the needs of the commodity-money organization of the market economy. The market requires equal, free, independent partners.

The liberal state proclaims the formal equality of all citizens. In a liberal society, there should be freedom of speech, opinion, property rights, taking into account the space for private initiative. Human rights and freedoms are not only enshrined in the constitution, but also become possible in practice.

Thus, the economic basis of liberalism is private property. The state frees producers from its guardianship and does not interfere in the economic life of people, but establishes a general framework for free competition between producers, the conditions of economic life. He also acts as an arbitrator and adjudicates their disputes.

At the later stages of liberalism, legal government intervention in economic and social processes becomes socially oriented, which is associated with many factors: the need to rationally allocate economic resources to solve environmental problems, to participate in the international division of labor, prevention of international conflicts, etc.

The liberal-democratic regime allows the existence of opposition, moreover, from the point of view of liberalism, the state takes all measures for the existence of an opposition representing the interests of the minority, creating special procedures to address these interests.

Pluralism and a multi-party system are, first of all, essential attributes of a liberal society. In addition, under the liberal-democratic regime, there are many associations, corporations, non-governmental organizations, sections, clubs that bring together people of interest to each other. There are organizations that allow citizens to express their political, professional, religious, social, social, personal, local, national interests and needs. These associations are the backbone of civil society and do not leave citizens face to face with the state, which, as a rule, tends to impose its decisions and even abuse its capabilities.

When liberalism shapes elections, their outcome depends not only on the opinion of the people, but also on the financial capabilities of certain parties required for election campaigns.

The implementation of public administration is based on the principle of separation of powers. The system of "checks and balances" reduces opportunities for abuse of power. State decisions are made, as a rule, in a legal form.

In public administration, the decentralization of power is used: the central government takes upon itself the solution of only those issues that cannot be resolved by local authorities.

Of course, one should not apologize for the liberal-democratic regime, because it also has its own problems, the main of which are the social protection of certain categories of citizens, the stratification of society, actual unequal starting opportunities, etc.

The use of this regime becomes most effective only in a society with a high level of economic and social development. The population must have a sufficiently high political, intellectual and moral culture.

The liberal-democratic regime is based on the ideas and practice of democracy, the system of separation of powers, protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual, in which the judiciary plays an important role. This generates respect for the court, the Constitution, the rights and freedoms of others. The principles of autonomy and self-regulation permeate many aspects of society.

For the liberal-democratic regime, there is another type of democracy. This is a humanistic regime, which, while maintaining all the significance of a liberal-democratic regime, continues and strengthens the trend by eliminating its shortcomings. True, the humanistic regime, overcoming contradictions, failures, only appears in some countries, serving as the ideal goal of the political development of a modern state.

Its legal form is not at all focused on the individual, on dividends, and to ensure health, safety, well-being, specific social protection, support for a specific family and personal life of each member of society.

Man is an end, not a means; this is the main principle of the humanistic regime. The state does not create state dependence on social security, and creates all conditions for the normal creative work of each member of society. High social and legal protection, the importance of staging the life of every person is an obligation in practical activities all government agencies.

Humanity for thousands of years in search of the most perfect forms government organization society. These forms change with the development of society. The form of government, the state apparatus, the political regime are those specific areas where the search is most intensive.

Modern democracy is about representing interests, not classes. All citizens in a democratic state, as participants, are equal before the state, that is, it means equality before the law and equality of political rights and freedoms. A modern democratic state is a state governed by the rule of law, and in practice, the separation of three branches of government is carried out, and real mechanisms are created to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens.

The liberal-democratic regime supports the values of individualism, opposing it to collectivist principles in the organization of political and economic life, which, according to some scholars, can ultimately lead to totalitarian forms of government.

Under liberalism, a state formed through elections proceeds not only from the opinion of the people, but also from the financial capabilities of certain parties necessary for election campaigns.

The implementation of management is based on the principle of separation of powers. The system of "checks and balances" reduces the potential for abuse of power. Government decisions are usually made in a legal form.

The use of a liberal democratic regime is most effective only in a society with a high level of economic and social development.

However, it should be noted that a liberal democratic regime can only exist on a democratic basis, and was created from the correct democratic regime.

2.2 Social democratic regime

A social democratic regime emerges when Western states re-evaluate the values of liberal democracy. It was approved after the Second World War and means that the state, while not rejecting liberal values, at the same time acquires a socially oriented character. This state is intended to influence the distribution of material wealth, directed in the interests of the whole society and the principles of social justice.

