What is power briefly. Political power

POWER

POWER

A management tool used to achieve set goals. Goals can be group, class, collective, personal, state, etc. V. is called upon to do everything in order to achieve those goals that must be preserved, but at the same time improve and change management. The concept of V. is multifaceted and multifaceted. It covers relationships that are manifested both at the macro level (V. state-va) and at the micro level (V. of parents over children).
V. - biosocial, the makings of V. are inherited by people from nature. Already in the animal world there is a certain "". The leader of the herd of monkeys has a huge "B." over all the other monkeys, and they feel it well. Without such a leader, any herd can die, because it will lose its bearings and in the harsh conditions of the struggle for it will not be able to adapt to new living conditions. She herself made sure that someone from the herd of animals needs to have a “V.”, which allows him to play the role of leader in different situations. Being stronger, the leader subjugates all the others.
All people by nature have dominion over their own kind. Lust for power is inherent in everyone, but in some it is manifested more strongly, while in others it is weaker. The realization of power inclinations depends solely on social conditions. For example, Napoleon would not have become emperor of France if Corsica had not been annexed to France three months before his birth and if the country had not broken out.
For the implementation of V., at least it and the object are necessary: ​​one gives orders, they are carried out. The subject orders the object, and the object obeys, for disobedience entails.
The state, political parties, individuals, groups, through their representatives, act as subjects of V.. The same applies to object B. Subject and object B. can change places. Subordination to the subject of V. presupposes such forms of relationships in which his orders are carried out with necessity. At the same time, the subject of V. must have the appropriate authority, giving him orders to the object of V. and require him to carry out orders.
Power assumes over fulfillment decisions taken. Failure to comply with the decision should result in punishment, which can be economic, administrative, criminal, etc.
Political warfare is also coercion. Naturally, many do not like her, despise and reject. Anarchists, for example, believe that V. exists and must be disposed of by any means. V. is, however, an immanent feature of society, and it cannot function normally without appropriate power structures. People are afraid of V., but at the same time, if anomalous phenomena take over in society - crime, theft, robbery, etc. - they complain about the absence of V. Anarchy leads either to the disintegration of all aspects of social life and, ultimately, to its death, or to the establishment of a dictatorship.
V. is not identical with authority. The subject may have V., but not authority, although the possession of V. does not exclude the presence of authority. The subject acquires it gradually and deserves it through his activities that benefit society, collective, group, political party, mafia, etc. The subject of authority gives advice and recommendations that can be taken into account or ignored, which is unacceptable in relation to the orders of the subject V. Many prominent people (writers, scientists, artists, etc.), without any V., enjoy great authority in society . As for the V. haves, they must earn authority by their deeds, and not by promises.
There are different classifications of the types of V., which depend on social life, on the nature and content of V. itself, and so on. First, in a general form, internal, external, “natural” and institutional V. can be distinguished. Internal V. follows from the internal nature of the object V. External V. is V. that does not follow from the internal nature of its object. It involves submission to someone else's will, imposing one's own vision of the world, one's own order and way of life. Thus, the victorious state forces the defeated one to submit to it, to restructure its own in accordance with the ideas of the victorious state. By “natural” V. is meant V., which, as it were, is given by nature. For example, the leaders of primitive tribes had a large V., but they received it in a natural way, i.e. thanks to their natural gifts, their devotion to the tribe, etc. As for the institutional V., it is based on legal laws and norms. Depending on the spheres of public life, V. can be distinguished as economic, political, spiritual, and so on. In turn, economic V. can be divided into subspecies (V. within an enterprise, corporation, firm, etc.). Political V. is also manifested in various forms(, democracy, dictatorship, oligarchy, personal V. regime, legislative, executive and judicial branches of V., etc.).
Each generates his own social V. In primitive society, such a type of V. (leaders, an assembly of the clan) dominated, which most adequately corresponded low level productive forces and production relations. But already with the transition to a class society, another type of war appears, appearing in various forms (monarchy, democracy, tyranny, etc.). The forms of its manifestation depend on concrete historical conditions. So, in Athens in the era of Pericles, a developed slave-owning system functioned, in antich. Rome's republican government was replaced by a dictatorship. Monarchy is typical of feudalism. As for the capitalist mode of production, the typical form of war for it is the republic, although dictatorial regimes appear under certain historical circumstances. But sooner or later they give way to the republican form of government.

Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki. Edited by A.A. Ivina. 2004 .

POWER

in a general sense, and the ability to exercise one's will, to have a decisive influence on the behavior of people with the help of c.-l. means - authority, law, violence (economic, political, state, family and others) .

Scientific approach to the definition of V. requires taking into account the multiplicity of its manifestations in society, and therefore, clarifying the specific. features otd. its types - economic, political (including state, public), family; delimitations of class, group, personal V., which are intertwined with each other, but are not reduced to each other; delimitation of features, forms and methods of manifestation of V. in various social, economic. and political systems. If in antagonistic society ch. characteristic of V. are relations of domination and subordination, then in the socialist. society, they are increasingly being replaced by relationships based on persuasion, leadership, influence, and control.

The most important type of V. is political. V., the real ability of a given class, group, individual to carry out his will in politics and legal norms; it is characterized by social domination and leadership of certain classes. Although now political activities are carried out within the various components of the political. systems: parties, trade unions, intl. organizations (UN, NATO and others) , center. political institute. V. is a state. State. V. has a class, relies on specialist. the apparatus of coercion and extends to the entire population of a given country; it means defined. organization and activities in the implementation of the goals and objectives of this organization.

