Russia: a state without ideology, a society without a national idea? See what “Ideology” is in other dictionaries.

The form of expression of theoretical political knowledge is political ideology. This is a system of ideas of any social organization in which the direction of development of society is substantiated and a program of social transformation is formed.

The term “ideology” was first used in 1796 by the French philosopher D. de Tracy. This term meant a new "science of ideas" that would study the origins of people's thoughts. However, due to the lack of objectivity, ideology is not a science. Initially, this term was assigned the meaning that K. Marx gave it: a system of ideas of the ruling class. Then the concept of “ideology” was extended to the system of political ideas of any social institution.

Ideology preaches the political values ​​of a group of citizens and, as a rule, claims this group to exercise political leadership. Political values ​​- These are the ideas and concepts of subjects about the forms of policy implementation, the benefits that a particular policy will ensure, the actions necessary to satisfy the interests of society. Values ​​are most often expressed in specific ideals. These are the desired images of social order: security, equality, freedom, justice, democracy, etc.

The following main ones can be identified functions political ideology, i.e., necessary changes in the consciousness of citizens, carried out through ideology:

1)orientational: ideology orients political subjects in the system of values ​​and interests of a given social group;

2) mobilization: ideology gives instructions for a certain political activity to its followers;

3) integrating: ideology opposes private interests and acts as a unifying factor for the corresponding social group.

Political ideology acts as a factor in the political development of society. The dominant ideology in society is enshrined in the country's constitution and thus becomes the state ideology. In accordance with it, the state is called upon to carry out social transformations. If constitutional provisions are supported by citizens, then state ideology acquires the status national idea. Of course, only a small list of interests and values ​​can unite all citizens of a country. Numerous social groups, social strata of society have their own ideas and concepts about the program of necessary social transformations. This finds expression in various types political ideology

Political ideology call a system of ideas that express the interests of various subjects of political activity and create a theoretical basis for organized political action. Ideology is formalized in the form of socio-political theory, then it is concretized in the political programs of various parties and figures and, by determining people’s behavior, influences actual political practice.

The interests of various subjects (individuals, parties, classes, nations, etc.), their assessments of modern society, and ideas about the social ideal differ significantly from each other, therefore ideologies also differ.

Liberalism(from Latin liberal is - free) defends democratic rights and individual freedoms, freedom of enterprise and the parliamentary system. Liberal ideology is characterized by: Individualism, freedom, reason, equality, tolerance, consent, constitutionalism.

In the 20th century theory was developed neoliberalism, according to which the main functions of the state are the protection of free enterprise, the fight against monopolism, and the development of individual entrepreneurship.

Conservatism(from Latin conservare - to protect) is usually contrasted with liberalism. This ideology is aimed at protecting the traditional social order and countering various innovations and changes. Conservatism is characterized by: traditionalism, human imperfection, hierarchy, order, paternalism, own.

In the 20th century formed neoconservatism, whose task was to protect and disseminate Western values. Because the distinctive feature Conservatism is the defense of the existing state of affairs against innovation; it is not surprising that neoconservatism has absorbed many established liberal values ​​- the protection of rights and freedoms, freedom of enterprise. At the same time, he tries to closely link these values ​​with traditional ones (family, religion, patriotism).

Socialist ideology(from Latin socialis - public) puts forward the principles of social justice and equality as an ideal. The elements of socialism are: equality;priority of society; collectivism; public property; mass character; planned economy.

Social democratic ideology is a variant of socialist ideology. According to supporters of this ideology, the transition to a society of social justice and equality must be gradual. The mechanism of this transition is not revolution and violence, but social reforms. Social Democrats strive for a compromise between the free market and the state. They do not oppose capitalism, but believe that income should be redistributed by the state to the benefit of the poor in order to reduce the gap between rich and poor.