Social democratic regime - leftist political parties, their programs are focused on socialism, but also on electoral and parliamentary means without riots and violent revolution.

Social Democratic parties see the welfare state as a step towards their own main goal- democratic socialism. State power, they say, is designed to prepare the conditions for the transition to a social-democratic regime, in which democratic methods of government will be applied in all spheres of public life. Social policy is not a service or favor from the state, and its direct responsibilities arising from social rights are provided to citizens. Theorists of the social democratic regime develop the legal ideas of the social state, responsible to their citizens, and entrust it with a wide range of tasks, until the adoption of social relations of social justice.

An intermediate position between the positions of neoliberals and social democrats are the concepts put forward by the ideologists of the middle classes and the democratically-minded intelligentsia. In the ideology of these strata is the theory of the welfare state. It emerged in the 1950s during a period of economic growth in Western Europe and the United States.

One of the founders of the theory was the Swedish economist and politician Karl Gunnar Myrdal (1898-1987) (Author of the book "Beyond the Welfare State").

The basis of his concept is the assertion that general prosperity has been achieved in the industrialized countries of the West. Other countries sooner or later embark on the same path of economic and social development. The essence of the theory of public welfare, as formulated by Myrdal, is "a world without revolution - a revolution in fact in a capitalist state conducts a coordinated public policy, and, moreover, with such efficiency that it gradually led to the development of the country's economy in accordance with the interests of the majority of citizens. In accordance with its concept, we will present a number of common features. "

The wealthy Western countries have a mixed economy, that is, market relations combined with government planning. Friedrich von Hayek objects, and his follower Myrdal argued that planning in modern capitalist society is caused by objective reasons, primarily the formation of monopolies. The industrialized countries of the West, he wrote, “are infinitely far from the liberal democratic model.” State intervention is necessary to maintain equilibrium and stable economic growth. Planning is intended to regulate the activities of large economic associations and, therefore, does not affect individual freedom.

For a welfare state, it is characterized by a tendency towards democratization of the country's political life. Universal suffrage and the growth of social welfare, as Myrdal argued, allow a transition to a state of decentralization and transfer of functions, which are traditionally carried out by the state, local authorities and public associations of citizens. Unlike the states of the last century, modern Western democracy includes all strata of society and participates in the distribution of social benefits. The political process in the most advanced welfare states (Myrdal includes Sweden and Great Britain) has been placed under "expanding popular control."

Taking into account the above facts, the liberal-democratic regime includes a kind of democratic regime, characterized by a set of methods and ways of exercising power based on democratic and humanistic principles, the recognition of individualism and private property as the highest values of political and economic life.

Conclusion

An analysis of the effective establishment of democratic regimes shows that democratic political institutions become truly effective only after a long process of evolution and adaptation to the conditions and traditions of society, as evidenced by the experience of democratic formation in Western countries. Consequently, the modern sophistication in the development of democratic political institutions in Russia and in other countries cannot be explained by the issue of compatibility of democracy and its institutions with national traditions and norms, as well as the fact that they can be effective, but gradually adapting to political reality.

Liberal democratic regimes exist in many countries. Its meaning is such that some scholars believe that a liberal-democratic regime is actually not the implementation of the regime of exercising power, but, on the contrary, is a condition for the existence of civilization itself at a certain stage of its development, even the final result, which ends the entire evolution of a political organization, most effective form of such an organization.

The democratic regime recognizes differences of opinion and a multi-party system, the possibility of legal activity of opposition parties, trade unions and other mass organizations. Through grassroots organizations, the population tries to take advantage of participation in the political process and pressure the government to meet their demands.

List of sources of information used

Abdullaev, M.I. Theory of state and law / - M .: ID Pravo, 2010. -464 p.

2. Baranov N.A. "Evolution of modern Russian democracy: trends and prospects". - SPb., 2008.-276 p.

Vedenina N.A. Modern political liberalism and the problem of social justice: Dis. ... Cand. ist. sciences. M., 2003.- 253s.

Vlasenko N.A. Theory of state and law: textbook (2nd edition, revised, supplemented and revised). - M .: Prospect, 2011 .-- 84 p.

Power in the transition from totalitarianism to democracy. Free thought. // Kozhukhov A.P. - No. 8. - 2008. - P. 152.

Dimov V. Fair liberalism. The path to a comfortable state. M., 2007.- 425 p.

Kashkin S.Yu. Political regime in the modern world: concept, essence, development trends. -2010. - 185 p.