V. is one of main concepts of politics. science and practice. V. I. Lenin wrote that “the transfer of state power from the hands of one class to the hands of another is the first, main, fundamental revolution, both in the strictly scientific and practical political meaning of this concept” (PSS, T. 31, With. 133) that "the root of any revolution, the question of power in the state ..." (ibid., T. 32, With. 127, cm. Also, T. 34, With. 200) .

Societies. V. existed before the appearance of the state, it will remain in one form or another after its disappearance. Criticizing the position of P. B. Struve, who argued that he would survive even after the abolition of classes, Lenin wrote: “First of all, he sees completely wrong hallmark states in coercive power: coercive power exists in every human community, both in the tribal structure and in the family, but there was no state here ... A sign of the state is a special class of persons in whose hands power is concentrated ” (ibid., T. 1, With. 439) .

State. V. can achieve its goals by various means - ideological. impact, economic incentives and other indirect means, but only she has a monopoly on coercion with the help of specialist. apparatus in relation to all members of society.

Dominance suggests abs. or relates. subjugation of some people (social groups) others. Leadership denotes the ability to exercise one's will by influencing in various direct and indirect forms on guided objects. It can be based solely on authority, on the recognition by the governed of correspondences. powers of managers with a minimum implementation of imperiously-compels. functions. So, the leadership from the communist side. or the workers' party relies mainly on the ideological influence on the masses, on the strength of authority. The effectiveness of leadership depends on the correctness of the party's policy, on the extent to which its ideas and concrete decisions meet the interests of the masses, the objective needs of societies. development.

It is also important to distinguish between the concepts of political. leadership and management. Yes, in modern imperialist groups of monopolies exercise a leading role in society and the state. However, they do not take on the functions directly. controls that are carried out prof. political figures, the administrative apparatus. The monopolies exert their decisive influence on the policy of the capitalist. states by various means: the very fact of concentrating in their hands the key levers of the economy, the direction of activity, financing determined. parties and political campaigns, influence on character constitutional regimes on the formation of societies. opinions, on the activities of various pressure groups in parliaments, in state institutions and T. Lenin emphasized that under the conditions of parliamentary regimes he leads society indirectly, but all the more surely. “That special stratum in whose hands is power in modern society- Lenin wrote - this is. The direct and closest relationship of this body with ... the bourgeois class is also clear from history ... from the very conditions for the formation and staffing of this class, to which access is open only to bourgeois "come from the people" and which is connected with this bourgeoisie by a thousand strongest threads. (ibid., With. 439-40) .

The leading force in the socialist countries advocates, which exercises its leadership primarily through the communist. or a workers' party, and specialists working in the field of economy, culture, education and others Communist and workers' parties, exercising leadership of society, are at the center of all political. systems. They influence, firstly, by developing an ideology and policies, programs for the activities of society; secondly, shaping and organizing the implementation of these programs internal And ext. politicians; thirdly, by nominating their representatives to key positions in the areas of management, teaching them how to manage; fourthly, controlling the implementation of the planned line. directly with them. business and others processes are handled by farms., state, societies. and other organizations. The distinction between the concepts of leadership and management in the conditions of socialist. society has not only theoretical, but also practical. . This approach helps to properly distribute functions, rights and responsibilities between various political units. systems of the socialist countries, to avoid parallelism in their activities, to make management as efficient as possible.

Under communist conditions societies. self-government will wither away the main institution politich. V. - state, however, leadership and management will be maintained, which will be carried out by the whole society.

F. Engels, On Authority, K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, T. 18; e ss, The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State, ibid., T. 21; Lenin V. I., On the social structure of V., prospects and liquidationism, PSS, T. 20; his own, Tasks of the proletariat in our revolution, din, T. 31, With. 162-65; him, Gosvo and the revolution, in the same place, T. 33; his own, Prolet, the revolution and the renegade Kautsky, ibid., T. 37; Materials of the XXIV Congress CPSU, M., 1971; Materials of the XXV Congress CPSU, M., 1976; Materials of the XXVI Congress CPSU, M., 1981; Burlatsky F. M., Galkin A. A., Sociology. Policy. International relations, M., 1974; Veselovsky V., Classes, elephant and V., per. With Polish, M., 1981.

F. M. Burlatsky.

Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .

POWER

in contrast to physical violence, which affects the soul and penetrates them, subordinating another to the law of its will. In essence, it is similar authority. Its correlate is respect; it is ethical if and only if it guides the one who respects it in such a way that he is able to realize more and higher values ​​(cf. Ethics), without being directly affected by the authorities. Power needs justification, and these attempts are an essential part of history. Power inherent demonic. “Truly, this is demonic power: even where it fights for the ideal in the highest degree selflessly, considering success lasting only when it defends its own with exceptional vitality, it resolutely carries out its own, linking the passionate desire for its own significance directly with its deeds. . Whoever has power is possessed by it” (Gerh. Ritter, Die Dämonie der Marcht, 1947). Therefore, power in the understanding of orthodox Christianity is sinful under all circumstances.

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .

