The concept of “civil society. Is there a civil society in modern Russia? Civil society in simple terms
The content of the article
CIVIL SOCIETY.The concept of civil society has a long and complex history. It came into use in the 17th and 18th centuries, and its main meaning was that the community of citizens should have its own laws and not depend on gross arbitrariness on the part of the state. Historically, this concept goes back to the family of Latin words civis, civilic, civitas (citizen, civil, city, state), which is associated with such aspects of civil society as citizenship, civic duties and virtues, civilized behavior.
Definition problems.
The main problem in trying to define civil society arises from the fact that civil society has two different aspects, social and political. From the time of Aristotle until Locke, these two spheres were considered in an inseparable unity. Civil society as such did not seem to exist at all. Community, state, koinonia, civitas were one social and political whole. Societies were political societies, and this position was still held in 1690 when John Locke wrote his Second treatise on government... One of its chapters is entitled “On Political and Civil Society”. Locke believed that society in this sense differs from the natural state; it differs significantly from the community of spouses, family. Moreover, civil society is incompatible with absolute monarchy. At the same time, it is a political entity ("body"); for Locke, the social contract and the contract of citizens with the state are one and the same.
Over the course of a century, the terminology has changed. In the work of Adam Ferguson Civil Society History Experience (1767) there is a gap between the political and social spheres. Around the same time, J. Madison, in his articles in Federalist, emphasized the role of civil society as a counterbalance to the arbitrary rule of the state. He believed that a guarantee against the tyranny of the majority is the presence in society of various groups with multidirectional interests. In this sense, civil society is the guardian of human rights.
In the 19th and 20th centuries. many began to understand civil society simply as a human community; others saw in him an element of political organization. Interestingly, some saw civil society as a source of support for the existing political system, while others saw it as a focus of opposition. Thus, in the Anglo-Saxon world, civil society and the state were usually considered complementary rather than hostile forces, which is why the concept of civil society has lost its specific meaning there. In many European countries, civil society was understood as a source of opposition to the state, since there the state's activity was reduced to the latter's interference in the private and corporate life of citizens.
In both cases, civil societies have three characteristics. First, the presence of many associations or, more generally, centers of social power. In this sense, civil society is incompatible with a rigid, autocratic state machine. Secondly, the relative independence of these centers of social power. By virtue of their ability to self-organize, these centers of power resist state control. And thirdly, a sense of civic responsibility, as well as civilized behavior and active citizenship are all necessary elements of a truly civil society.
One of the most important differences between countries reveals the answer to the question: which emerged earlier - the state or civil society? In the United States, civil society clearly preceded the state. The meaning of Federalist's articles was to justify at least minimal elements of the federal, that is, central, board. In England, civil society also emerged before an effective central government emerged. This is also true for some other European countries, for example Switzerland. However, in other countries, especially in France and Spain, and later in Portugal, the state took root first, and civil society had to win back its rights in the fight against the state, which did not want to give up power, even if sometimes enlightened.
Lord Dahrendorf
in the theory of constitutional law, a set of relations in the economy, culture and other areas that develop within a democratic society independently, autonomously from the state. The main elements of G. about. are: diversity and equality of forms of ownership, freedom of labor and entrepreneurship, ideological diversity and freedom of information, inviolability of human rights and freedoms, developed self-government, civilized legal power. In recent years in a number of countries there has been a tendency to consolidate the foundations of geological education. as an integrated constitutional and legal institution.
Excellent definition
Incomplete definition ↓
Civil society
a complex of social relations, an independent set of established forms of joint activities of people. This is a part of society, taken, as it were, outside of political power and includes mainly non-political relations; the totality of all non-state social relations and institutions, expressing the various values, interests and needs of people. The ability to express the private interests of an individual in addition to the state and the institution of bureaucracy is one of the main features of civil society. It stands above all on the protection of private interests, guarantees the inviolability of private life. The structural elements of civil society are: in the economic sphere - non-state and municipal enterprises, business partnerships and societies, production and other cooperatives (artels), unions (associations) and other voluntary associations of legal entities and citizens in the field of economic activity, created on their initiative ; in the social sphere - the family, public organizations and movements, other organizationally formed informal associations, bodies of public self-government, non-state mass media, etc .; in the spiritual sphere - creative, scientific and other associations (religion), independent and independent of the state. In Russia, the civil defense has not yet been formed, but there are only separate fragments of it, sprouts that have been pulled out, trampled and trampled by both the former and the current Russian authorities. This is largely due to the lack of traditions of civil society development in the country. Therefore, in Russia, civil society will have to be formed as an extensive network of public relations and institutions independent of the state, expressing the will and protecting the interests of citizens. The necessary conditions for the formation of civil society are: creation of a social and legal basis for civil defense of a social and legal state, where the state and citizens are equally responsible to each other and before the law, where all public authorities and all citizens are subject to the norms of law; a sufficiently high level of development of the personality itself, its inner freedom, the ability to be included in one or another institution of civil defense. A certain level of civil culture of the population is needed - without this it will be unable to accept the values \u200b\u200bof civil society, it will not even understand the need for its formation and development.
Historically, G.o. originated in the ancient world along with the formation of concepts such as "citizenship" and "citizen". The concept of civitas (society) was formed precisely from the concept of civis (citizen). The transition from the idea of \u200b\u200bG.o. to a certain philosophical and legal concept of G.O. first clearly expressed in the works of T. Hobbes "On the Citizen" (1642) and "Leviathan" (1651). In the following centuries, this concept was developed and deepened by a whole galaxy of representatives of philosophical and political thought - J. Locke, J.-J. Rousseau, I. Kant, G. Hegel, K. Marx, A. Gramsci. J.-J. Rousseau in his treatise "On the Social Contract" for the first time divided the political and civil society identified by J. Locke. A member of the former, according to Rousseau, is a subject, while the latter forms a citizen. Accordingly, human rights and civil rights are separated.