Communist ideology- another version of socialist ideology. Its theoretical justification was undertaken by Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924). Communists believe that reforms are not capable of leading society to the establishment of social justice, since the ruling classes will not want to voluntarily give up their power. Therefore the only thing Right way- revolutionary violence that must destroy capitalism. Lenin believed that after the revolution, workers under the leadership of the Communist Party would rebuild society on the basis of equality and justice. The ideal for communist ideology is a classless communist society, in which the principle “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” is implemented.

Ideology of fascism(from Italian fascio - ligament, bundle) was formed between the First and Second World Wars against the backdrop of a deep economic crisis and political instability. It is characterized by militaristic rhetoric, the cult of strength, romanticization of heroism and self-sacrifice, militant anti-intellectualism, calls for national unity and rallying around a charismatic leader. Blood (nationality and race) in fascism was valued above individual characteristics. In general, fascism promoted ideas of national and racial superiority, violence and chauvinism. The implementation of the ideas of fascism in practice led to the death of tens of millions of people.

Anarchism(from the Greek anarchia - anarchy) is at the other pole of the ideological spectrum. Characteristic feature this ideology is a denial state power. Anarchists believe that government power is a form of violence and should be abolished. Free individuals or small communities can decide their affairs without the state - cooperating with each other, exchanging goods, concluding voluntary agreements.

In addition to the listed ideologies, we can name two more systems of socio-political views that are currently in the process of formation: feminism(from Latin femina - woman), advocating the elimination of all forms of discrimination, especially discrimination against women by men; And environmentalism(from English environment - environment), calling for the protection of nature. These belief systems are increasingly influencing political agendas and political activity.

The main political ideologies in Fig. arranged in a sequence reflecting their similarities and differences. According to Fig. it is possible to determine which ideologies belong to the left and which to the right. Usually, left They are optimistic about human nature and believe that social justice in society can be achieved without excessive government protection. The far left are anarchists, and communists are close to them. Social Democrats are supporters of a more moderate left-wing ideology. Liberals are now closer to the center. Actually centrists One can also name those who combine the ideas of liberalism and conservatism - neoliberals and neoconservatives. Rights They look at human nature more pessimistically and believe that stability is possible only on the basis of traditions, supervision, and government control. Conservatives are mostly moderate right-wingers, and a shift to the far right leads to a fascist ideology.

Ideology is a socio-philosophical category that denotes the degree of social consciousness. It represents a system of various social views, including politics, law, aesthetics, morality, philosophy and religion.

Each of these areas is a tool for assessing and understanding how people relate to social reality.

The use of the term “ideology” first took place in the 18th century at the suggestion of the thinker Destut de Tracy, who so called the science of the universal laws of the formation of ideas. As a full-fledged discipline, it should not have differed in content from any other science, while significantly surpassing them due to its integrating role in social cognition.

What are the different political views? Expert Dmitry Gusev speaks

Since the beginning of its existence, the concept of ideology has been the subject of constant confrontation - the information war is still going on between two opposing sides, on one of which theorists (ideologists) have settled, and on the other, practitioners (politicians).

Basic ideological concepts

In modern society, different ideologies coexist harmoniously. Some areas have received the most attention for a long time, and therefore they are successfully implemented in social practice. There are three branches of the formation of ideologies:

Ideology. Answers on questions

Left - is divided into communism and socialism, which, in turn, form a number of other ideological branches;

Centrist;

Right - the most common branches are liberalism and conservatism.

The concept of ideology – Arseny Khitrov

Left ideologies

The origin of the term “left” coincides with the French Revolution in 1789-1799, when the Constituent Assemblies were held. It was in the left wing of parliament that deputies who were adherents of radical change were seated existing system. Since then, it has been customary to consider those who are progressives, radicals, and “reformers” to be leftists.

Communism

Marxism served as the foundation for the formation of communism, which in the 19th century, in contrast to liberalism, formed the then popular doctrine of the need to build a more just society. According to the arguments of this ideology, communism is capable of ending human exploitation by overcoming all types of alienation ordinary people from power, property and the results of labor.