POWER

POWER is the ability to influence something or someone. Power is closely related to dominance and authority. M. Weber defined power as follows: “The power lies in individual A to achieve from individual B such behavior or such refraining from actions that B would not otherwise accept and which corresponds to the will of A.”

In modern political science, four models of power are best known.

Voluntarism is based on the traditions of the social contract, social atomism and methodological

skom individualism (see Social contract. Atomism). In this model, power is viewed through the prism of intentions and passions. All social life is essentially reduced to the claims and relations of individuals. Anyone is presented only as a collection of individual wills. For the first time this model of power relations was formulated in the works of the classics of the English political - T. Hobbes, J. Locke. D. Hume showed that “power” is close to the concept of “cause”, but unlike the cause, power is also associated with the result.

The modern political scientist R. Dahl considers power as the ability to force others to do something that, in the absence of pressure, they would not do, that is, as the ability to bring things into, change the course of events. Imperious, in his view, consists of two main elements - stimulus and reaction. By analogy with Newtonian mechanics, it is assumed that all bodies are in a state of relative rest until they are acted upon by some external force. That is the power that power is. In essence, Dahl is causal in nature.

This same model of power includes “rational choice” (see rational choice theory), which postulates the existence of hidden causes and structures. Public life consists of a chain of successive interactions between individuals and groups, in which a special role is given to motivation, incentives for participants in power relations.

Many critics of the voluntarist model of power have pointed out that it does not provide a theoretical explanation of how and why individuals are able to exercise power in the way they do it. In addition, this model does not take into account at all the ideological and cultural-historical prerequisites that determine the preferences and goals of human activity.

The hermeneutic or communicative model is related to phenomenology and hermeneutics. Its supporters believe that power is constituted due to the meanings shared by the members of a given social community. Beliefs are a central ingredient in power relations, and considerations of rationality are necessarily involved in social life. The interest of hermeneutics is directed primarily to the symbolic and normative constructs that form the practical data of social agents. This approach also includes the belief that people are by nature linguistic beings and largely determine the nature of society, including the forms of existing power. For example, Arendt Hanna in his work “On Violence” holds that power means the ability of a person to act, but to act jointly. Power, in her opinion, is never the property of an individual, but belongs to a group and exists only as long as it retains its own. Humans are uniquely communicative beings, and it is through their ability to share thoughts and relationships with others that their ability to dominate and obey is maintained.

For supporters of this model, power is included in the system of values ​​that constitute, as well as the possibilities for the activities of social agents.

The “material” aspects of power relations remained essentially out of their interest.

The structuralist model of power is associated with the names of K. Marx and 9. Durkheim. It rejects the methodological approach, and does not accept a purely approach. Power, according to this model, has a structural objectivity that is not recognized in either the voluntarist or the hermeneutic model. The power structure makes human behavior possible and limits it at the same time. It may have a normative character, but it is not limited to the views and beliefs of people.

The structural approach defines power as the ability to act. Social agents have power by virtue of the stability of the relationships in which they participate. It has a certain "materiality" because it follows certain structural rules, has its own resources and relationships. This is the dual nature of structures: social structures do not exist independently of the activity and ideas of people about it, and at the same time they act as the material conditions of activity. This structure does not arise simply from relations, for example, between the capitalist and the workers, is not reducible to the views of the capitalist on the workers, but is inherent in capitalism as a whole. Participants of interactions rely on it, realizing certain goals, including those of an imperious nature.

The postmodern model of power has variants, ranging from M. Foucault to modern feminism. Rejecting individualism and , postmodern theorists believe that language and symbols are the central elements of power. From their point of view, the scientific does not have sufficient cognitive reliability. Thus, Foucault sees it in "stirring up the revolt of enslaved knowledge", which is obscured, if not disqualified, by generally accepted knowledge. In the genealogical analysis of power, he proceeds from the fact that power is concentrated not only in political sphere. Power relationships are found everywhere: in personal relationships, in the family, at the university, in the office, in the hospital, in the culture as a whole. The asymmetry of influences, which consists in the fact that A has a stronger influence on B than B on A, suggests that power is a universal social relation. Therefore, the task of a politician is to take off the mask from power, especially in those areas of life where the relationship of domination and subordination is not evident. Power, according to Foucault, is certain structures or discourses that have both positive and negative. Social agents are created due to the power relations in which they participate, and no matter how "resistance" to this power may be, social agents are always limited to those structures in which they appeared.

Postmodern theorists emphasize the local analysis of "micro-power". Any global or

Introduction

Relevance. Society cannot do without social and then political institutions, i.e. sustainable social or political institutions, institutions, associations and communities that perform social or political functions necessary for society.

People are social beings, they cannot live, work, without uniting according to needs and interests, goals. In a word, social and political institutions arise due to biological, social, political and other reasons with an objective necessity. Historically, tribal communities were the first social institution. The clan was a group (community) of people united by consanguinity or alleged kinship, common property, joint labor and equal distribution. This social institution was very stable and viable. It ensured the survival of people who were still largely dependent on natural forces and could only exist on the basis of collective economic and social unity. The clans existed and functioned for many millennia, they united into larger social institutions- tribes. Later, religious associations (orders, etc.), trade and merchant guilds, and other social institutions appeared. Historically, the first political institution, the most important and largest, was the state. As society becomes more complex and democracy develops, new socio-production (cooperatives), socio-political (trade unions), political (political parties) and other institutions emerge.