In the history of modern times, the development of the idea and concept of G.O. received state and legal embodiment in the transition from feudal absolutism to constitutional monarchical or republican political regimes (England, Sweden, Denmark, France). In Russian history, the beginnings of the formation of G. constantly came up against much stronger tendencies of nationalization of everything and everyone. The Russian state almost always, sooner or later, absorbed and subordinated to itself any public initiatives or structures. Amorphous and anemic G. o. does not pass without a trace for the state. For the Russian history of modern times, this is the social dead end of Bolshevism-communism.
In Germany, this is Hitlerism and everything connected with it. The optimal model for the development of the state and government. should include a mechanism of constantly corrected dynamic balance, the balance of forces of state regulation and social self-organization, self-development. It is always a process, not a state. The watchdog state, the minimal state, can and should, at certain historical periods, turn into a state-interventionist who takes on the function of an arbiter of the acutely conflicting sides of the state. The industrially and socially developed countries of the West have long gone through the state of the economy, completely free from any state interference in it, and are implementing in practice programs of state regulation of socially significant spheres of the economy. The experience of these and other countries shows that in a weak state, the invisible hand of the market helps mainly the rather few members of society who are easily adaptable to market conditions. As a result, G.o. sharply polarizes, turning into a field of serious socio-political conflicts. The solution to this problem lies in the effective influence of the “visible” (and therefore socially controlled) hand of the state, which compensates for the temporary social consequences of market reforms.
Today in Russia there is an alienation between society and the government, which has generated not only distrust of the “lower classes” to the “upper classes”, but also the hostility of the “upper classes” to the “lower classes”, first of all to any forms of initiative of society, due to the underdeveloped social interests. Hence the constant desire of the state not to interact with the institutions of civil society, but to manage them, to ignore impulses from below, trying to turn civil movements and associations into channels of one-way transmission of instructions “from top to bottom”.
In modern Russia, the formation of civil society is taking place simultaneously with the transition to a democratic system of government and a market economy. And in this transition, civil society should help Russia. It is a kind of "engine" in the development of the country in the direction of building a rule-of-law state with a market economy. This problem is currently in the spotlight. Constantly in their speeches and addresses, the country's top leadership, political and public figures focus on the need to create a functioning civil society, as well as the need for interaction between the state and government with civil society institutions in the formation of certain basic bills.
Currently, there are serious challenges in Russia that the state is not able to confront on its own (terrorism, insufficient level and pace of reforming state institutions, high levels of poverty and slow changes in the consciousness of the population, etc.). And only together with civil society can the state confront these challenges. Civil society should become an assistant to the state in solving these problems.
The President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin is convinced that "without a mature civil society it is impossible to effectively solve the pressing problems of people." "Only a developed civil society can ensure the inviolability of democratic freedoms, guarantees of human and civil rights." It must be said that civil society begins with a developed self-awareness that rises from the individual beginnings of the personality. They can be developed, first of all, by the efforts of the individual himself, by his aspiration for responsible freedom and democracy. And only a free person can ensure the growth of the economy and the prosperity of the state as a whole.
Today in Russia there are elements of civil society that are present in all spheres of public life (political, economic, social, spiritual, etc.). For example, political parties, local governments, the media, social and political organizations, various environmental and human rights movements, ethnic and confessional communities, sports associations, creative, scientific and cultural unions, unions of entrepreneurs and consumers, etc. There are such organizations as the Association of Russian Banks, the Union of Entrepreneurs and Tenants, in the social sphere - the Pension Fund, the Union of Soldiers' Mothers, the Fund for the Social Protection of Mothers and Children, in the political - a political party, etc. But, unfortunately, many organizations, unions, associations and movements are only formally independent. In reality, everything is different. However, despite this, it can be said that the formation of civil society in the Russian Federation has already begun and is taking its first steps.
Today, society can express its interests and give impulses to power through various channels. Direct communication with local, regional and federal authorities (sending individual and collective letters, days of personal reception, etc.). You can also "reach out to the authorities" through political parties. For example, the LDPR faction has created an Internet project where people can send videos filmed by themselves about cases of corruption, violation of rights and the law, etc. After that, the party sends a deputy request to the relevant government bodies. Citizens can also give impulses to the authorities through the media, etc.
One cannot but mention the projects created for the development of civil society. For example, the creation of the "Public Chamber of the Russian Federation". The official goal of which is to facilitate the formation, maintenance and development of the field of civil participation in the development and implementation of state policy in the Russian Federation. One of the most effective organizations for the formation of civil society, according to the author, has done a lot of positive things in this direction. The Law "On Education", in the development and adoption of which the wishes of the society were taken into account, and amendments were made, the Law "On NCOs", the reform of "Housing and Communal Services", etc.
The Council for Assistance to the Development of Civil Society Institutions and Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation was also created. The main goal of this organization is to ensure and protect human and civil rights and freedoms, to promote the formation and development of civil society.
Civil society institutions are the link between the state and the individual. They express the interests of members of society, on the basis of which laws are created and adopted. The signals and impulses emanating from the society in Russia should correct and control the existing government.
In modern Russia, the formation of civil society has its own specific features:
1. The first feature is “the positive nature of rallies and protests”. In the Russian Federation, protest actions do not reach their extreme forms. Russian legislation does not prohibit citizens of their country from holding peaceful rallies, pickets, processions, and protests. Society through them forms and expresses its opinion, demands on various problems (social, political, economic, cultural), on foreign policy issues. And it is worth emphasizing that the demands of the protesters are being met. The power hears the people and goes to meet them. For example, the events of May 2012 can be cited. The main goal of the protest movement was to declare the authorities about themselves, about their attitude to the legitimacy of the authorities, about their position towards the past elections. It is worth saying that the protesters have achieved their goal. The protest actions were like an impulse to dialogue with the authorities, and this dialogue took place. In Russia, protests and rallies have a rather positive character, which distinguishes it from other countries. For example, from today's Ukraine, where protest movements and actions have acquired extreme forms of manifestation. The country is on the eve of destruction, the country is in chaos.
