7.1. The origin, types and functions of political elites. Political elite of the modern Russian society

Elite is inherent in all societies and states, its existence is due to the following factors:

1) psychological and social inequality of people, their unequal abilities, capabilities and desire to participate in politics;

2) the law of the division of labor, which requires professional management work as the conditions for its effectiveness;

3) the high social significance of managerial labor and its corresponding incentives;

4) ample opportunities to use management activities to obtain various kinds of social privileges. It is known that political and administrative work is directly related to the distribution of values ​​and resources;

5) the practical impossibility of carrying out comprehensive control over political leaders;

6) the political passivity of the broad masses of the population, whose main vital interests usually lie outside the sphere of politics.

These and many other factors determine the elitism of society. The political elite itself is internally differentiated. It is divided into the ruling , which directly possesses state power (ie, the political elite of power), the opposition (ie, counter-elite), the highest , which makes decisions significant for the whole state, the middle one , which acts as a barometer of public opinion (including 5% of the population), administrative (these are employees-managers (bureaucracy), and also distinguish political elites in parties, classes , etc. But the distinction between political elites does not mean that they do not interact with each other and do not interact with each other.

Thus, the elitism of modern society is a reality. Eliminate political elitism is possible only at the expense of public self-government. However, at the present stage of development of human civilization, the self-government of the people is rather an attractive ideal, a utopia, than a reality.

For a democratic state, of paramount importance is not the fight against elitism, but the solution of the problem of forming the most elite political elite, its timely qualitative renewal, preventing the trend of alienation from the people and becoming a closed dominant privileged caste. In other words, we are talking about the need to create appropriate institutions that would ensure the effectiveness of the political elite and its control over society.

The level of the solution of this task largely characterizes the social representativeness of the elite, i.e. the representation of various sectors of society, the expression of their interests and opinions in the political elite. Such representation depends on many reasons. One of them is social origin and social affiliation. Strictly speaking, social belonging is largely determined by belonging to the elite, since joining the elite usually means acquiring a new social and professional status and losing the old. For example, a worker, being elected to parliament, as a rule, leaves his former profession, although he retains his age and sex, ethnic and other characteristics.

The social origin of the elite affects their social orientation. So, for example, it is easier for people from farmers, workers, employees and other groups to understand the specific needs of the relevant segments of the population. But it is not at all necessary that the interests of the workers be defended by the workers, the peasants by the peasants, the youth by the youth, etc. Often it can be better done by professional politicians who come from other groups of society.

Disproportionality in the social characteristics of the elite and the population in modern states is quite large. For example, today in Western countries university graduates are represented in the elite much more widely than other groups. This is due to the relatively high social status of parents. In general, the disproportionate representation of various strata in the political elite usually grows as the status of the position is raised. In the lower stages of the political and administrative pyramid, the lower strata of the population are represented much more widely than in the upper echelons of power.

But more important, in comparison with social origin, the guarantee of the social representativeness of the elite is the organizational (party, trade union) affiliation of leaders. It is directly related to their value orientations. In addition, parties and other organizations usually have enough opportunities to influence their representatives in the right direction.

In a modern democratic society, party mechanisms of control over the elites are complemented by state and public institutions. Such institutions include elections, media, opinion polls, pressure groups, etc.

The structure of political elites includes: top executives, managers and ideologues (intellectuals, representatives of the artistic world, clergy), whose judgments and opinions enjoy enormous prestige.

But the elites include not only individuals and groups directly involved in management, but also the most influential economic and administrative circles, leaders of the media, educational institutions, and family members of influential individuals, although they do not seem to be directly involved in decision making and policy implementation. The political elite also includes representatives of the ruling class, who are not formally related to politics, but have a behind-the-scenes influence on political decision-making, they play the role of so-called "gray cardinals". They cannot provide direct (material and moral) assistance, limit or not provide it at all, but at certain times they can become the main actors in the political process. One way or another, the elite occupies an important place among the political actors. In essence, politics is a product of the elite, its function, and the function is socially necessary, which expresses the interests of the whole society .