The purpose of the course work is to study the concept of power, its varieties and its appointment in society.

The subject of the study is society as the basis of power;

The object of the study is power and its varieties.

1. Define the concept and essence of power;

2. Explore the varieties of power;

3. Determine the features of the appointment of power in society.

A lot of works are devoted to the issue of power and its appointment in society, mostly the material presented in the educational literature is of a general nature. To write this work, the works of many authors were used, in particular, such as: Abdulaev M.I., Melekhin A.V., Cherdantsev A.F., Khropanyuk V.I.

This work has the following structure: it consists of two chapters, an introduction, a conclusion, a list of sources used and an appendix.

Power and its types

The concept and essence of power

Power is the ability and ability to exercise one's will, to influence the activities and behavior of other people, even in spite of resistance. The essence of power does not depend on its basis. The ability and ability to achieve one's goals can be based on various methods: democratic and authoritarian, honest and dishonest, violence and revenge, deceit, provocation, extortion, incentives, promises, etc.

Power appeared with the emergence of human society and will always accompany its development in one form or another. It is necessary for the organization of social production, which requires the subordination of all participants to a single will, as well as for regulating other relationships between people in society.

Power is a necessary attribute of any society. It can be defined as the ability of certain classes, social groups or individuals to carry out their will through a certain social environment, using, if necessary, coercion.

From this definition It follows that power is, first of all, the relationship between the subject, or the bearer of power, and the object, i.e. subject or subject. The content of power can be divided into social and technical aspects. Abdulaev M.I. Theory of State and Law: A Textbook for Higher Educational Institutions. - M.: Financial control, 2006. - S. 214.

The social content reflects the will of the subjects of power, representing certain strata, classes, groups of society or ruling individuals.

The technical aspects of power are designed to ensure its direct and feedback connection with the "social environment". These are, first of all, ways of bringing imperious decrees to the attention of subordinates. So, in Ancient Babylon, the Laws of King Hammurabi were carved on a basalt pillar installed in the center of the city so that no one could refer to their ignorance. In modern society, orders of authority are communicated through official messengers, means mass media etc.

Since the decrees of power can be carried out voluntarily and "under pressure", then any authority must have the (technical) possibility of coercive implementation of its decrees. Therefore, it includes means and mechanisms for the implementation of coercion, which can be both physical and mental. For example, every state includes the so-called power structures - the army, the police, as well as prisons, camps, etc. On the other hand, an important factor in the indisputability of the tribal system was the perception of it as a largely mysterious and supernatural phenomenon. In ancient systems of law, divine punishment after death was considered the most severe punishment for an offense.

Some authors equate power and domination, which is not indisputable. Power implies subordination (voluntary or forced) to the will of the subject of power subject to the will. Domination also includes the possession of the conditions for the existence of the subject. Therefore, the bank manager only exercises power, while the master is the owner, the owner. Theory of state and law: textbook / edited by Pigolkin A.S. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Jurist, 2003. - S. 108.

The essence of power.

The word "power" can be used in several meanings:

1. The ability, right and opportunity to dispose of anyone, anything; to have a decisive influence on the fate, behavior and activities of people with the help of various means - rights, authority, will, coercion;

2. Political domination over people;

3. The system of state bodies;

4. Persons, bodies vested with the relevant state, administrative powers.

Essential Features of Political Power

sovereignty, which means independence and indivisibility of power.

the volitional nature of power presupposes the existence of a conscious political program, goals and readiness to fulfill it;

the coercive nature of power (persuasion, submission, command, domination, violence);

universality of power, which means the functioning of power in all spheres of social relations and political processes.

Power is the central axis around which all politics revolves. It is omnipresent and permeates all the structures of society, acting as its cementing element, supporting the internal organization and hierarchy of social relations.

There is no single definition of power in political science theory. The following definitions are most frequently given: Theory of State and Law: A Textbook for High Schools / Ed. T 33 prof. V.M. Korelsky and prof. V.D. Perevalova. - 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Publishing house NORMA Publishing group NORMA-INFRA - M), 2002. - S. 212.

power, interpreting power as domination and coercion to obedience;

strong-willed, understanding power as the ability to carry out one's will even in spite of resistance;

power as influence. The essence of influence lies in the ability to influence the behavior of others.

teleological, according to which power is the achievement of certain goals;

instrumentalist, interpreting power as the ability to mobilize resources to achieve certain goals;

conflict, reducing power to a position of domination, associated with the ability of individual groups and individuals to control the mechanism for the distribution of scarce social values;

structuralist, representing power as a special kind of relationship between the manager and the ruled.

These definitions are not mutually exclusive, but complement each other. Recognizing the fact that today a general theory of power has not developed in science, domestic political scientists have systematized numerous theories of power. Several approaches have been identified in considering the essence of power. Theory of State and Law: A Textbook for High Schools / Ed. T 33 prof.V.M. Korelsky and prof.V.D. Perevalova. - 2nd ed., rev. and additional - M.: Publishing house NORMA Publishing group NORMA-INFRA - M), 2002. - S. 213.