2. The second feature of the formation of civil society in modern Russia is “ethno-regional character”. The gap in the level of development of civil relations in various regions of the country is too large (for example, in the capital and in the outback). This circumstance undoubtedly complicates the development of civil society in the political space of modern Russia. It follows from this that at the regional level the civil society is much weaker than at the federal one. Of course, his ability to resist political power is significantly less than in the country as a whole. To eliminate such a deep contradiction, it is necessary to intensively develop local self-government, where not only power relations, but also civil ones are concentrated.
And here it is impossible not to note the activities of the "Public Chamber of the Russian Federation" to reduce the gap between the metropolis and the region. For example, in January 2013, President Vladimir Putin signed a law to increase the number of members of the Public Chamber from 126 to 166 people. This undoubtedly made it possible to expand the participation of regional public structures in the work of the "Public Chamber", which, in turn, makes it possible to accelerate the development of a single civil society in modern Russia.
3. The third feature is the “dependence of independent media”. Vladimir Putin, being a presidential candidate, on February 12, 2004, at a meeting with his proxies at Moscow State University, said: “We must continue to work to form a full-fledged, efficient civil society in the country. I would like to emphasize: it is inconceivable without truly free and responsible mass media. But such freedom and such responsibility must have the necessary legal and economic basis, which is the duty of the state to create. " That is, in Russia, independent media are formed not by civil society, but by civil society and the state together. According to the author, this is a positive project. The state, to one degree or another, should control what information is presented to the media.
4. The last feature, which the author highlights, is the “PR-company of the President”, that is, a direct connection with society. No country has a "direct line" of communication between the president and the people. Where various representatives of society take part (students, veterans of the Great Patriotic War, scientists, cultural workers, large families, retirees, doctors and many other representatives of society). People can contact the president by phone, by sending letters, over the Internet or through a teleconference. Such events last more than two hours. Even in the most democratic country, the United States of America, this is not the case. This feature distinguishes the formation of civil society institutions in modern Russia from Western countries.
Summing up the above, several conclusions can be drawn:
1. The establishment of civil society institutions in Russia has begun and is moving forward in small steps (as noted above, many unions, associations, movements, associations, etc., have appeared in all spheres of society). Even if many organizations today are only formally independent of the state and power structures, they still exist, which gives rise to a moderate optimistic assessment of the possibilities and prospects for the development of the rule of law and civil society in Russia;
2. Civil society in Russia is being formed simultaneously with the transition to a democratic and rule-of-law state. It should become the “engine” that will move the country towards a democratic state and a market economy;
3. The formation and development of civil society in Russia has its own specifics. She has her own way and her own way in this direction.
Civil society - this is:
1) the sphere of self-manifestation of free citizens and voluntarily formed associations and organizations, protected by the relevant laws from direct interference and arbitrary regulation by state authorities;
2) a set of non-political relations, that is, social relations outside the framework of power-state structures.
The history of the formation of civil society
The history of the development of its concept in Western socio-political thought testifies to the difficulties of the formation of civil society.
Thinkers about the essence of civil society:
| Thinker | Key ideas |
|---|---|
| T. Hobbes, English philosopher | Civil society is a union of individuals, a collective in which all its members acquire the highest human qualities. The state prevails over civil society. |
| J. Locke, English philosopher | Civil society is a political society, that is, a public sphere in which the state has its own interests. |
| C. Montesquieu, French philosopher | Civil society is a society of enmity between people, which is transformed into a state to stop it. |
| T. Payne, American educator | Civil society is a blessing, and the state is an inevitable evil. The more perfect a civil society, the more it self-regulates and the less needs regulation by the state. |
| G. Hegel, German philosopher | Civil society is the sphere of realizing especially private goals and interests of an individual. There is no real freedom in civil society, since there is always a universal contradiction between private interests and power. Civil society itself is unable to cope with its problems. The priority belongs to the state, which is able to integrate disparate interests into the whole society of citizens. |
| K. Marx, F. Engels, German economists and sociologists | Civil society is the sphere of material, economic life and human activity. It is this that is primary in relation to the state, civil life as the sum of various interests holds the state together. |
The structure of civil society
The structure of civil society includes various communities of people:
Political parties and lobbying (from the English lobby - lobby, corridor) organizations (committees, commissions, councils), created under the government.
Social and political organizations and movements (environmental, anti-war, human rights, etc.).
Business unions, consumer associations, charities, cooperatives, rental collectives, joint stock companies.
Scientific and cultural organizations, sports societies.
Municipal communes and other self-government bodies at the place of residence and work, voter associations, political clubs.
Independent media.
Relations between the components of society, which have a non-state and non-political nature (family ties, professional, economic, religious and other relations).
A special space for the free manifestation of people, which is protected from interference by the state and other forces.
The ratio of civil society and the state
|
Linescomparisons | Civil society | The state |
|---|---|---|
|
Realized interests |
Everyday interests of individuals. | Public interests of social groups, classes, ethnic groups. |
|
Implementation means |
Belief, legal and moral norms, traditions, customs, art, etc. | Constitution, power, coercion, law, etc. |
| Connections and relationships between people | The predominance of horizontal ties based on the relationship of solidarity and competition. | The predominance of vertical ties based on the relationship of domination and subordination. |
| The basis | A free individual with inalienable rights and non-political organizations (consumer associations, cooperatives, sports societies, the church, etc.), with the help of which he realizes them. | Political institutions, authorities, leaders, elite, etc. |
Functions of civil society:
Regardless of the state, it has the means and sanctions with which it is possible to force a person to comply with generally accepted norms that ensure the socialization and education of citizens.
Protects citizens and their associations, interests and needs from illegal interference in their life by the state and its organs, protects the rights and freedoms of the individual, defines the boundaries of politics.
Contributes to the formation of state bodies, democratic and humanistic development of the entire political system of society.
