Political norms: an example. What are political traditions?

2024 Author: Henry Conors | [email protected]. Last modified: 2024-02-12 02:55

The development of the state largely depends on how fundamental and developed the norms governing certain processes occurring at the level of political institutions and society. What are the specifics of the respective mechanisms? What is the role of political norms for the Russian state?

Term Definition

The topic under consideration has a complex structure and a noticeable debatable component. The first aspect in which it is useful to consider political norms is definition. There is a widespread interpretation according to which the term under consideration should be understood as measures of regulation of activities in the sphere of public administration and the field of interaction between power institutions, society and individuals. There are different types of political norms: they can be presented in the form of laws, traditions, customs, value orientations, spiritual and cultural priorities. They can be supplemented by principles - elements that do not have the character of regulation, but often play no less significant role than the actual norms.

But regardless of the specific variety, the regulation measures in question relate to the political sphere of society. That is, they affect the authoritiesrelations, electoral processes, work of socio-political associations, activities of social and ethnic groups. Political principles and norms can be implemented at various levels - national, regional, municipal.

The measures of regulation in question are established in order to ensure control by the state and society over communications involving individuals, classes, representatives of political parties and other public associations. Another important function that political norms perform is to protect the interests of the state and citizens from internal destructive factors and external influences.

Adjacent nature of norms

It can be noted that the measures of regulation in question are very close, and in some cases identical to the sources of regulation of processes in society - social norms. In some cases, it is not easy to distinguish between them due to the fact that the object of control is the same, and the content of the regulations is similar. Political, social norms are often considered in the same context.

According to one of the interpretations, the considered measures of regulation are a special case of social ones. This point of view is close to those researchers who consider society to be primary in relation to the state. Legal norms are understood in a similar way - that is, those that are set forth in laws. That is, whatever this or that regulatory mechanism may be, it will somehow correlate with the public sphere. Political and legal regulations will be privatesocial options.

Norms and values

Let's look at how the regulatory measures under consideration correlate with political values. Which, like principles, can also play an important practical role. Political values are guidelines that are more related to morality than to law. Following them assumes that the subject of the relevant activities - for example, a government agency or a specific official in a public position - will show his will not because of the requirements dictated by the authorities, but because of following some universal, humanitarian considerations.

Ideally, political values, if we talk about the modern environments in which domestic and international relations are implemented, should reflect the interests of citizens first of all, and not of the authorities. This is ensured by democratic procedures associated with the formation of certain institutions of public administration. If they function at the proper level, then there will be no problems with the compatibility of political values and the interests of society.

Norms and traditions

At the beginning of the article, we noted that traditions can be one of the varieties of political norms. Their main difference from principles is that they are of a nature that does not imply their alternative understanding. If the principles somehow need to be explained, then the traditions, as a rule, do not. They are clear to most participants in political communications.

The bearers of traditions can be a variety of subjects, for example,politicians holding a specific position. It can be a society that delegates power or administrative functions to them. This may be a political or other public association that follows certain traditions in the course of working with voters or in the process of solving current problems.

The Importance of Traditions

In some cases, the considered elements of regulation can replace legal norms. For example, due to their absence or insufficient development and, as a result, inefficiency. In this case, traditions are sometimes referred to as "legal custom". For example, the internal policy of Russia assumes their regular use when it comes to legal relations with the participation of entities from national republics. In this case, it is easier for the legislator to trust the patterns of behavior that have developed in local societies than to develop a separate legal norm.

Traditions can also be an element of society's proactive adaptation to new realities or the influence of certain factors that the current legislative framework does not provide for. At the same time, if the use of traditions as a whole becomes an adequate response of a political subject to changes, then they may well become the basis for the formation of appropriate legal provisions.

Tradition is the most important tool for transmitting the experience accumulated by society in the course of the historical development of participation in certain political communications. Their presence contributes to the development in society of patterns of response to factors that are dangerous from the point of view of the stability of the state. For example, in the case of stressforeign policy situation, a society that has historical experience of participating in large-scale conflicts may be ready to mobilize all forces to save their country.

The influence of traditions on public communications

Political traditions influence not only the sphere in which power relations are realized and state institutions function, but also other areas of social communications. The population of the Russian Federation, which is traditionally characterized by a high level of patriotic sentiment, is highly likely to be ready, for example, not to buy imported goods subject to sanctions. In this sense, the influence of tradition - love for the Motherland - is traced at the business level, although at first glance there is little in common between these areas.

Political traditions, according to many researchers, form behavioral guidelines in people, which can predetermine the fundamental attitudes towards the implementation of certain activities. In the event of the appearance of certain factors that influenced the formation of a tradition in the past, a person can, without too much prompting, determine for himself the optimal sequence of actions in a given situation. For example, when people appear among the candidates for a high position in the state system of power who support the abolition of the institution of licensing, the subjects appointing them will remember how much this measure in the conditions of the capitalist economy under construction in the Russian Federation can reduce the quality of many goods and services, and will not appoint this person to the appropriate position.