Relational theories (from the English relation - relation) understand power as an interpersonal relationship that allows one individual to change the behavior of another. This approach comes in several variants:

a) the theory of resistance (D. Cartwright, J. French, B. Raven considers power as a relationship in which the subject suppresses the resistance of the object. Accordingly, a classification of various degrees and forms of resistance, as well as the foundations of power, is developed. The concept of "strength of power" is introduced, which is understood as the maximum potential ability of an agent to influence another;

b) the theory of exchange (P. Blau, D. Hickson, K. Heinigs) interprets power as a situation of resource exchange. Resources are unevenly distributed: some individuals are deprived of them and need them. In this case, the surplus of resources possessed by others can be transformed into power. The surplus is given away to those who lack it in exchange for the desired behavior. The authors focus on the asymmetric nature of power relations;

c) the theory of the division of spheres of influence (D. Rong) calls into question the question of the asymmetry of the relationship of power. Power is an interaction where participants periodically change roles. For example, the trade union controls the hiring of labor, while the employer dictates the time and place of work.

Systemic theories of power consider power as an impersonal property, as an attribute of the system. Within this concept, three campaigns are distinguished:

a) power as an attribute of macro social system(T. Parsons, D. Easton). For T. Parsons, power is a generalized intermediary in political system. He compared it with money, which acts as a generalized mediator of the economic process. Power is understood as the real ability of the system to accumulate its interests, to achieve its goals;

b) the meso-approach (M. Crozier) considers power at the level of subsystems (family, organization). The direct connection of power with the organizational structure is indicated;

c) the micro-approach (M. Rogers, T. Clark) interprets power as the interaction of individuals acting within a specific social environment. Power is defined as the ability of an individual to influence others and is viewed through his roles and statuses in the system;

d) the communicative approach (N. Luhmann, K. Deutsch) understands power as a means of social communication that allows regulating group conflicts and ensuring the integration of society.

Behavioral (behavioral interpretations, from English behavior - behavior) concepts of power, as well as relational theories, consider power as a relationship between people. The main attention is paid to the motives of behavior in the struggle for power. There are several possible interpretations:

a) the power model (G. Lasswell) believes that the root cause of power is the impulse - the desire for power. From the collisions and interactions of individual wills to power, all political matter is built. The very same power is manifested in decision-making and control over resources;

b) the market model (J. Ketlin) proceeds from the analogy between politics and economics. In politics, the laws of market trade operate: taking into account supply and demand, striving for profit, competition;

c) the game model (F. Znanetsky) assumes that in the political market, subjects differ not only in different reserves of power, but also in abilities, strategy flexibility, and passion. The struggle for power can be motivated by a "playful" nature that brings satisfaction to the participants. Politics is a field of play, a theater where success depends on dexterity, acting and the ability of the subject to reincarnate.

So, to summarize: power is interpreted either as a characteristic of an individual (personal power), or as a resource or commodity. The most popular consideration of power as an interaction (relationship), structural components which will be the subject and the object (the subject is the active side, acting as the cause of the change in the actions of the other - the object). The absence of a single definition confirms the multidimensionality of this phenomenon. Theory of State and Law: A Course of Lectures / Edited by N.I. Matuzova and A.V. Malko. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional M.: Jurist, 2001. - S. 406.

There are different points of view regarding the nature of power (the primary source of power):

psychological interpretations derive power from human psychology: the will to power, an inferiority complex (in this case, power acts as a means of compensating for a sense of one's own inferiority);

the structural-organizational approach takes power beyond the scope of psychology and connects it with the nature of the organization (a kind of "effect" of the organization), with the statuses and roles of individuals in the organization;

the legal approach derives power from norms and sanctions, from this point of view, power is the ability to create norms and demand their implementation;

the class approach (Marxist) substantiated the class nature of political power: power acts as an organization of the economically dominant class.

1) Power is associated with domination, which is understood as coercive violence, command. The directive moment (the imposition of one's will in the form of an order) is present in power as a generalized symbol (the ability to use violence, punishment) and as real power in relation to those who violated the laws. On the other hand, the category of domination is narrower than the category of power, because power can act in the form of influence and authority and not resort to violence.

2) Power can be exercised in the form of influence. But influence is broader than power. You can talk about power if this influence is not random, but is observed constantly. Power as an influence is carried out either in the form of persuasion (impact on the rational level of consciousness), or in the form of suggestion, which involves the use of special manipulation techniques (impact on the subconscious).

3) Authority is considered as a possible form and source of power. Authority is a leadership voluntarily recognized as subject to the subject of power of the right to power by virtue of his moral qualities or business competence.

There are various interpretations and approaches to determining the nature of power.

Thus, behavioral interpretations consider power as a special type of behavior in which some people command and others obey. As a result, the understanding of power is individualized, reduced to the interaction of real personalities. Power relations are derived from the nature of man, his natural properties. A person is considered as a "power-hungry animal", whose actions and actions are based on the desire (most often unconscious) for power. It is the desire to subjugate other individuals to one's will that acts as the dominant motive for the political activity of a particular individual.

The behaviorists see the political process itself as a clash of individual aspirations for power, in which the strongest wins. The balance of aspirations to power of political forces is provided by a system of political institutions. Violation of the balance of political forces leads to crises and conflicts in society.

By focusing on "observable behavior," behaviorists attempt to uncover the same and regularly repeated responses in an individual's behavior. They note the insufficiency of legal forms of regulation of people's behavior by the authorities (for example, legal ones) and seek to penetrate deeper into the mechanism of behavior motivation. In the course of research, it was found that the majority of the inhabitants perceive political reality in terms of an irrational principle: traditions, customs, religion, feelings.