Kudryavtsev, Yu.A. Political regimes: classification criteria and main types / Yu.A. Kudryavtsev. // Jurisprudence. -2011. - No. 1 (240). - P. 205

T.I. Kryzhantovskaya Representative and direct democracy of a developed socialist society: Author's abstract. dis. ... Cand. jurid. sciences. M., 2011. -S. 17.

Leiphart A. Democracy in multi-component societies. Comparative study. - M., 1997. - 310 p.

Nersesyants B.C. Theory of State and Law: A Brief training course... - M., 2001 .-- 245 p.

P.I. Novgorodtsev On the social ideal. M., "Science", 1991. - 582 p.

Politics and Law - "Democracy" by A.F. Nikitin, 2012.- p. 12

Theory of State and Law / Edited by A.S. Pigolkina, Yu.A. Dmitrieva / [Text]. - M .: Higher education, 2007.216 p.

15. Theory of State and Law: Textbook / Ed. O.V. Martyshina. M .: NORMA, 2009.- 420 p.

16. Tkachenko S.V. Liberalism as the state ideology of Russia // Law and state: theory and practice. 2010. N 1.-S. 32.

17.Farberov N.P. Marxist-Leninist concept of socialist democracy // Problems of the theory of socialist state and law. M., 1977.- S. 22.

Huntington S. The future of the democratic process: from expansion to consolidation // World Economy and International Relations. 1995. No. 6.- P. 45.

Tsygankov P.A., Tsygankov A.P. Between Westernism and Nationalism: Russian Liberalism and International Relations // Problems of Philosophy. 2012. N 1.-S. 32.

20. Tsygankov V. Modern political regimes: structure, typology, dynamics. M., 1995. - 100 p.

Chirkin V.E. Theoretical problems of the political regime in the countries of socialist orientation // State and law in developing countries... M., 1976.- p. 7

Liberal democracy is a form of political organization with two fundamental qualities. The government is “liberal” in terms of the core values that underlie the given political system, and “democratic” in terms of shaping its political structure.

The core values associated with the liberal democratic political system are rooted in traditional liberal notions of limiting power and are intended to ensure the existence of a wide range of civil and human rights. The above can be guaranteed by such instruments as the constitution, the bill of rights, the principle of separation of powers, the system of checks and balances, and most importantly, the principle of the rule of law.

The functioning of a democratic political system reflects the will of the people (at least of its majority). Public consent within the framework of a liberal - democratic political system is ensured through representation: liberal democracy (sometimes still defined as representative) involves the adoption of political decisions by a small group of people on behalf of all citizens of the country.

Those who assume such duties and responsibilities act with the consent of citizens and rule on their behalf. Meanwhile, the right to make decisions is conditioned by the presence of public support, and it can be denied in the absence of approval of the actions of the authorities by the population, to whom the authorities are accountable. In this case, citizens deprive their chosen ones of the right to exercise their powers and transfer them into the hands of other persons.

Thus, elections, during which the will of the population is manifested in relation to the actions and personal composition of government bodies, is a fundamental function of liberal democracy. The electoral system empowers all adult citizens of the country with the right to vote, ensures regular elections and open rivalry between political parties vying for power.

The liberal democratic political system is primarily associated with the countries of the first world with the capitalist economic system.

See also Rule of Law, Elections, Civil Rights, Democracy, Legitimacy, Liberalism, Marxism-Leninism, Accountability, Political Tolerance, Human Rights, "Representation", "Separation of powers".

Liberal democracy is a form of socio-political structure - a state based on the rule of law based on representative democracy, in which the will of the majority and the ability of elected representatives to exercise power are limited in the name of protecting the rights of the minority and the freedoms of individual citizens.

Liberal democracy aims to ensure that every citizen has equal rights to due process, private property, privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion. These liberal rights are enshrined in supreme laws (such as the constitution or statute, or in precedent rulings by the highest courts), which in turn empower various state and public bodies to enforce these rights.

A characteristic element of liberal democracy is an "open society" characterized by tolerance, pluralism, coexistence and competition of the widest range of socio-political views. Through periodic elections, each of the different-minded groups has a chance to gain power. In practice, extremist or marginal views rarely play a significant role in the democratic process. However, the model of an open society makes it difficult for the ruling elite to conserve power, guarantees the possibility of a bloodless change of power, and creates incentives for the government to respond flexibly to the needs of society [source unspecified 897 days].

In a liberal democracy, the political group in power does not have to share all aspects of the ideology of liberalism (for example, it may advocate democratic socialism). However, it is obliged to comply with the above-mentioned principle of the rule of law. The term liberal in this case is understood in the same way as in the era of bourgeois revolutions at the end of the 18th century: it provides everyone with protection from arbitrariness on the part of the authorities and law enforcement agencies.

