Ukraine in the XXI century: challenges for the political elite // Mirror of the week.

In Russia, the ideological vacuum created after the collapse of communist doctrine was quickly filled with ideas of reviving the power of the state, returning it to the status of a powerful international player.

Such an ideology was supported by a large number of the population, most of whom felt nostalgic for the greatness of the Soviet Union and were dissatisfied with the current situation. The new ideological system was also supported by the elite, who saw it as a way to strengthen state power and, consequently, their own powers.

In Ukraine, the issue of the national idea has become quite acute with the acquisition of independence, which for a long time served as a reference point for national democratic forces in society. The ideas of democracy and the market were quickly discredited in the eyes of many Ukrainians due to the sharp deterioration in living standards under the slogans of their introduction. Later, ex-president L. Kravchuk will recall: "We built our society on independence. It was an idea. It is a candle that should have come to: independence, independence, catholicity … We set ourselves an idea. And its filling? Vacuum? This should be the mechanism for implementing the idea from kindergarten, family to the upper echelons of the state "[5, p. 12].

Given the low level of national consciousness in society, even the value of Ukrainian independence itself was questioned. But even in such crisis conditions, the Ukrainian elite failed to put forward any successful project of a national idea. This led to the deepening of various divisions in society, did not contribute to the consolidation of its forces on the tasks of modernization.

It is obvious that any large-scale transformations significantly deepen the contradictions in society. Exacerbation of conflicts in the social, political, ethnic areas can lead to various deformations in the development of society and the state, significantly slow down the implementation of reforms. The reasons for the growing contradictions in transit societies are the increasing politicization of the masses during the "rally" period of independence, the ethnic diversity of the population, the rapid socio-economic stratification of society and so on. Both Russia and Ukraine have faced problems of escalating social conflicts and contradictions. Among them, a sharp place is occupied by sharp economic differentiation and conflicts on ethno-national grounds.

The deepening of material stratification is characteristic of all post-Soviet societies. The main task of animal farm summary sparknotes the elite in this aspect is to mitigate the negative effects of this process, the introduction of an effective social protection system for the poorest segments of the population. Instead, the authorities in both countries focused mainly on their own narrow corporate interests and did not pay enough attention to the "social cost" of transformation. This has led to the discrediting of modernization ideas in the eyes of a large part of the people, the deprivation of reforms of broad mass support significant crisis of legitimacy of the elites themselves.

In addition, in the conditions of the disintegration of the old system of power in the post-Soviet territories, separatist sentiments in the republics significantly intensified. This problem has become more acute in Russia, where the issue of preserving state integrity and keeping autonomous republics in Russia’s orbit has become one of the most important tasks of the first years of independence. But this issue has not always been resolved peacefully. In some cases, the authorities failed to avoid bloodshed, and the war in Chechnya became a serious problem in the long run.

In Ukraine, the authorities have taken a more effective integrative position in this area. Perhaps the issues of ethno-national relations were resolved by the Ukrainian political elite most successfully and effectively, at least in comparison with its successes in other spheres of public life.

Thus, the Ukrainian and Russian political elites at the initial stage of modernization transformations were marked by a significant number of common features. This similarity was due primarily to the predominance of the old Soviet nomenklatura in their ranks. However, the combination of political, economic, geographical and mental factors has led to significant differences in the position of the Russian and Ukrainian political elites in societies.

In Russia, the processes of strengthening the power vertical, concentrating much of the power around the president and the executive branch have led to the concentration of the main levers of influence on social processes in general and modernization in particular in the hands of a certain elite , represented by top officials and big business owners. Other elite groups, such as regional and parliamentary ones, were severely restricted in their access to key government decisions. This state, although it contributes to the efficiency of the state, but creates the danger of closing the elite, the loss of feedback from society, the involvement of new forces, which is a necessary condition for successful modernization.

In Ukraine, on the other hand, the existence of deep contradictions between different elite segments and the constant struggle between them hindered the consolidation of the political class and its transformation into a real subject of modernization changes. In addition, it can be argued that the domestic elite, which was formed in the days of independence, did not represent the interests of most segments of society, which also hinders its effective operation.