Psychological interpretations of power, based on its behavioral understanding as the behavior of real individuals, try to reveal the subjective motivation of this behavior, the origins of power rooted in the consciousness and subconsciousness of people. One of the most prominent directions this kind of psychoanalysis. He interprets the desire for power as a manifestation, sublimation of a suppressed libido, which is a predominantly sexual drive subject to transformation (Sigmund Freud) or psychic energy in general (Carl Gustav Jung). The desire for power and especially the possession of it perform the function of subjective compensation for physical or spiritual inferiority. Power arises as an interaction of the will to it of some and readiness for submission, "voluntary slavery" of others. According to Freud, there are structures in the human psyche that make it predisposed to prefer slavery to freedom for the sake of personal security and comfort.

Various psychoanalysts differ in explaining the causes of psychological submission. Some (S. Muscovy, B. Edelman) see them in a kind of hypnotic suggestion that exists in the relationship between the leader and the crowd, while others (J. Lacan) see them in the special susceptibility of the human subconscious to the symbols expressed in the language. In general, the psychological approach helps to identify the mechanisms of power motivation as a command-subordination relationship. Theory of State and Law: A Course of Lectures / Edited by N.I. Matuzova and A.V. Malko. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional M.: Jurist, 2001. - S. 411.

The opposite of the behaviorist and psychological visions of power is its systemic interpretation. If the first two directions require going in the understanding of power from the bottom up, from individuals to society, guided by its manifestations actually observed in empirical experience, then the systems approach proceeds from the derivative of power not from individual relations, but from the social system, considers power as "the ability of the system to provide fulfillment by its elements of the obligations assumed, aimed at the realization of its collective goals. Some representatives systems approach(K. Deutsch, N. Luhmann) interpret power as a means of social communication (communication), which allows regulating group conflicts and ensuring the integration of society. The systemic nature of power determines its relativity, i.e. prevalence on certain systems.

Structural-functionalist interpretations of power see it as a property social organization, as a way of self-organization of the human community, based on the expediency of separating the functions of management and execution. Without power, the collective existence of a person, the joint life of many people, is impossible. Society itself is arranged hierarchically, it differentiates managerial and executive social roles. Power is a property social statuses, roles, allowing you to control resources, means of influence. In other words, power is associated with occupying leadership positions that allow you to influence people with the help of positive and negative sanctions, rewards and punishments.

Relational (from the French word "helasiop" - relation) definitions consider power as a relationship between two partners, agents, in which one of them has a decisive influence on the second. In this case, power appears as the interaction of its subject and object, in which the subject controls the object with the help of certain means.

Such an understanding of power allows us to reveal its structure, to link its various characteristics into a single whole. The main components of power are its subject, object, means (resources) and the process that sets in motion all its elements and is characterized by the mechanism and methods of interaction between partners.

All these interpretations of power can be divided into two main approaches to understanding power.

According to the first approach, power is understood as any ability of an individual to perform this or that action. So, T. Parsons, the founder of the school of structural-functional analysis, defines power as "the ability to perform a function on behalf of and on behalf of society." In this case, power is understood as a property of the subject, regardless of the object. In other words, to have power, a person does not need another person.

More common in Western political science is another approach, according to which power is understood as any ability of an individual to exert a decisive influence on the behavior of other people. With this approach, power is seen in every interindividual interaction if there is an asymmetry (mismatch, multidirectionality) of wills, subordination of the will (goals, desires) of one person to the will of another. Wherein

a) power is replaced by influence;

b) it is not about political, but about social power;

c) the question of the economic foundations of power is not raised.

Thus, power relations are reduced to interindividual, interpersonal relations, i.e. power relations are psychologized. Theory of State and Law: A Course of Lectures / Edited by N.I. Matuzova and A.V. Malko. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional M.: Jurist, 2001. - S. 413.

Classical in Western political science is the definition of power, given in 1922 by Max Weber: "Power means any ability to conduct within the data social relations own will, even in spite of resistance, regardless of what such an opportunity is based on. "Kravchenko E.I. Max Weber. - M .: Ves Mir, 2002. - S. 18.

As can be seen from the definition, M. Weber raises power relations to the level of a social (and not just psychological) phenomenon. It is this circumstance, in our opinion, that has determined the prevalence of this approach in Western political science.

Based on the understanding of power by M. Weber, three main features of power can be distinguished.

1. Power is a volitional relationship between people. There are two sides of this relationship - the subject and object of power, or domineering and subordinate will. The imperious will is addressed to the other side with the requirement to obey, to perform this or that action or, conversely, to refrain from it. Those. it dominates, has the character of a determining influence, its prescriptions have an imperative (obligatory, obligatory) character.

2. Hence the second characteristic of power: power represents the relationship of dependence between people in society.

3. Power is exercised with the help of special methods of power.

It is easy to see that if the first sign defines power as a subject-object relationship, then the second characterizes this interaction from the point of view of the object, and the third characterizes the subject of power. The object's attitude to power is revealed in the category of "legitimate power". The attitude of the subject to the object of power is characterized by the concept of "resources of power". Hence the next two questions of our lecture. Khropanyuk V.I. Theory of State and Law: Proc. allowance for universities. / Ed. Strekozova V.G. 1st ed., revised. and additional - M, 1995. - S. 110.