Civil society acts as necessary democratic stratum between man and state,preventing the latter from usurping power.
QUESTIONS:
1. Find a concept that is generalizing for all the other concepts in the series below, and write down the number under which it is indicated.
1) scientific organization; 2) civil society; 3) joint stock company; 4) sports society; 5) environmental movement.
2. What is the meaning of social scientists in the concept of "civil society"? Drawing on your knowledge of your social studies course, compose two sentences containing information about civil society.
1. The meaning of the concept, for example: civil society is the sphere of self-determination of free citizens and voluntarily formed associations and organizations, protected by appropriate laws from direct interference and arbitrary regulation by the state authorities. (A different, similar definition may be given.)
2. Two sentences with information about the political regime based on the knowledge of the course, for example:
1) “Civil society took shape at a certain stage of historical development, primarily in Western civilization”;
2) "The process of the formation of civil society was not only economic, social, political, but also socio-cultural and spiritual transformation."
Any other proposal containing information on the political regime can be drawn up.
3. Name any three institutions of civil society in modern Russia and give examples of their activities.
The following institutions can be named and examples of their activities are given:
1) public organizations - the committee of soldiers' mothers, which monitors the observance of the rights of soldiers doing military service;
2) trade unions - the independent trade union of miners of Russia;
3) independent media - the radio station "Echo of Moscow", which gives the floor to representatives of various political movements.
4. You have been instructed to prepare a detailed answer on the topic “Civil Society”. Make a plan according to which you will cover this topic. The plan must contain at least three points, of which two or more are detailed in subparagraphs.
One of the options for the disclosure plan for this topic:
1. The concept of civil society.
2. Preconditions for the emergence of civil society:
a) economic;
b) political and legal;
c) social;
d) cultural.
3. The structure of civil society:
a) political parties and movements;
b) public organizations;
in church;
d) trade unions;
e) independent media.
4. Functions of civil society.
5. The relationship between civil society and the rule of law.
6. Prospects for the development of civil society in modern Russia.
Perhaps a different number and (or) other correct wording of points and sub-points of the plan.
5. (1−4). Read the text and complete assignments 1-4.
“Democracy is essentially a means, a utilitarian device for protecting social peace and individual freedom. As such, it is not flawless, not reliable in itself. It should also not be forgotten that often in history, cultural and spiritual freedom flourished during periods of authoritarian rule, not democracy, and that the rule of a homogeneous, dogmatic majority can make democracy more intolerable than the worst of dictatorships.
Paying attention to the fact that democracy is under threat has become fashionable, and there is some danger in it. Hence comes the erroneous and unfounded belief that as long as the highest power in the country belongs to the will of the majority, this is a sure remedy for arbitrariness. The opposite statement would be no less erroneous: not a source of power at all, but its limitation is a reliable remedy for arbitrariness. Democratic control can prevent the government from becoming a dictatorship, but it requires work. If, on the other hand, democracy solves its problems with the help of power, not limited by firmly established rules, it inevitably degenerates into despotism.
When the government has to determine how many pigs to raise or how many buses to drive on the country's roads, which coal mines it is advisable to leave operating or how much to sell boots in stores, all such decisions cannot be deduced from formal rules or taken once and for all or for a long period. They inevitably depend on circumstances that change very quickly. And when making such decisions, one has to keep in mind the complex balance of interests of various individuals and groups. In the end, someone finds reasons to prefer some interests to others. These grounds become part of the law. This is how privileges are born, inequalities imposed by the government apparatus arise ...
The state should confine itself to the development of general rules applicable in situations of a certain type, giving individuals freedom in everything related to the circumstances of place and time, for only individuals can fully know these circumstances and adapt their actions to them. And so that individuals could consciously make plans, they must have the ability to foresee the actions of the government that can influence these plans ”(F. Hayek).
1. What role should the state play in the regulation of public life in a democracy, according to the author? Why else should individuals be free?
2 ... What are the three threats to democracy named by the author?
3. Based on the text, personal experience and facts of public life, give three concrete examples of “firmly established rules” of democracy that do not allow its degeneration into a dictatorship.
1) "The state should limit itself to the development of general rules applicable in situations of a certain type";
2) "... only individuals can fully know these circumstances (places and times) and adapt their actions to them."
2. Three threats to democracy:
1) "the rule of a homogeneous, dogmatic majority";
2) power "not limited by firmly established rules";
3) the existence of privileges for individual members of society, inequality.
3. Three concrete examples of “well-established rules” of democracy that prevent it from degenerating into a dictatorship:
1) "democratic control";
2) "development by the state of general rules applicable in situations of a certain type";
3) "granting individuals freedom in everything that is associated with the circumstances of place and time";
4) recognition of the people as a source of power;
5) equality of citizens;
6) participation of citizens in government;
7) electivity of the main state authorities;
8) respect for minority rights.
Three arguments:
1) in a democratic country, the branches of government are controlled by society;
2) in a democracy, political and ideological pluralism is ensured;
3) thanks to the separation of powers, a citizen can be protected from arbitrariness by the state.
Other arguments could be given.
Civil society - this is:
the sphere of self-manifestation of free citizens and voluntarily formed associations and organizations, protected by the relevant laws from direct interference and arbitrary regulation by the state authorities;
a set of non-political relations, that is, social relations outside the framework of power-state structures.
Constitutional state - a kind of a democratic state, the political regime of which is based on strict observance of the rule of law, legal norms that enshrine the natural, inalienable, universal rights and freedoms of man and peoples.
Preconditions for the emergence of civil society
QUESTIONS:
1. (1-6) Read the text and complete assignments 1-6.
