8.3. Political development

What is political development ? Most political scientists define it as a process leading society from the traditional political system to the modern, i.e. industrial or post-industrial society.

Most of the countries of the planet are included in this process today, they are modernizing or developing their own traditions in line with modernity. Moreover, as a rule, the modern world is understood as the type of economic, social and political system that developed in Western Europe and North America in the 17th-19th centuries, and then spread to other European countries in the 20th century. - to a number of states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

What factors determine the process of political development?

First of all, the level of economic potential of the country. A study of two geographical maps — maps of developed and developing countries and maps of liberal and authoritarian systems — makes it possible to detect almost complete coincidence in the following: the main industrial regions (North America, Western Europe, Japan, etc.) coincide with regions of political liberalism. On the other hand, the regions of underdevelopment (Latin America, Asia, Africa) - at the same time in many cases provide classic examples of authoritarianism.

Upon further, more detailed study, it is found that, of the group of industrial nations themselves, liberal democracy is more stable in more developed ones.

Thus, liberal political institutions (elections with rivalry of candidates, a multi-party system, the existence of an opposition, political freedoms, etc.) normally work only in economically developed countries. Conversely, these institutions function poorly with a low level of economic development and, therefore, almost never occur in developing countries .

Free nations are rich nations. There is a relationship between economic development and a democratic regime. Indeed, is it by chance that the main elements of parliamentarism first appeared in Great Britain, that is, in the country that first experienced the industrial revolution? Or that in France, where the period of industrial development was less long, the parliamentary regime was introduced only after 1815? Or that in the Scandinavian countries, parliamentary regimes took root before 1914, when there was accelerated industrialization? There are a lot of similar examples.

On the other hand, parliamentary democracy could not be introduced in those European countries where the socio-economic structure remained archaic. The countries of Central and Eastern Europe that adopted the parliamentary model after the Second World War eventually evolved towards authoritarian regimes.

In recent years, many political scientists in the West have traced this pattern of political development on the basis of statistical material. Political analyst Bruce Russet based on the comparison of socio-economic (per capita income, literacy, level of industrialization, urbanization, press distribution, etc.) and political indicators (voter turnout, government spending, etc.) identified five levels, or stages of economic and political development.

Russet divided societies from 107 countries in five basic types, corresponding to the five stages of economic and political development.

Stage 1. Traditional primitive societies.

Stage 2. Traditional civilizations.

Stage 3. Transitional societies.

Stage 4. Societies of the "industrial revolution".

Stage 5. Societies of "high mass consumption".

Another American political scientist, Robert Dahl, described these stages in terms of the level of gross national product (GNP) per capita.

The distribution of states by level
socio-economic development

But how does the number of democratic regimes, depending on the level of economic development.

Thus, there is a clear correlation between the socio-economic level of development and the presence of democracy .

The high level of socio-economic development provides three conditions necessary for democracy: reducing conflicts, redistributing resources and, finally, spreading culture. Modern societies have a conflict level lower than that of traditional societies. The decrease of this level with the economic development is explained, first of all, by the end of poverty and deficit, which, in turn, reduces social tensions. Economic progress transforms a conflict society into a consensus society, which is the only possible structure for a liberal democracy.

Advances in socio-economic development make it possible to better distribute political resources. The concept of "political resources" was introduced by political scientist R. Dahlem to designate instruments of political influence, i.e. money, time, knowledge, information, connections, etc.

If the distribution of these resources is uneven, then citizens have unequal influence, and this sometimes creates an atmosphere of social tension. Of course, in any political system, political resources are unevenly distributed, but this inequality is different in different systems. In developed democratic societies, resources do not accumulate in one's own hands. It is difficult to find in them a narrow and clearly visible elite that would truly own the country. Each type of resource in developed countries corresponds to a certain elite, and the relations between them become extremely complex.

Socio-economic development affects the state of culture. Democracy is not viable if all citizens in general do not have a certain level of culture and knowledge . Universal suffrage, for example, is meaningless if citizens do not understand the important issues that have been put to the vote. On the other hand, technical and economic development creates favorable conditions for cultural development: it reduces working hours, improves means of disseminating culture, etc.

Of course, there are exceptions from the general rule on the interdependence of the economic level of development and democracy: democratic institutions in underdeveloped societies (ancient Greek and Roman democracy) and, conversely, authoritarian regimes in developed societies (Germany in the 1930s, a number of modern Latin American states) .

Political development presupposes an increase in the ability of the political system to conduct public affairs, resolve conflicts, and satisfy the demands of the people. What does this mean practically? According to political analysts Almond and Powell , this means the realization of the three "abilities" of the system.

Firstly , the ability to innovate, i.e. ability to adapt to new problems, to respond flexibly to new impulses and unforeseen circumstances.

Secondly , the ability to mobilize, i.e. the ability to mobilize resources (human and material) for solving a socially significant task. "Resource Mobilization" implies:

• converting unclear mass aspirations into a program and policy;
• promotion of a new public program;
• finding the necessary resources;
• alignment of goals and activities;
• maintaining public order.

Third , the ability to survive. A developed political system is capable of ensuring its survival by strengthening positions that favor the preservation of the system through specialized or non-specialized structures of political socialization, such as school, church, army, parties.

Political development is also characterized by a tendency towards equality , which has three features:

• people's participation in political activities. This happens either democratically (widening the right to vote) or in the form of authoritarian mobilization;
• the universalization of laws that become general, applicable to all without distinction;
• Recruitment to the civil service is carried out only on the basis of competence, abilities, education.

Since the end of the XIX century. Political scientists, in addition to studying political institutions, have become actively involved in political processes. Political science studies such processes as thoroughly:

• political socialization;
• political participation;
• political change;
• political development.

Political socialization means the process of familiarizing members of society with values ​​and certain forms of human activity.

Political participation is the expression of a citizen’s views in one form or another, his involvement in the activities of various political institutions.

Political changes are a type of social changes that characterize the adaptation of political institutions to new situations, the change of value and normative guidelines in society.

Political changes can be both revolutionary and evolutionary.

Political development is a process leading society from the traditional to the modern political system.