Undoubtedly, Ukrainian and Russian political elites play a significant role in the modernization process. This is due to the specifics of the post-Soviet transition period, when civil society, which could become a full partner of the state in the implementation of transformations, is only in its infancy, and the mentality of the population accustomed to a passive position in life, and long traditions of initiation and introduction of reforms "from above" characteristic of the USSR.

However, under such conditions, the rulers of both states, without feeling control and incentives for reforms by society, prefer purely formal transformation, rather than real systemic change. But in this aspect there are some differences between the elites of the two countries. Due to certain qualitative characteristics, the Russian ruling class is more focused on strengthening the role of the state in social processes. And historical experience shows that this is the most successful way out of the crisis in which all spheres of society found themselves.

Thus, we see that the elites of Ukraine and Russia, for all the differences between them, have shown insufficient efficiency. The only way out of this situation is to significantly improve their quality by deeply innovating and attracting new people who better meet the needs of modernization.

literature

Barsenkov AS, Vdovin AI History of Russia. 1917-2004. – M .: Aspect Press, 2005. – 816 pp. Boyko OD Ukraine 1991 – 1995: Shadows of the past or contours of the future? (Essays on recent history). – K.: Master-S. – 1996 .– 207 s. Gaman-Golutvina OV Political elites of Russia. Milestones of historical evolution. M.: Intellect, 1998. – 416 pp. Gelman V. Ya. "Transition" in Russian: concepts of the transition period and political transformation in Russia (1989 – 1996) // Social sciences and modernity. – 1997. – No. 4, – P. 64 – 81.Democratic Ukraine (gas). – January 24, 1995. Ioffe Yu. Ya. One on one with the system. – Lugansk: Lugansk. – 1995 .– 271 pp. Kryshtanovskaya O. Anatomy of the Russian elite. – Moscow: Zakharov, 2005 .– 384 pp. Kryshtanovskaya OV Transformation of the old nomenclature into a new Russian elite // Social sciences and modernity. 1995. No. 1. – P. 51 – 65. Kukolev IV Transformation of political elites in Russia // Social sciences and modernity. – 1997. – No. 4 – P. 82 – 91. – P. 82 – 91. Political elite of Ukraine: theory and practice of transformation / VS Zhuravsky, O. Yu. Kucherenko, MI Mikhalchenko. – Kyiv, 1998 .– 264 pp. Shulga M., Potekhin O., Boyko N., Parokhonska O., Shulga T. The ruling elite of modern Ukraine / Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine; Ukrainian Center for Peace, Conversion and Conflict Studies. – Kyiv, 1998 .– 68 pp. Yakymenko Yu., Zhdanov I. Ukraine in the XXI century: challenges for the political elite // Mirror of the week. – No. 44 (469), 15 – 21 November 2003. – http: // www. zn. Kiev. ua / nn / show / 469/43795 /.

03/14/2011

Processes of institutionalization of civil society: the role of the political elite. Abstract

The current ideological situation in Ukraine cannot yet become the basis for real modernization of the country. The reason is the unspirituality of the implemented reforms, a sharp decrease in volitional and moral impulses. The ideology of the ruling Ukrainian elite is not based on morality. Morality can even get in the way of a political career

Political modernization is characterized by: the assimilation of the norms of democracy by the mass consciousness, the creation of a differentiated political structure with a high specialization of roles and institutions; territorial and functional expansion of the sphere of central legislation, administration and political activity; constant expansion of inclusion in political life of social groups and interest groups; the emergence and rapid growth of rational bureaucracy; weakening of traditional elites and their legitimization; replacing traditional elites with modernizing ones, etc.

In general, at the macro level, political modernization means a change in the relationship between the state and society, or rather – its stratification system. On the one hand, it is a process of concentrating political power in the hands of the nation state. On the other hand – providing the individual with the necessary legal and social protection from virtually unlimited central government.

The interaction of the state and the system of social stratification is reflected in the problem of the functional capabilities of the modernizing elite. This problem can be specified in the following tasks, which should be emphasized in the study of political change:

identification of the nature and structure of the modernizing elite; description of the level of modernization of the main social groups and strata; determining the relationship between the modernizing elite and the stratification system; defining the functions of the modernizing elite in the relationship between the state and society.

There are many concepts, classifications and typologies of the political elite (V. Pareto, G. Mosca, H. Ortega y Gasset, M.