There are people who want to be led because of their passive and reverent nature, or because they are selfishly relying on the benefits of being obedient or supporting recognized authorities. Further, there are many people who generally
have no taste for community involvement or have no inclination, need, or opportunity
engage in public affairs, remain indifferent to them and deliberately want to isolate themselves from them in order to avoid the known unpleasant aspects of participation in public life. Finally, there is a natural physical and spiritual inequality of abilities, intelligence and talent, which themselves dictate the choice for leading an organized society and determine the leadership that society needs and its correct organization.<…>
The cardinal requirement of democracy is that not only the leaders, but also the led masses themselves, participating in discussions, criticism, elections and political life in general, should strive to approach the ideal of a democratic hero. Namely: to get an education, to understand your great tasks and come closer to the ideals and requirements that democracy makes to
to a mature citizen.
Duties are bilateral: the moral level of a real democrat leader must correspond to the moral level of the mature masses of the people being led. They follow their real leader in the same way as those who follow the creator-artist who are drawn by the power of his creativity to other spheres and kingdoms.
(Adapted from the book. E. Benes)
1) Make an outline of the text. To do this, highlight the main semantic fragments of the text and title each of them.
2) What is the author's description of the responsibilities of participants in public life in a democracy? How does he explain this characteristic?
3) What qualities (traits, properties), according to E. Benes, characterize a person who is ready and able to lead others and lead an organized society? Name any four of them.
4) Use concrete examples to illustrate any three of the characteristics of a “democratic hero” given in the text.
5) Sergei owns a small company. He considers any participation in public life to be pampering and a waste of time. He does not go to the polls, explaining that Sunday is the only day off that he can afford. How can you explain Sergei's position? Provide a piece of text that can help you answer the question.
6) The text provides three forms (models) of participation in public life. Choose the one that you think is the most correct. Based on the text and social science knowledge, give two arguments (explanations) in defense of your position.
physical and spiritual abilities;
intelligence;
These qualities (traits, properties) can be given in other, similar formulations.
4. As an illustration of the data in the text of the characteristics of the "democratic hero" the following examples can be given:
A good knowledge of the law helps a citizen to participate in discussions, defending their rights.
An interest in politics makes one take part in the political life of the country and fight against injustice.
The ability to analyze the programs of various parties and leaders allows you to make the right choice.
The characteristics of the “democratic hero” can be illustrated by another example.
5. The correct answer should contain the following elements:
Explanation of the fact given in the assignment, for example: Sergei has no interest in public life, he is completely focused on his personal goals and problems. Another explanation for the fact given in the assignment can be given.
Fragment of the text: “There are many people who have no taste at all for participation in public life or have no inclination, need or opportunity to engage in public affairs, remain indifferent to them and consciously want to isolate themselves from them in order to avoid the known unpleasant aspects of participation in public life ".
6. The correct answer should contain the following elements:
One of the three listed forms (models) of participation in public life.
Two arguments (explanations) in defense of their choice, for example:
this position allows us to maintain stability in society to a greater extent.
In the case of choosing the second form (model) (deliberately fencing off from public affairs), it can be indicated that:
there is a natural physical and spiritual inequality of abilities, intelligence and talent, therefore not all people can be leaders;
everyone must do their job. If you do not have the ability to actively participate in public life, then honestly do your job, and those who have the appropriate ability, let them go in for politics.
In the case of choosing the third form (model) (management of an organized society), it may be indicated that:
if nature has endowed a person with abilities, talent and intellect that allow him to manage social life, then such talents cannot be “buried in the ground”;
only this position contributes to the development of society, the improvement of people's lives.
Other arguments (explanations) may be given.
Real freedom of the individual becomes possible in a society of true democracy, where not the state, political power dominates society and its members, but society has absolute primacy over the state. The transition to such a society is a historically long process, and it is associated with the formation of a civil society.
What is "civil society?" What are its internal mechanisms that allow the development of economic, socio-cultural, political relations in the regime of democracy, respect for the human person, guaranteeing its rights and freedoms?
To answer this question, one should, first of all, pay attention to the fact that between the concept of "civil society" and the concept of the same order of "society" there is not only an obvious relationship, but also very significant differences. Society as a set of relations between people becomes civil only at a certain stage of its development - maturity, under certain conditions. In this regard, the adjective “civil”, despite some of its ambiguity, is quite specific and very capacious content. The category of civil society reflects a new qualitative state of society, based on the developed forms of its self-organization and self-regulation, on the optimal combination of public (state-public) and private (individual-personal) interests with the decisive significance of the latter and with the unconditional recognition of a person as the highest value of such a society , his rights and freedoms. Therefore, civil society is opposed not just by a “non-civil” society, that is, a society that does not possess the qualities of a civil society, but by a society of violence suppressing the individual, state total control over the social and personal life of its members.
The term "civil society" itself is used in both broad and narrow meanings. In a broad sense, civil society includes the entire part of society not directly covered by the state, its structures, i.e. what the state “does not reach”. It arises and changes in the course of natural-historical development as an autonomous sphere that is not directly dependent on the state. Civil society in a broad sense is compatible not only with democracy, but also with authoritarianism, and only totalitarianism means its complete, and more often partial, absorption by political power.
Civil society in a narrow, proper meaning is inextricably linked with the rule of law, they do not exist without each other. Civil society is a variety of non-state-mediated relationships between free and equal individuals in a market and democratic legal statehood. This is the sphere of the free play of private interests and individualism. Civil society is a product of the bourgeois era and is formed mainly from below, spontaneously, as a result of the emancipation of individuals, their transformation from subjects of the state into free citizens of owners who have a sense of personal dignity and are ready to take on economic and political responsibility.
Civil society has a complex structure, including economic, economic, family-related, ethnic, religious and legal relations, morality, as well as political relations not mediated by the state between individuals as primary subjects of power, parties, interest groups, etc. In civil society, in contrast to government structures, it is not vertical (subordination) that prevail, but horizontal ties - relations of competition and solidarity between legally free and equal partners.