Socialism

Socialism, as an ideology, pursues the principles of equality of people and justice in society. IN in this case equality is interpreted as equal opportunities for all members of society, preserved at the state level, from the point of view of social and economic components. For social ideology, the highest value is the collective good, the achievement or preservation of which allows for the sacrifice of any individual interests.

Left and right

Centrist ideology

The political embodiment of centrist ideology is social democracy, which, in fact, originated as one of the currents of Marxism. According to social democrats, whose ranks are increasingly filled with female politicians, achieving social equality in society does not accept violence and revolutionary measures - the political and economic positions of the bourgeoisie can succumb to democratic pressure.

Right ideology

Traditionally, right-wing ideology has placed economic or national goals above the public good and egalitarian values, such as equal human rights or chances to achieve goals, for all segments of the population.

During the French Revolution in 1789-1799. Politicians who preferred a conservative point of view were considered right - those who were satisfied with the current state of affairs.

Liberalism

Adherents of liberal views profess individual freedom, even if it contradicts society with its traditions. The basic value of liberalism is the freedom of the individual, which can only be limited by the expression of the free will of other individuals. This ideological movement does not accept prejudices and prejudices, preferring openness to everything new and progressive.

Conservatism

The basis of conservatism as an ideology is the principle of complete and unconditional adherence to the traditions and customs that have developed in society. According to conservatives, any change is a social evil, bringing with it troubles and disasters.

Mechanisms for the formation of ideologies

Each political preference is strictly individual character, as well as a person. But in reality, the number of preferences is not at all equal to the number of people, since many social groups are similar in their views. Even despite the disagreements varying degrees, regarding certain issues, ideology is capable of uniting the masses.

Over the entire existence of mankind, various socio-political concepts have been developed, and each of them has its supporters. With regard to adherence to various political preferences, the decisive factors here are social status, education, age and social traditions.

Basis for the classification of ideologies

There are many ideologies in any society. Each collective social subject with self-awareness and special interests is the bearer of his own system of views on social reality and his position in it. Moreover, one and the same subject, for example a specific person, identifying himself with different groups of people, is simultaneously the bearer of several interrelated ideological systems. Ideologies differ from each other in their basic postulates, attitude to existing reality, declared goals, proposed ways and means of achieving them. They differ even more in their influence on people and the scale of their spread in different regions of the world.

The classification of ideologies helps to navigate the ideological mosaic of the modern world. Classification is one of the methods of scientific knowledge, consisting in dividing a certain class of phenomena into types, dividing these types into subspecies, etc. Typically, characteristics that are essential for given objects or phenomena are chosen as the basis for division in the classification. Classification usually results from some simplification of the actual boundaries between the types of the class of phenomena under consideration, since such boundaries are always conditional and relative. Nevertheless, the classification is intended for permanent use in any science or field of practical activity. If this or that ideological construct, for example, is classified by a researcher as some type of ideology, then this indicates a certain characteristic feature inherent in it, which is known to users of the classification.

The classification of political ideologies can be carried out on the following grounds:

According to their carriers (groups, communities and associations of people of the most varied nature);

The peculiarities of thinking and the scale of the claims of their bearers;

The nature of the attitude towards existing social reality expressed in ideologies and the direction of the goals put forward by them;

Suggested ways to implement the formed ideals, values ​​and goals.

The listed classification grounds are among the most common. Of course, the division of ideologies can be based on some other properties that are important in one way or another.

Main types of ideologies

We have already touched upon the issue of the bearers of ideologies more than once. These, according to the definition of the concept of ideology, are groups and communities of people who differ in their position in existing reality. Consequently, it is possible to distinguish ideologies in accordance with the collective social actors operating in a particular society and the world as a whole. It is customary to distinguish between group, estate, class, confessional (religious), and national ideologies. The scale of these groups can also be different - from several dozen ideological and political like-minded people, to half or more of the total population of humanity. As already noted, the formation of a universal, or planetary, ideology is not excluded. There are also ideologies of various organizationally formed groups and communities of people - corporate, party and state ideologies.