The role of the elite in society, government, economy, etc. reflect its functions :

1) elites play a crucial role in determining the political will of a social group, of the whole class, and in developing mechanisms for implementing this will;

2) elites are called upon to form the political goals of their group, class, their program documents;

3) elites regulate the activities of political representation of a group, class, dosing support, strengthening or limiting it;

4) elites are the main reserve of leading cadres, the center of recruitment and placement of managers in various sectors of political and state administration.

Revealing the essence, role and composition of the elite, it is impossible, in our opinion, not to dwell on the question of who constitutes the "new political elite" of Russia today. This question is important not only to analyze the nature of the current government, but also to identify its prospects. In order to answer it, you must first look at the composition of the social movement, which in recent years has struggled with the Soviet (communist) regime. Representatives of the following socio-political groups dominated this democratic “stream”.

1. Intellectuals, who, thanks to their professional activities, especially acutely felt the repressive nature of the old regime, were aware of its futility.
2. There were sincere supporters of democratic values ​​and national revival in all other mass strata of society, i.e. ideological opponents of the communist regime.
3. People who suffered to some extent from the previous regime, and not only repressed, dissidents and political prisoners, but also all citizens whose life, according to their convictions, was crippled, distorted by totalitarianism.
4. Some intellectuals from the party elite. It was they who, having access to the media, were able to deliver the first tangible blows to official mythology, to begin a "revolution in consciousness."
5. Democratic, reformist, market-oriented representatives of the economic elite.
6. Pragmatists at all levels of power and management structures, who do not care which gods to pray for, if only to serve, or rather, to rule, i.e. This is "the circumstances of the Democrats."
7. Outsiders are careerists from the most diverse social groups who sought to use democratic movements as a social “elevator”.

But not all representatives of these categories were able to enter the new elite. Natives of the first three groups turned out to be generally too impractical to rule. The rest is the basis of today's government. And here it is striking that the new politicians were somehow or other, directly or indirectly, socially or professionally connected with the old elite, drawn into the orbit of its influence. Moreover, the high proportion in the new elite of the “reformers” and “pragmatists” (groups 5 and 6) suggests the birth of a new elite in the depths of the old and, therefore, a strong dependence of the first on the second.

Social "elevator" raised to the top of those who yesterday were far from the levers of power. This "elevator" brought to the forefront and those who occupied the low-prestigious floors of the imperious and bureaucratic pyramid, and also attracted intellectuals to politics, and all this changed the overall look of the elite, but no more. She acquired through the press and television new advertising packaging, but could not transform qualitatively. Moreover, as evidenced by the facts, yesterday's defenders of the people, fighters for social justice turned into brilliant grandees who appropriated the privileges of the old elite and even multiplied them.

When analyzing the current elite, it is noted that the upper echelons of power are generally characterized by friability, disintegration (disengagement). The common basis that binds together the various groups of elites is extremely weak and, moreover, there is a struggle between them for individual domination and ousting the enemy from the upper echelons in general. This struggle, in which there is nothing sacred, subordinates the social functions and goals of state power, ensures the political orientations of the groups that belong to the ruling elite. Their transformation, unexpected alliances, “treason” and betrayal, splitting and splitting, “dressing up” of the “left” in the “right”, liberals, etc. - All this suggests that most of the current leaders are in search of their own political and ideological "I". One of the most important reasons for the weakness of the political elite is the lack of broad social and political support among the majority of its constituent groups. Therefore, they and the elite as a whole are almost unable to use broad and organized support from below, as it was at least in August 1991.

The weakness of the political elite is also particularly pronounced in the spiritual sphere. And if it is possible to reveal the "current" political orientations of the groups belonging to this elite, then ideological orientations are practically absent - these are moral values, and socio-political doctrines, and a clear long-term reform program.

Attempts to mechanically transfer Western European ideology to domestic soil: liberalism, social reformism, and others — end in failure. Their values ​​on this basis are quickly reinterpreted in a peculiarly pragmatic way: individualism turns into unrestrained egoism, freedom into self-will and irresponsibility, competition into the absolute right of the strong, etc. Attempts to create ideological platforms that respond to the uniqueness of time run into the slogan of “de-ideologization”, under which the current leaders stormed the communist strongholds. Thus, the current political elite demonstrates the inability to create a holistic system of new ideas that can unite and inspire society .