The development of the state in many respects depends on how fundamental and developed are the rules governing certain processes taking place at the level of political institutions and society. What is the specificity of the relevant mechanisms? What is the role of political norms for the Russian state?
Definition of the term
The subject under consideration has a complex structure and a noticeable discussion 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 in question should be understood as measures of regulation of activities in the field of public administration and the field of interaction between power institutions, society and individuals. There are different types of political norms: they can be represented in the form of laws, traditions, customs, value guidelines, spiritual and cultural priorities. They can be supplemented by principles - elements that do not have the nature of regulation, but often play no less significant role than the norms themselves.
But regardless of the specific variety, the regulatory measures in question relate to the political sphere of society. That is, they affect power relations, electoral processes, the work of socio-political associations, the activities of social and ethnic groups. Political principles and norms can be implemented at various levels - national, regional, municipal.
The regulatory measures in question are established with the aim of ensuring control by the state and society over communications with the participation of 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.
Related nature of norms
It can be noted that the regulatory measures 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 because the object of control is one and the same, and the content of the regulatory provisions is similar. Political, social norms are often considered in a single context.
In accordance with one of the interpretations, the regulatory measures under consideration are a special case of social ones. This point of view is close to those researchers who consider society primary in relation to the state. Legal norms are understood in a similar way - that is, those set forth in laws. That is, no matter how one or another regulatory mechanism, it will in one way or another be related to the public sphere. Political and legal norms will be private social options.
Norms and Values
Consider how the measures under regulation are correlated with political values. Which, like principles, can also play an important practical role. Political values are guidelines that are more consistent with morality than with law. Following them implies that the subject of the relevant activities - for example, a government body or a particular official in a public position - will show his will not by virtue of requirements dictated by his authority, but by following certain universal, humanitarian considerations.
Ideally, political values, if we talk about modern environments in which domestic and international relations are realized, should reflect the interests of primarily citizens, not the authorities. This is ensured by democratic procedures associated with the formation of various public administration institutions. If they operate 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 the principles is that they are of a nature that does not imply their alternative understanding. If the principles somehow need to be explained, then tradition is usually not. They are understood by most participants in political communications.
The bearers of traditions can be a variety of subjects, for example, political figures holding a specific position. This may be a society that delegates to them power or administrative functions. This can be a political or other public association that follows certain traditions in the course of work with voters or in the process of solving current problems.
The significance of tradition
In some cases, the regulatory elements under consideration 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 domestic policy of Russia involves their regular involvement, when it comes to legal relations with the participation of entities from national republics. In this case, the legislator is easier to trust the patterns of behavior prevailing in local societies than to develop a separate legal norm.
Traditions can also be an element of the proactive adaptation of society to new realities or the influence of certain factors that the current legislative framework does not provide. Moreover, if the involvement of traditions as a whole becomes an adequate reaction of a political subject to changes, then they may well become the basis for the formation of the relevant legal provisions.
Tradition is the most important tool for transmitting the experience gained by society during the historical development of participation in certain political communications. Their presence contributes to the development in society of patterns of response to dangerous factors in terms of state stability. For example, in the event of a tense foreign policy situation, a society that has had historical experience of participating in large-scale conflicts may be ready to mobilize all its forces to save their country.
The Impact 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 likely to be ready, for example, not to buy imported goods that are 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 people's behavioral guidelines that can predetermine the fundamental nature of attitudes towards the implementation of certain activities. In the event of the appearance of certain factors that have influenced the formation of tradition in the past, one can determine for himself the optimal sequence of actions for himself in a given situation. For example, when people who support the abolition of the licensing institution appear among the candidates for a high position in the state system of power, the subjects appointing them will recall how this measure can reduce the quality of many goods and services in the current capitalist economy in the Russian Federation, and will not appoint this person to the appropriate position.
Traditions can play an important socializing and educational role. That is, people in the process of growing up and joining public communications, in the presence of strong political traditions, will not need to clarify things that require their active participation in certain components of state building. What kind of scenarios might be appropriate here? For example, a man brought up on strong political traditions of respect for the history of his country, most likely, will not evade the army, but will gladly go to serve in it. He will strive to develop a demanded profession in order to benefit the state.
Traditions as a factor in strengthening statehood
Traditions are an important factor in strengthening statehood, especially when it comes to its Russian model. So, the modern principles of building intra-federal relations in the Russian Federation did not appear by chance - they have a long historical tradition, actually from 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 base, but to the fact that this is a completely fundamental historical tradition. The nations that are part of 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 characteristic of past years.
Traditions are particularly noteworthy in that, despite their fundamental nature, they can be carefully modified under the influence of various factors - in this case, those related to the development of the state. Therefore, they are often considered by researchers as the most effective regulatory mechanisms, as the most correct political norms. An example we noted above is respect for the history of our country.
Moral aspect
Political norms can also be represented by moral principles. Their main attribute is the expression of a will not dictated by any precepts, traditions or principles. The subject of political communications can make a decision based on his personal desire to help a partner. Or at least not worsen his position.
Morality can be predetermined both by a person’s individual vision of the situation, and by attitudes that play a significant role in society or in its individual groups or associations - parties, trade union organizations, and ideological circles.
Legal norms in politics
Law and politics are spheres that are closely interconnected. Most of the decisions that are made by the authorities in modern states are somehow implemented within the framework of legally established mechanisms. Legal norms can be classified as key for the political sphere. But what matters is how they are interpreted. Also, law and politics are phenomena that have one fundamental dissimilarity. What is it manifested in?
The fact is that in processes involving government institutions very often decisions are proactive in nature, for which the legal framework has simply not been developed or is characterized by clearly outdated provisions. As a rule, the legislator is preceded by the publication of a particular act by a precedent that has become the pretext for developing a new legal norm or adjusting an existing one. Therefore, politicians often make decisions that may not be consistent with current legislation. And this becomes a frequent reason for discussion, for accusing certain officials of non-compliance with the “rule of law”.
However, the legislative aspect of the regulation of political communications is very important in terms of ensuring the stability of state institutions. One cannot 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 governing, where possible, various spheres of political communications. The main source of relevant norms is usually the provisions of the Constitution or of a substitute code of laws. The remaining legal acts are based on them.
Of course, norms can be characterized by the simultaneous influence of legislative provisions, morals, traditions or principles. In this case, we can speak, for example, of a fair law, consistent with historical premises and modern realities. This may be an ideal scenario, but all trustworthy actors in politics strive for it.
Criteria for classifying norms as political
Based on what features should these or other regulatory measures be understood as political norms? An example of this type of source is the Election Law of the Russian Federation. This legal act directly relates to the political sphere, namely, procedures related to the delegation of power by the country's population 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 setting is the support by the population of the Russian Federation of a centralized model of government, a strong federal center. It is this tradition, when key decisions must be taken in Moscow, that many political scientists explain the fact that Russians choose parties and candidates with a conservative philosophy, who shape 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 based on a similar tradition. The population consciously delegates the bulk of the power to Moscow, however, expecting corresponding results from administrative decisions of the capital. Modern mass political parties - "United Russia", the Communist Party, the Liberal Democratic Party - one way or another assume in the implementation of their programs following this tradition. All key decisions, regardless of who wins the parliamentary elections, are made in Moscow.
Among moral principles one can also find political norms. An example is the installation of the government of the country to write off external debts in relation to countries that objectively cannot pay off loans. It seems that, from the point of view of law, the state has the right to request the debt in full. Moreover, the political tradition can characterize the lender as a principal collector of all debts. But a scenario is not ruled out in which the authorities of the creditor country, by virtue of moral principles, decide to write off the debt.