The first classification of ideologies depending on the nature, or scale, of thinking of their bearers was proposed by K. Manheim, who introduced the concepts of partial and total ideologies. The basis for this division of ideologies was the following two circumstances. In Mannheim's interpretation, the history of social thought appears as a clash of class-subjective worldviews, each of which focuses on the private interests of its bearers and is therefore a partial ideology. To reflect the originality and character of the entire structure of consciousness of a certain era or a specific historical social group, Mannheim uses the concept of total ideology. “The concept of partial ideology,” he believes, “comes from the fact that one or another interest causes lies or concealment of the truth; the concept of total ideology is based on the opinion that certain points of view, methods of observation, and aspects correspond to a certain social position.” As you can see, the first concept is used by Mannheim to reflect the connection between the views of a social subject and his interest, the second - to identify the connection between the social position of the subject and the points of view he expresses on various issues of social life. This classification continues to retain its scientific and educational significance to this day.

As already noted, almost all ideologies claim exclusivity and universal significance. However, their objectively valuable social content is still different, just as the number of adherents of one or another ideology is different. Consequently, the real limits of the scale of claims to their social significance and the number of adherents of various ideologies can also serve as the basis for their classification. Based on this, we can distinguish global, local and private ideologies.

Global, or total, ideologies claim to develop a common understanding and explanation of the world for all humanity and a comprehensive program of life activity, universal principles of the organization and functioning of society. This, of course, does not mean that they are supported by all of humanity, but such ideologies have their adherents in various regions of the world. Global ideologies function mainly at the theoretical-conceptual level and act as an expression of the originality and character of the entire structure of consciousness, the entire worldview of certain historical eras or specific social groups (for example, classes). Such ideologies usually include socialism (especially in its Marxist understanding), liberalism and conservatism, including nationalism as a variety of the latter. These ideologies are often still defined as traditional ideological and political movements.

Local ideologies are usually formed by territorial communities - states or groups of neighboring states acting as a single whole (for example, member states of the European Union). They appear in response to the needs of regulating relations between various social forces within a certain region and are aimed at ensuring the integrity and comprehensive progress of a certain country or group of countries, the common good of their peoples. Confessional ideologies (for example, the ideological and political doctrines of Catholicism, Orthodox churches and Islam) are also local in nature. Local ideologies are formed on specific sociocultural soil, but at the same time they are powerfully influenced by the postulates of traditional ideological and political trends.

Private (N. Poulantzas), also known as partial, ideologies function at the psychological level, they focus on the vital interests of individual social groups. Such ideologies in their totality reflect the entire spectrum of private interests of social groups and strata of a particular society. In this case we're talking about about class, corporate, group, party ideology, etc. An institutional manifestation of the presence of private political ideologies is a multi-party system, as well as the existence of various public formations based on the interests of citizens (interest groups).

Based on the nature of the attitude of their bearers to the existing social reality expressed in ideologies and the intentions arising from it, ideologies are distinguished as progressive, conservative and reactionary.

Progressive ideologies always see a certain, significant or less significant, disorder in society and formulate the goals and objectives of its transformation through certain innovations. Such ideologies take into account objective trends social development and direct the actions of their carriers towards the abolition of outdated ones and at the same time the creation of new ones public structures, thereby ensuring the possibility of further movement of society. Of course, behind these kinds of ideas there are certain groups of people with their own interests. The carriers of progressive ideas are usually social strata and classes that are objectively replacing the former dominant forces. Progressive ideologies in the era of bourgeois revolutions included liberalism, and after the establishment of the capitalist mode of production - socialism. Currently, the ideologies of new social movements - pacifism, feminism, environmentalism, communitarianism, anti-globalism - are claiming progressive status.