The historical process of the formation of civil society thus characterizes the difficult path of humanity's ascent from various forms of oppression, political dictatorship and state totalitarianism to real democracy in social relations, to real individual freedom. It is no coincidence that the first scientific concepts of civil society, which emerged in the 18th - early 19th centuries, drew attention to such characteristics as the presence of a certain sphere of social (first of all, property, market and economic), family, moral, ethical, religious relations, relatively independent from the state. In this regard, the initial understanding of civil society was based, in essence, on the opposition of the sphere of public and private interests: if the embodiment of the former is the state organization of society, then the latter should receive their implementation in an independent, autonomous civil society, i.e., the private sphere people's lives. In itself, the posing of the question of civil society as a specific sphere of non-political, private life of citizens, independent of state power, historically had, of course, progressive significance. She played an important role in the establishment of a new, bourgeois constitutional system based on the principles of inviolability of sacred private property, non-interference of the state in the sphere of free enterprise, the elements of market competition, as well as in the sphere of personal and family life of members of civil society. The formation of bourgeois society meant the transformation of commodity relations into a universal method of social ties of individuals, when the feudal estates and their state and legal privileges were replaced by the formal legal equality of citizens. "This completed the process of separating political life from civil society." (K. Marx). As a result, civil society also acquired an independent existence, independent of political power.
The concept of "civil society" appeared in the modern era in the works of T. Hobbes, J. Locke, C. Montesquieu and others.
The concept of civil society in the works of these thinkers was based on the ideas of natural law and social contract. From the point of view of these thinkers, man as a rational being strives for freedom. He wants to dispose of his personality, to be aware of himself as the owner of his life rights. The social contract, the unification of people into society assumed both the transfer of their rights to the society (the state) and the restriction of the state power itself in the interests of realizing the freedom of citizens. Civil society is the result of a contract, an agreement that implies a relationship of reciprocity, voluntariness between the state and the citizen. According to Locke, the natural community of people turns into a civil society when "any number of people are so united into one society that each of them renounces his executive power, inherent in him by the law of nature, and transfers it to society."
At the same time, modern thinkers identified with civil society not just any state, but only one that expresses the interests of citizens. Taking these interests into account, creating conditions for their free realization are an indispensable condition for the effective development of society. An emphasis on protecting private interests was characteristic of the works of the English economist A. Smith. The "system of natural freedom" developed by A. Smith proved the need to eliminate state interference in private property entrepreneurship, to provide full freedom for the development of private initiative, "unnaturalness" of any state control of individual economic freedom of citizens, which created the necessary conditions for the unlimited development of commodity-money market relations. Thus, a solid economic foundation was laid for the classical model of an emerging civil society, the main requirements of which were private property, market economy, and economic independence of people.
Special merit in the development of the concept of civil society in its interdependence with the state belongs to Hegel. Based on the systematization of the entire legacy of French, Anglo-Saxon and German socio-political thought, Hegel came to the conclusion that civil society represents a special stage in the dialectical movement from family to state in the process of a long and complex historical transformation from the Middle Ages to the Modern Age. “Civil society,” he wrote, “is a differentiation that appears between the family and the state, although the development of civil society comes later than the development of the state.”
According to Hegel, the social life characteristic of civil society is radically different from the ethical world of the family and the public life of the state. Civil society includes a market economy, social classes, corporations, institutions whose task is to ensure the viability of society and the implementation of civil law. Civil society is a complex of individuals, classes, groups and institutions, the interaction of which is governed by civil law and which, as such, do not directly depend on the political state itself.
Thus, Hegel came to the conclusion that there is a sphere not only of "general" and political interests, but also of private, more precisely, private property interests. He defined this area as the area of \u200b\u200b"civil society".
As Hegel noted, unlike the family, the many components of civil society are often disparate, unstable, and prone to serious conflict. It resembles a hectic battlefield where private interests clash with other private interests. Moreover, the excessive development of some elements of civil society can lead to the suppression of other elements. Therefore, civil society cannot remain “civil” as long as it is not governed politically under the supervision of the state. Only the supreme public power - the constitutional state - can effectively deal with its injustices and synthesize specific interests into a universal political community. From this position, Hegel criticizes his contemporary theory of natural law for mixing civil society and the state.
Karl Marx has a special approach to the problem of civil society. K. Marx significantly simplified the complex structure of the Hegelian model of civil society. For him, civil society is the form in which the bourgeois state, based on private property, arose and functions. In such a society, "none of the so-called human rights goes beyond the egoistic person, a person as a member of civil society, that is, as an individual who is closed in himself, in his private interest and private arbitrariness and isolated from the social whole."
Indeed, the idea of \u200b\u200ba civil society arose and developed in connection with the emergence and development of bourgeois relations. It was caused by the need to "pave the way" by theoretical means for the bourgeois social system, unthinkable without freedom of a human being - a commodity producer.
However, as the events of the 20th century have shown, the idea of \u200b\u200bcivil society is not only not outdated, but, on the contrary, has become even more urgent. It was in the 20th century that the danger of total enslavement of the individual appeared. The source of this danger is the overwhelming power of political and state structures, their expansionary claims, which extend not only to economic relations, but also to all other spheres of human activity, including the area of \u200b\u200bspiritual culture. The aggressiveness of these structures was most clearly manifested in the life of the people of those countries where totalitarian regimes, the administrative command order, where there existed and exists an authoritarian style of relations between power holders and ordinary citizens. Therefore, in the 20th century, the development of the concept of civil society took place mainly under the banner of criticism of totalitarian regimes, protection of individual rights and freedoms. In modern political theories, the idea of \u200b\u200bcivil society has been supplemented by the idea of \u200b\u200bdemocracy based on political pluralism, general consensus and partnership of competing social groups. The theory of pluralism has become widespread, according to which the main task of a modern democratic society is to achieve a general civil consensus by taking into account and coordinating many interests of various groups of the population, removing or mitigating contradictions, seeking civil consent, aimed at integrating society.
For a modern understanding of civil society, it is not enough to understand it only from the position of its opposition to state power and, accordingly, to the sphere of realizing public interests. The main thing in the modern, general democratic concept of civil society should be the definition of its own qualitative characteristics of those real social relations, which in the systemic unity can be defined as a modern civil society.