The democratic nature of the state structure is enshrined in the fundamental laws and supreme precedent decisions that make up the constitution. The main purpose of the constitution is to limit the powers of government officials and law enforcement agencies, as well as the will of the majority. This is achieved with the help of a number of instruments, the main of which are the rule of law, independent justice, separation of powers (by branches and by territorial level) and a system of "checks and balances", which ensures accountability of some branches of government to others. Only such actions of representatives of the authorities are legal, which are carried out in accordance with the law published in writing and in due order.

Although liberal democracies include elements of direct democracy (referendums), the vast majority of the highest government decisions are made by the government. The policy of this government should depend only on the representatives of the legislature and the head of the executive, who are established through periodic elections. Subordination of the government to any non-elected forces is not allowed. In the interval between elections, the government must work in an open and transparent manner, and the facts of corruption must be immediately made public.

One of the main provisions of liberal democracy is universal suffrage, which gives every adult citizen of a country an equal right to vote, regardless of race, gender, material status or education. The exercise of this right, as a rule, is associated with a certain registration procedure at the place of residence. The election results are determined only by those citizens who actually took part in the voting, but often the turnout must exceed a certain threshold for the vote to be considered valid.

The most important task of electoral democracy is to ensure that elected representatives are accountable to the nation. Therefore, elections and referendums must be free, fair and fair. They must be preceded by free and fair competition between the representatives of different political views, combined with equal opportunities for electoral campaigns. In practice, political pluralism is determined by the presence of several (at least two) political parties that have significant power. The most important prerequisite for this pluralism is freedom of speech. The choice of the people should be free from the overwhelming influence of the army, foreign powers, totalitarian parties, religious hierarchies, economic oligarchies and any other powerful groups. Cultural, ethnic, religious and other minorities should have an acceptable level of opportunities to participate in the decision-making process, which, as a rule, is achieved by granting them partial self-government.

It is widely believed that a number of conditions must be met for a liberal democracy to emerge. These conditions include a developed justice system, legislative protection of private property, a broad middle class, and a strong civil society.

Experience shows that free elections by themselves rarely provide liberal democracy, and in practice they often lead to “defective” democracies, in which either part of the citizens are deprived of the right to vote, or the elected representatives do not determine the entire policy of the government, or the executive branch subordinates the legislative and the judiciary or the justice system is not capable of enforcing the principles laid down in the constitution. The latter is the most common problem.

The level of material well-being in a country is also hardly a condition for a country's transition from an authoritarian regime to a liberal democracy, although studies show that this level plays a significant role in ensuring its sustainability.

There is a debate among political scientists about how sustainable liberal democracies are created. The most common are two positions. According to the first of them, for the emergence of liberal democracy, a sufficiently long split of the elites and the involvement of legal procedures, as well as wider layers of the population, in the resolution of conflicts. The second position is that a long history of the formation of democratic traditions, customs, institutions, etc. is needed. certain peoples.

Types of liberal democracies

The presence of liberal democracy is largely determined by the actually implemented principles and the compliance of the regime with the above criteria. For example, Canada is formally a monarchy, but is actually ruled by a democratically elected parliament. In Great Britain, formally, the hereditary monarch has supreme power, but in fact, the people have such power, through their elected representatives (there is also the opposite point of view that parliamentarism in Great Britain is just a screen for absolute monarchy). The monarchy in these countries is largely symbolic.

There are many electoral systems for forming parliament, the most common of which are the majoritarian system and the proportional system. Under the majoritarian system, the territory is divided into districts, in each of which the mandate goes to the candidate with the majority of votes. Under the proportional system, seats in parliament are distributed in proportion to the number of votes cast for the parties. In some countries, part of the parliament is formed according to one system, and part according to another.

Countries also differ in the way they form their executive and legislative branches. In presidential republics, these branches are formed separately, which ensures a high degree of division by function. In parliamentary republics, the executive power is formed by the parliament and is partially dependent on it, which ensures more even distribution the amount of power between the branches.

The Scandinavian countries are social democracies. This is due to the high level of social protection of the population, equality in the standard of living, free secondary education and health care, a significant public sector in the economy and high taxes. At the same time, in these countries the state does not interfere in pricing (even in the public sector, with the exception of monopolies), the banks are private, and there are no obstacles to trade, including international trade; effective laws and transparent governments reliably protect the civil rights of people and the property of entrepreneurs.