If we turn for clarification to the protocols of modern "wise men" - the Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary, then he will again surprise us with another mental trick called "Soap Bubble". On page 92 of that book it says:
"Power is the ability and ability to exercise one's will, to have a decisive influence on the activities, behavior of people with the help of any means - authority, law, violence."
So, power in a short definition is the ability to exercise will.
Let's ask the dictionary about will. He answers:
“Will is the ability to choose the goal of activity and the internal efforts necessary for its implementation” (ibid., p. 97).
In other words, will is the ability to choose a goal and carry it out with inner efforts.
Now let's substitute this short definition will into a short definition of power.
We get:
POWER is the ability to exercise the ability to choose a goal and implement it with internal efforts.
Comments, as they say, are unnecessary.

Any basic Life concept is deciphered through a number of auxiliary Related concepts, which, together with the main one, form a Coordinated System. It is this Coherent System that should be obtained if we substitute the decoding of auxiliary concepts into the definition of the main concept.
If we are dealing with a false - an artificial concept or a falsely understood natural concept, then successively replacing the basic explanatory concepts with their disclosures in the main formulation, we get an increasingly inflated and iridescent bubble with bizarre colors, which eventually bursts, exposing the inner emptiness and the lack of sensible essence under the empty shell of scientific verbiage.
This is the “Soap Bubble” effect, which clearly shows that the meaning of scientific philosophy, like a fairy-tale king who turned out to be naked, is in fact exaggerated and stupid.

Fellow scientists may quite reasonably object that demonstrating the “soap bubble” technique on the example of power, the author was incorrect. He ignored the second part of the definition, which may be (what the hell is not joking) and contains the real essence.
Well. Let's get back. The question is not only important, but also fundamental. Let's look at the second part of the definition:
"Power is the ability and opportunity ... to have a decisive influence on the activities, behavior of people with the help of any means - authority, law, violence."

Interesting questions immediately arise.
What is an ability? This is a certain primordial given in a person. Who gives the ability? In accordance with the Ancient worldview of the Triune Life, Fair Nature gives abilities based on the Spiritual experience that a person has accumulated in a previous earthly incarnation. Innate abilities are a GIFT from GOD. Here the Canons of NATURE, which are established by the Creator, operate.

What is opportunity? This is a preliminary readiness for the manifestation of something, which can be both internal and external. Internal readiness is actually the same as ability. This means that we are talking about external readiness, more precisely, about providing external opportunities (in this case) for the authorities. What defines these possibilities? external conditions? Democrats will say - the laws on elections (power, in their opinion, should be elective). And who creates these social laws - the legal system? People.

People invent these not Natural, but ARTIFICIAL laws of the social structure - the so-called Law. In fact, these are the rules of the game of domineering cunning with subservient simpletons - a game of throwing a fool, in which the role of the fool is always assigned to the second, and the trump cards are always in the hands of the first.

These artificial laws are invented by those in power, or rather by the intellectuals serving them in their own selfish interests, covered by demagogy about the needs of the people and caring for them (by the way, democracy comes from demagogy, and not vice versa, as is commonly believed).
The so-called social laws are prepared in the kitchen of the "intellectual elite" by egghead scientists in order to feed this inedible scrambled eggs to the people (the electorate). Thus, already at the very beginning of the definition of Power as "the ability and ability to exert a decisive influence" on the brains and behavior of people, the intellectual prostitutes of the ruling doctrine show their true essence, mixing God's gift with scrambled eggs.

Let us return, however, to the last definition of power and, having removed the empty, scientific verbiage, we will single out its main points. Then it will turn out:
Power is the impact on people through authority, law, violence.
The disclosure of the essence of any phenomenon is inevitably connected with the exposure of the mechanism of this phenomenon and its purpose...

From the above formulation it is clear that the MECHANISM of power is associated with the impact on people and there are three means of influence - Authority, Law (that is, laws) and Violence (as always, the main thing is to last place).

Thus, for the spiritual and material enslavement of people, the authorities in the last 2000-year era of TOTALITAR LIE AND GENERAL HYPOMERCY use authorities specially created and inflated by it, and the so-called. a legal system - laws that, as even the simple ones know, that the drawbar - where it turns it, it went there.

Power is the ability and opportunity to embody one's will, to influence the behavior and fate of other people. It can be political, economic, spiritual, family, etc. In this article, we will consider the first type of power (features, characteristics, functioning of the relevant bodies on the example of the Russian Federation).

Definitions of power

The concept of power B. Russell attributed to the central categories political science. He, among other things, noted its great importance and fundamentality. T. Parsons, considering power as the core of social relations, compared its place in politics with the position of money, which they occupy in the economic sphere.

In science, this concept has its own long research history. In modern times, scientists sought to create the possibility of such a structural reorganization of power, which would allow it to be democratized and subordinated to the law. To do this, it was supposed to distribute it into several independent, but interconnected structures. So, the French educator C. Montesquieu, considering the concept of power, divided it into three branches: legislative, executive, judicial.

Political power

Political power is the real possibility of a group or individuals to determine their will based on the interests and needs in this area.
It has a number of features.