Civil society is not just a certain volumetric concept that characterizes a certain sphere of social relations, the limits of which are determined only by the fact that it is “the area of \u200b\u200baction of private interests” (Hegel). At the same time, "civil society" is not a legal, not a state-legal concept. The state cannot, is unable to "establish", "decree", "establish" by its laws the image of a civil society desirable for it.
Civil society is a natural stage, the highest form of self-realization of individuals. It matures with the economic and political development of the country, the growth of well-being, culture and self-awareness of the people. As a product of the historical development of mankind, civil society appears during the period of breaking the rigid framework of the estate-feudal system, the beginning of the formation of the rule of law. A prerequisite for the emergence of civil society is the emergence of an opportunity for all citizens of economic independence on the basis of private property. The most important prerequisite for the formation of civil society is the elimination of class privileges and the growth of the importance of the human person, a person who turns from a subject into a citizen with equal legal rights with all other citizens. The political foundation of civil society is the rule of law, which ensures the rights and freedoms of the individual. Under these conditions, a person's behavior is determined by his own interests and responsibility for all actions falls on him. Such a person puts his own freedom above all else, while respecting the legitimate interests of other people.
Since a large power is concentrated in the hands of the state, it can turn into a huge living organism, reminiscent of the biblical monster Leviathan (something between a hippopotamus and a sea serpent). Indeed, with the help of officials, the army, the police, the courts, it is easy to suppress the interests of social groups, classes and the whole people. The history of the establishment of fascism in Germany and Italy is a vivid example of how the gluttonous, terrible Leviathan devoured society, how its spheres were nationalized, and universal (total) control over the individual was exercised. These open terrorist dictatorships, as you know, have become the most dangerous opponents of social progress.
In this regard, civil society is an objectively established order of real social relations, which is based on the requirements of justice and the measure of achieved freedom, the inadmissibility of arbitrariness and violence, recognized by society itself. This order is formed on the basis of the internal content of these relations, which turns them into a criterion of "justice and measure of freedom." Thus, the relations that make up civil society acquire the ability to carry certain requirements, normative models of behavior of citizens, officials, state bodies and the state as a whole in accordance with the ideals of justice and freedom.
This means that the ideas of law as the highest justice based on the inadmissibility of arbitrariness and guaranteeing an equal measure of freedom for all members of civil society are embodied in the relations that make up civil society. These are the normative (generally binding) requirements that develop and exist in civil society regardless of their state recognition and consolidation in laws. But following them on the part of the state is a guarantee that the law in such a society and state acquires a legal character, that is, they not only embody the state will, but this will fully meets the requirements of justice and freedom.
The legal nature of civil society, its compliance with the highest requirements of justice and freedom is the first most important quality characteristic of such a society. This feature of civil society is embodied in the normative requirements embedded in the content of the categories of justice and freedom. Freedom and justice are, in a civil society, a social factor that normalizes (streamlines) the activities of people, collectives and organizations. On the other hand, the person himself, as a member of civil society, gains freedom as a result of his ability to obey the normative requirements of freedom as a cognized necessity.
The second qualitative characteristic of civil society is functional. It is connected with the fact that the basis for the functioning of such a society is not just the creation of a certain field (space) for the realization of private interests, formally legally independent from state power, but the achievement of a high level of self-organization, self-regulation of society. The main functions of establishing joint activities of members of civil society in certain areas (entrepreneurship and other forms of economic activity, family relations, personal life, etc.) should be carried out in this case not with the help of the tools and means of the state power standing over the society as a “special public authority ”, and by society itself on a truly democratic, self-governing basis, and in the field of market economy - primarily on the basis of economic self-regulation. In this regard, the new functional characteristic of civil society does not consist in the fact that the state “generously yields” a certain sphere of private interests to society itself, leaving it at the mercy of solving certain problems. On the contrary, society itself, reaching a new level of its development, acquires the ability to independently, without state intervention, carry out the corresponding functions. And in this part, it is no longer the state that absorbs society, establishing total state forms of leadership and control over the development of the relevant spheres, but the reverse process of absorption of the state by civil society takes place: there appears (at least in these areas of "civil life") the primacy of civil society over the state ...
In accordance with this, it is possible to single out a third qualitative feature of civil society, which characterizes its highest values \u200b\u200band the main goal of its functioning. Unlike the initial ideas about civil society, based on the absolutization of private interests (their main carriers, of course, private owners), the modern general democratic concept of a post-industrial civil society should be based on the recognition of the need to ensure an optimal, harmonious combination of private and public interests.
Freedom, human rights and his private interests should be considered in this case not from the standpoint of the egoistic essence of an "economic man" for whom freedom is property, but, on the contrary, property itself in all its diversity of forms becomes a means of affirming the ideals of a liberated person. And this should happen on the basis of unconditional recognition as the highest value of civil society of a person, his life and health, honor and dignity of a politically free and economically independent person.
In accordance with this, one should also approach the definition main goal functioning of modern civil society. The main goal is to satisfy the material and spiritual needs of a person, to create conditions that ensure a dignified life and free development of a person. And the state in this case (under the conditions of a legal civil society) inevitably acquires the character of a social state. We are talking about the enrichment of the nature of the state with social principles that largely transform its power functions. Establishing itself as social, the state renounces the role of "night watchman" and takes responsibility for the socio-cultural and spiritual development of society.
Taking into account the mentioned qualitative characteristics, it is possible to define the concept of civil society as a system of socio-economic and political relations based on self-organization, functioning in the legal regime of social justice, freedom, satisfaction of material and spiritual needs of a person as the highest value of civil society.
Modern civil society has the following structure:
1. Voluntarily formed primary communities of people (family, cooperation, associations, business corporations, public organizations, professional, creative, sports, ethnic, confessional and other associations).