Advantages:

Above all, liberal democracy relies on the rule of law and universal equality before it. [Source unspecified 409 days]

A World Bank-funded publication argues that liberal democracy holds governments accountable to the nation. If the people are dissatisfied with the government's policy (due to corruption or excessive bureaucracy, attempts to circumvent laws, mistakes in economic policy, etc.), then the opposition has a high chance of winning the next elections. After she came to power, the most reliable way to stay in power is to prevent the mistakes of her predecessors (dismiss corrupt or ineffective officials, comply with laws, attract competent economists, etc.) Thus, according to the authors of the work, liberal democracy ennobles the desire for power and forces the government to work for the good of the nation. This ensures a relatively low level of corruption.

At the same time, a number of countries (Switzerland, Uruguay) and regions (California) are actively using elements of direct democracy: referendums and plebiscites.

Because the minority is able to influence the decision-making process, liberal democracy protects private property for the wealthy. [Source unspecified 409 days] American author Alvin Powell argues that the world's most democratic countries have the lowest levels of terrorism. ... This effect may even extend beyond the region: statistics show that since the late 1980s, when many countries in Eastern Europe embarked on the path of liberal democracy, the total number of military conflicts, ethnic wars, revolutions, etc. in the world decreased sharply [not available in source].

A number of researchers believe that these circumstances (in particular, economic freedom) contribute to economic recovery and an increase in the level of well-being of the entire population, expressed in GDP per capita (eng.). At the same time, despite high rates of economic growth, some liberal democracies are still relatively poor (eg, India, Costa Rica), while a number of authoritarian regimes, on the contrary, are flourishing (Brunei).

According to a number of researchers, liberal democracy manages available resources more efficiently if they are limited than authoritarian regimes. According to this view, liberal democracies are characterized by higher life expectancies and lower child and maternal mortality rates, regardless of the level of GDP, income inequality or the size of the public sector.

disadvantages

Liberal democracy is a form of representative democracy, which attracts criticism from adherents of direct democracy. They argue that in a representative democracy, majority power is expressed too rarely - at the time of elections and referendums. The real power is concentrated in the hands of a very small group of representatives. From this point of view, liberal democracy is closer to the oligarchy, while the development of technology, the growth of education of people and their increased involvement in the life of society create the preconditions for the transfer of ever greater powers of power into the hands of the people directly.

Marxists and anarchists completely deny that liberal democracy is democracy by the people, calling it "plutocracy." They argue that in any bourgeois democracy, real power is concentrated in the hands of those who control financial flows. Only very wealthy citizens can afford to campaign and spread their platform through the media, so only the elite or those who bargain with the elite can be elected. Such a system legitimizes inequality and facilitates economic exploitation. In addition, critics continue, it creates the illusion of justice, so that the discontent of the masses does not lead to riots. At the same time, the "stuffing" of certain information can cause a predictable reaction, which leads to the manipulation of the consciousness of the masses by the financial oligarchy. Supporters of liberal democracy consider this argument devoid of evidence: for example, the media rarely voice radical points of view because it is not interesting to the general public, and not because of censorship [source unspecified 954 days]. However, they agree that campaign finance is an essential element in the electoral system and that in some cases it should be public. For the same reason, many countries have public media outlets with a pluralistic policy.

In an effort to retain power, the elected representatives are primarily concerned with measures that will allow them to maintain a positive image in the eyes of voters in the next elections. Therefore, they give preference to such decisions that will bring political dividends in the coming months and years, to the detriment of unpopular decisions, the effect of which will manifest itself only in a few years. However, doubts have been expressed as to whether this disadvantage indeed a disadvantage, since it is extremely difficult for society to make long-term forecasts, and therefore an emphasis on short-term goals may be more effective.

On the other hand, in order to increase the weight of their vote, individual voters can support special lobbying groups. Such groups are able to receive government subsidies and seek solutions that meet their narrow interests, but at the same time do not meet the interests of society as a whole.

Libertarians and monarchists criticize liberal democracy for the fact that elected representatives often change laws unnecessarily. This makes it difficult for citizens to comply with laws and creates the preconditions for abuse by law enforcement agencies and officials. The complexity of legislation also leads to the slowness and cumbersomeness of the bureaucratic machine.

There is a widespread belief that regimes with a high concentration of power are more effective in the event of war. It is argued that democracy requires a lengthy coordination procedure, the people may object to the call. At the same time, monarchies and dictatorships are able to quickly mobilize the necessary resources. However, the latter statement is often contradicted by the facts. In addition, the situation changes significantly, subject to the presence of allies. Certainty in foreign policy leads to more effective military alliance between democratic regimes than between authoritarian ones.