Traditions canplay an important socializing and educational role. That is, people in the process of growing up and becoming involved in public communications, in the presence of strong political traditions, will not need to be explained about things that require their active participation in certain components of state building. What kind of scenarios might be appropriate here? For example, a person brought up on strong political traditions of respect for the history of his country, most likely, will not shy away from the army, but will gladly join it. He will strive to master a profession in demand in order to benefit the state.

Traditions as a factor in strengthening statehood

Traditions are an important factor in strengthening statehood, especially if we talk about its Russian model. Thus, the modern principles of building intra-federative relations in the Russian Federation did not appear by chance - they have a long historical tradition, in fact, since the time of the Empire.

The fact that the peoples of Russia feel comfortable and loyal to the central government is due, as researchers believe, not to the perfection of the legal framework, but to the fact that this is a completely fundamental historical tradition. The nations that make up the Russian Federation are well aware that, say, with a higher level of federalization, they may not be able to cope with the increased burden on the economy, with the emergence of new social problems that are not typical of past years.

Traditions are especially noteworthy in that they, despite their fundamental nature, lend themselves toaccurate modification under the influence of certain factors - in this case, those associated with the development of the state. Therefore, they are often considered by researchers as the most effective regulatory mechanisms, as the most correct political norms. The example we noted above is respect for the history of your country.

Moral aspect

Political norms can also be represented by moral attitudes. Their main feature is the expression of will, not dictated by any prescriptions, traditions or principles. The subject of political communications can make a decision based on a personal desire to help a partner. Or at least not make things worse for him.

Moral can be predetermined both by a person's individual vision of the situation, and by attitudes that play a significant role in society or its individual groups or associations - parties, trade union organizations, ideological circles.

Legal norms in politics

Law and politics are areas that are closely related to each other. Most of the decisions that are made by the authorities in modern states, one way or another, are carried out within the framework of legally fixed mechanisms. Legal norms can be classified as key for the sphere of politics. But what matters is how they are interpreted. Also, law and politics are phenomena that have one fundamental dissimilarity. How does it manifest itself?

The fact is that in processes involving government institutions, decisions are often made in a proactive way.character, for which the legal framework has simply not been developed, or it is characterized by clearly outdated provisions. As a rule, the issuance of a particular act by the legislator is preceded by a certain precedent, which has become the reason for the development of a new legal norm or the correction of an existing one. Therefore, politicians often make decisions that may not be consistent with the current legislative regulation. And this becomes a frequent reason for discussions, for accusing certain officials of inconsistency with the “rules of law.”

However, the legislative aspect of the regulation of political communications is very important in terms of ensuring the stability of state institutions. It is impossible to do without it at the present stage of development of the world community. And therefore, in most developed countries there is a powerful legislative framework that regulates, where possible, various areas of political communications. The main source of relevant norms is usually the provisions of the Constitution or the code of laws that replaces it. Other legal acts are based on them.

Of course, norms can be characterized by the simultaneous influence of legal provisions, morals, traditions or principles. In this case, we can talk, for example, about a fair law that corresponds to historical prerequisites and modern realities. This may be the ideal scenario, but all trustworthy political actors aspire to it.

Criteria for classifying norms as political

Based on what signs certainare regulatory measures to be understood as political norms? An example of this type of source is the Law on Elections of the Russian Federation. This legal act directly concerns the political sphere, namely, procedures related to the delegation of power by the population of the country to the level of federal authorities.

If we consider Russian traditions, which of them can be understood as political norms? An example of this type of regulatory installations is the support by the population of the Russian Federation of a centralized model of state administration, a strong federal center. It is this tradition, when key decisions should be made in Moscow, that many political scientists explain the fact that Russians choose parties and candidates with a conservative philosophy, who form their programs with an emphasis on maintaining the vertical of power. This tradition has been around for a long time, and it has historical explanations. Russia has always been a de facto unitary state with centripetal political trends due to the specifics of its formation. Russia's domestic policy is largely built on the basis of this tradition. The population consciously delegates the main part of power to Moscow, but expects appropriate results from the administrative decisions of the capital. Modern mass political parties - "United Russia", the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the Liberal Democratic Party - one way or another suggest following this tradition in the course of implementing their programs. All key decisions, regardless of who wins the parliamentary elections, are made in Moscow.

Among the moralprinciples can also be found political norms. An example is the setting of the country's government to write off external debts in relation to countries that objectively cannot pay off their loans. It seems that, from the point of view of law, the state has the right to claim the debt in full. Moreover, political tradition may characterize the creditor as a principled collector of all debts. But a scenario is not excluded, in which the authorities of the creditor country, due to moral principles, decide to write off the debt.