2. The totality of non-state non-political relations in society: economic, social, family, spiritual, moral, religious and others. This is the production and private life of people, their customs, traditions, customs.
3. The sphere of self-manifestation of free individuals and their organizations, protected by laws from direct interference in it by the government.
Thus, the structure of civil society in developed countries is a wide network of public relations, various voluntary organizations of citizens, their associations, lobbying and other groups, municipal communes, charitable foundations, interest clubs, creative, cooperative associations, consumer societies, sports societies, public political, religious and other organizations and unions. They all express the most diverse social interests in all spheres of society.
A concrete analysis of the basic elements of civil society follows from this.
First, the economic organization of civil society - this is society of civilized market relations. The market as a kind of "component" of economic freedom is impossible without the development of independent entrepreneurial activities aimed at systematic profit.
The second structural element of civil society is its social organization. In market conditions, it is very complex, which reflects primarily the differences between individual social groups. Three main groups of the population of civil society can be distinguished: employees, entrepreneurs, and disabled citizens. Ensuring a balanced balance of economic interests and material capabilities of these groups is an important direction of social policy.
Employees need to create economic, social and legal conditions for efficient work, fair wages for their labor, and broad participation in profits.
With regard to entrepreneurs, measures should be taken to guarantee them freedom of all forms of economic activity, to stimulate their investment in the development of efficient, profitable production of goods and services. As for disabled citizens, they should be provided with targeted social protection, defined norms of social security and services that will allow them to maintain an acceptable standard of living.
Finally, the third structural element of civil society is its socio-political organization. It cannot be equated with the state-political organization, with the state administration of society. On the contrary, the real democracy of civil society as the basis for ensuring real freedom of the individual becomes possible precisely when society, acquiring the qualities of civil, legal, develops its own, non-state socio-political mechanisms of self-regulation and self-organization. In accordance with this, the so-called political institutionalization of civil society occurs, that is, society self-organizes with the help of such institutions as political parties, mass movements, trade unions, women's, veteran's, youth, religious organizations, voluntary societies, creative unions, communities, foundations, associations and other voluntary associations of citizens, created on the basis of their common political, professional, cultural and other interests. An important constitutional basis for the political institutionalization of civil society is the principle of political and ideological pluralism, a multiparty system (Article 13 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). Political and ideological monopoly is alien to the civil society, suppressing dissent and not admitting any other ideology, except the official, state, no other party, except the ruling party - the “party of power”. An important condition for ensuring political and ideological pluralism, and, therefore, for the institutionalization of civil society is the freedom of organization and activity of the media (Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).
This, however, does not mean the identity of the freedom of the individual “and the legal status of the citizen. Freedom, as already noted, has such a property as normativity. It follows, on the one hand, that a person gains freedom as a result of his ability to obey its normative requirements (generally binding rules of behavior). On the other hand, this means that the external form of being of individual freedom is social norms that determine the measure, the permissible boundaries of freedom. And only in the most important areas that are of increased importance for society or for the person himself, the measure of freedom is determined and normalized by the state itself. This is done with the help of legal regulations, laws. Laws, if they are legal in nature, are in this regard, according to Marx, "the bible of freedom." The main legal means of securing, recognition by the state of the achieved individual freedom is the constitution.
At the same time, the very rights and freedoms, including constitutional ones, on the one hand, are determined by the level of development of civil society, the maturity of its economic, social, socio-political organization; after all, civil society is a social environment where most of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen are realized. On the other hand, the development, deepening of the most important characteristics of civil society as a legal, democratic society, as a society of true freedom and social justice, largely depends on the completeness of human and civil rights and freedoms, the degree of their guarantee, and the sequence of their implementation. In this respect, human and civil rights are a tool for the self-development of civil society, its self-organization. This two-pronged relationship is also consolidated at the state-legal, legal level, when the Constitution and other laws establish the responsibility not only of the citizen to the state, but also of the state to the individual.
The main function of civil society is the fullest satisfaction of the material, social and spiritual needs of its members. Various economic, ethnic, regional, professional, religious associations of citizens are called upon to contribute to the full realization by an individual of his interests, aspirations, goals, etc.
In fulfilling this main function, civil society performs a number of important social functions:
1. On the basis of legality, it ensures the protection of private spheres of life of a person and a citizen from unjustified strict regulation of the state and other political structures.
2. Mechanisms of public self-government are created and developed on the basis of associations of civil society.
3. Civil society is one of the most important and powerful levers in the system of "checks and balances", the desire of political power to absolute domination. It protects citizens and their associations from illegal interference in their activities of state power and thereby contributes to the formation and consolidation of the democratic organs of the state, its entire political system. To perform this function, he has a lot of means: active participation in election campaigns and referendums, protests or support for certain demands, great opportunities in shaping public opinion, in particular, with the help of independent media and communications.
4. Institutions and organizations of civil society are called upon to provide real guarantees of human rights and victories, equal access to participation in state and public affairs.
5. Civil society also performs the function of social control over its members. Independently of the state, it has the means and sanctions with which it can force individuals to comply with social norms, to ensure the socialization and education of citizens.
6. Civil society also has a communication function. A democratic society manifests a variety of interests. The widest range of these interests is the result of the freedoms that a citizen has in a democracy. A democratic state is called upon to satisfy the interests and needs of its citizens as much as possible. However, in the conditions of economic pluralism, these interests are so numerous, so diverse and differentiated that the state power has practically no channels of information about all these interests. The task of civil society institutions and organizations is to inform the state about the specific interests of citizens, the satisfaction of which is possible only by the forces of the state.
7. Civil society performs a stabilizing function with its institutions and organizations. It creates solid structures on which all social life is supported. In difficult historical periods (wars, crises, depressions), when the state begins to stagger, it "lends its shoulder" - the strong structures of civil society.
One of the functions of civil society is also to ensure a certain minimum level of necessary livelihoods for all members of society, especially those who cannot achieve this themselves (disabled, elderly, sick, etc.).