Political and ideological pluralism. Good or evil?

Political and ideological pluralism. Good or evil?
Political and ideological pluralism. Good or evil?
Anonim

Pluralism is a term coined by Christian Wolff during the German Enlightenment in the 18th century.

However, in Russia, he became popular in the "perestroika" times in the mid-80s. The idea of ​​political and ideological pluralism against the backdrop of 70 years of CPSU rule was truly revolutionary. In particular, for Russia of that period. In the countries of Western Europe, it was on it that the political system was based. What were the prerequisites for the emergence of pluralistic thinking?

Pluralism and its formation in Russia

ideological diversity and political pluralism

What is the manifestation of ideological and political party pluralism? In a society where there is no totalitarian regime, control and system of punishment for dissent, it is inevitable, like the change of seasons.

In Russia, political and ideological pluralism was born rapidly, in 4-5 years, which in the scale of history is cosmic speed. In 1985, the first cells were organized,communities and organizations. In 1989, they were already registered and received official status. Since then, 30 years have passed. Again, this is not a time limit for history. Therefore, pluralism in Russia is a young, flexible and developing phenomenon.

Ideological and political pluralism implies equality

what is the manifestation of ideological political party pluralism

He is both a prerequisite and a necessary condition for democracy. The presence of a multi-party system, where all its participants have the right to freedom of thought, speech, propaganda (in a good sense) of their ideas and values ​​- this is a portrait of a modern democratic society. A multi-party system is a natural state that any state will strive for and achieve, in which there are no violent restrictions, punishments for dissent and centralization of power.

In other words, in order for a person to make a choice, he needs to be given this choice. Parliament should not consist of one party, the presence of the opposition is necessary. Nothing prevents political parties from uniting in coalitions if they have common ground, while at the same time disagreeing on other issues.

The procedure for registering new political movements should be simple, understandable, and the set of criteria unified.

Political pluralism does not exist on its own, only coupled with a market economy and competition. The church in a pluralistic state is usually separate from it.

Ideological pluralism. Sign of a he althy society

democracy in society

Ideological diversity and political pluralism are two sides of the same coin.

The Constitution of the Russian Federation says that "no ideology can be established as a state or mandatory." A direct consequence of this is tolerance. No individual or group of people should be subjected to persecution and persecution for political, ideological, religious or other beliefs, if such are not contrary to the law. In general, it is worth emphasizing that pluralism is not anarchy. However, this is often the way it is misinterpreted. To paraphrase, we can say: what is not forbidden is allowed. Propaganda, for example, Nazism in Europe is prohibited by law. Therefore, such an ideology has no right to exist. The diversity of views and worldviews gives impetus to civilization. Of course, pure ideological and political pluralism is a utopia. Conflicts are inevitable when different religions, customs and beliefs collide. A sign of a he althy society is to be able to resolve these conflicts peacefully, to recognize the very existence of polar ideologies.

The dark side of pluralism

ideological and political pluralism presupposes equality

In the modern world, where borders are a conditional thing, the existence of different cultures, nations, religions and political movements on the same arena is inevitable. We emphasize once again: diversity and tolerance are a sign of progress, high development and moral he alth of the nation. Returning to the beginning of the article, let us recall that the term "pluralism" (albeit more in a philosophical sense) arose in the Enlightenment, whenWestern European society experienced its heyday. But any philosophical concept is dogmatic. There is no black and white, just as there is no ideal social idea. Are there pitfalls in pluralism? Undoubtedly. The mistake of communism (a thing completely opposite to the phenomenon under consideration) was that the public was placed above the personal. The state was considered as a self-sufficient organism, ignoring, in fact, the people who were its basis. Pluralism ascends the other way around: from the particular to the general, placing at the forefront a person and respect for his upbringing, thoughts, and beliefs. But, oddly enough, this is where the problem lies. The touch of civilization on humanity is thin. As soon as cataclysms, economic downturns and other crises occur, the primitive law “every man for himself” comes into force, and there is no need to talk about tolerance. The same people who have learned to respect and accept each other become ideological enemies. The struggle for power and the assertion of one's idea as the only right one has ignited more wars than a banal greed.

Who are the judges?

deviations in modern society

Ideology in a pluralistic society has the right to exist when it has stood the test of time and history.

Actually, Nazism was also once an ideology, like the slave system, and feudalism, and much more. However, modern civilization does not recognize their right to exist.

Many processes that take place "here and now" have not yet passed such a test. But the very ideapluralism opens too many windows for controversial phenomena to emerge.

The path from the emergence of an opinion to its legalization is short. A person (group) appears with a revolutionary new idea. If formally it does not contradict the law, a pluralistic society has no right to reject this idea. Simply put, strange behavior or deviation is not a reason for persecution. At the next stage, there are followers of this idea, an organized group is formed. At the same time, society begins to get used to such a "deviation". The movement is gaining momentum, propaganda is in place, and voila! It's already a bill.

Who's to say what's good and what's bad? Probably only our descendants…

Popular topic