1. The legality of the use of methods of pressure within the state.
2. Supremacy along with other types of power. It is able to limit the influence of large corporations, the media and other structures.
3. Publicity. Political power, unlike private power, appeals to the citizens of the state on behalf of the whole society.
4. The presence of one decision-making center.
5. Variety of resources. Political power uses not only pressure, but also economic, social and spiritual-informational methods of pressure (achieving goals).
6. Legality. It acts as a kind of justification for the use of methods of pressure and restriction of freedom.

State power is a form of political power.

Government

State power is the possibility and ability of a group, relying on a special apparatus, to extend its dominance to the entire population.

The following characteristics and features can be distinguished:

1. Public and political power governs different social groups.
2. Sovereign. In the field of state affairs, it has supremacy and independence in relation to other types of power.
3. It is carried out on an ongoing basis with the help of a special apparatus.
4. It has the monopoly right to use methods of pressure on the territory of the state.
5. Applies to all individuals and legal entities in the country.
6. Publishes normative-legal acts.

Signs of state power

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is engaged in the analysis of cases related to compliance with the main law of the state. He can also resolve disputes arising between power structures and problems related to the violation of the rights and freedoms of people.

Courts of general jurisdiction decide civil, criminal and administrative cases. Arbitration structures deal with economic disputes.

conclusions

Thus, in Russia, as in other democratic states, power is divided into three branches. Executive functions are performed by the Government and the President. Legislative power is in the hands of the Federal Assembly. The judiciary is carried out by three types of relevant structures.

Power- this is the ability and ability to have a decisive influence on the behavior and activities of people through various means: authority, law, coercion (including direct violence), and others.

Term power also used to designate its subjects, holders of power, elected persons or bodies, for example: a general meeting of all members primitive kind, elder, leader, priest, parliament, government, etc.

Without power, society will be in chaos, so it is permeated with power relations.

Power in society is generated by the need for management, the need to agree on common goals in the presence of diverse interests, values, and needs. It is also due to social asymmetry, i.e. natural and social inequality of people.

in dynamics in love is always attitude between people - power relation. The structure of power relations: subject, object, power influence itself.

Subject of power- this is the carrier of power, from which the imperious impulse comes, this is the active principle of power. The subject of power is endowed with consciousness and will subjugates the object to his will. For example, the subject of power may be a person, a group of persons, the people as a whole, a public or state authority, the state as a whole, international organizations, global community.

Object of power- these are those on whom the authoritative subordinating influence is directed. The peculiarity of the object of power lies in the fact that it is also endowed with consciousness and will and can act as the subject of power in other power relations. The objects of power can be those who are its subjects, i.e. a person, a group of persons, the people as a whole, a public or state authority, the state as a whole, international organizations, the world community. It is important that the object of power in one power relationship can become a subject in another power relationship.

Imperious influence- this is the connection and interaction between the subject and the object of power, which occurs in the process of exercising power. It lies in the fact that on the part of the subject, the manifestation of the will is carried out, up to its imposition, and on the part of the object of power, submission to the subject is carried out. Submission can be voluntary, when the will of the subject of power coincides with the will of the object, or forced. There are power relations in which the object and subject of power coincide, for example, in a tribal community, when decisions are made by a general meeting.

In statics, in the structure of power, will and force are distinguished. Will is a basic component of power, because in power, the will of the ruling subject is always manifested: an individual, a group of people, a social class, a people, society as a whole. The will of the majority of society, or the will of a class, or some group of people - aristocracy, oligarchy, technocracy, etc. can manifest itself in state power.

Force power confirms its will, puts the will into action, embodies it. The strength of power is manifested in authority, in ideological influence, in law, in coercion, in direct violence. The power of state power is embodied in state bodies - government bodies, and especially enforcement bodies - the army, police, prisons, etc.

Types of power. Since society is permeated with power relations, there are many types of power.

informal power. In small social groups(family, association of interests, school class, student group), where everyone knows each other and has personal contact, power is held on authority leader. Authority depends on personal qualities, merit, talent.

formal power. In political parties, the state, large corporations, in other organizations, power is based on position and external influence official governing bodies and officials. At the same time, it is not the personal qualities of the holders of power that matter, but their official status. The object of power is forced to obey impersonal rules and commands.

According to the spheres of society distinguish between spiritual, social, economic, political power, information, shadow, military, family, religious and others. One of the main types is political power. It is subdivided into international, state, party, municipal, regional. The purpose of political power is the regulation and management of the process of public and state life. The highest and most developed form of political power is state power.

State power is a relationship of domination and subordination, associated with management, coordination of volitional actions of people, based on organizing influence and the possibility of coercion by the state. It relies on a special apparatus of control and coercion. Has the monopoly right to make laws and other regulations mandatory for everyone. It has a monopoly on the use of legitimate (supported, approved by the population) violence. State power exercises control over society within a certain territory.

Methods, ways to ensure the dominance of the will of the ruling subject depend on the social interests and volitional attitude of the parties. If the interests and will of the subjects coincide, informational influence is sufficient for exercising power. With a divergence of interests and wills, the following ways are possible: a) coordination, stimulation, clarification, persuasion; b) coercion (including direct violence).

Conclusions. Power in society is manifested through social management and social regulation. Social norms determine the subjects of power, the scope of power, the measure of responsibility, the possibility and the measure of coercion. Management structures exercise the powers defined in social norms, while using management tools - authority, customs, law, coercion, information, wealth and others.