Conservative ideologies justify the existing socio-political order; their adherents are usually wary of any social changes, fearing that arbitrary interference in the social order will lead to a sharp deterioration in the state of affairs. The bearers of conservative views are also certain groups of people - those who occupy dominant positions in various spheres of public life. They are the ones who are most satisfied with the existing order and therefore do not want significant changes. But conservative sentiments can also be characteristic of broad sections of the population who prefer a quiet life in conditions of social stability to the need to adapt to constant changes. Conservative ideology is at the core of the activities of many political parties, although most of them do not have the adjective “conservative” in their names. These are, for example, the Conservative Party of Great Britain, the Republican Party of the USA, the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan, and almost all Christian Democratic parties in European countries.

Reactionary ideologies also critically assess the existing social reality, but, unlike progressive ideologies, they justify the need to return society to a certain past state. The bearers of such views reproach progressives for the fact that their actions are the cause of the decline and degradation of social life. They are convinced that the “golden time” in human history was in the past, that it was artificially lost and that it should be restored. Thus, reactionary ideologies are focused on reverse stroke history and insist on the restoration of social institutions of previous eras. In any society there are groups of people who, for one reason or another, are not satisfied with the changes that have taken place in life. They are the bearers of reactionary ideologies. It can be said that the so-called religious fundamentalist ideologies, some varieties of nationalism, the ideology of the “new right” in Europe, etc. are oriented not only towards the conservation of existing social orders, but also towards a return to the previous state of society.

According to the proposed methods of implementing the formed ideals, values ​​and goals, ideologies are divided into radical, or revolutionary, and moderate, or reformist.

Radical ideologies justify the need for a rapid and radical transformation of existing reality. Both progressive and reactionary ideological doctrines can be radical. Some of them are focused on, although legal, decisive actions, others - on revolutionary, and therefore, to one degree or another, violent and illegal actions. A type of radical approach to transforming the existing order is extremism. This is an ideological and political attitude, oriented towards extreme radical goals, the achievement of which is ensured exclusively by violent methods and means. Radical ideologies usually include the ideological doctrine of the communist movement (Marxism), and extremist ideologies include Bolshevism, Maoism, racism, chauvinism, etc. But we should not forget that liberalism also at one time acted as a radical ideology, which set the goal of revolutionary overthrow feudal social order; its bearers also considered violent actions acceptable to achieve their goals. For example, the English and French bourgeois revolutions were accompanied by violence and bloody terror. The liberation struggle of the 13 British colonies in North America, which took place under the slogans of liberalism, was also violent. Only subsequently did liberalism, as well as the doctrine of the communist movement, evolve in the direction of moderation.

Reformist ideologies, justifying the need for social change, orient their carriers towards the use of gradual and moderate reforms as a way to achieve the stated goals. Reformist positions are usually taken by the middle strata of the population, who are not completely satisfied with their real position in society, but who are not interested in radical changes for fear of losing what they have already achieved during revolutionary upheavals. Reformist ideology is believed to underlie the ideological doctrine of social democracy. However, the bearers of such an ideological attitude are broader categories of the population. The bearers of conservative ideology do not rule out a reformist approach either.

Ideologies are also divided into traditional (with classic examples and their subsequent modifications highlighted) and non-traditional.

Traditional ideologies are those that took shape by the middle of the 19th century. and served the interests of the main social classes of the New Age. Such ideologies are liberalism, conservatism and socialism. Modifications of their classical content (i.e. developed by the founders) are neoliberalism, neoconservatism, libertarianism, ideological doctrines of social democracy (democratic socialism) and communist parties (Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, Eurocommunism, etc.)

Non-traditional ideologies are those that were either updated in the first half of the 20th century, or took shape at the turn of the 20th - 21st centuries. and reflect the interests of the most diverse groups of people. Non-traditional ideologies include nationalism, fascism, pacifism, feminism, ecologism, globalism, anti-globalism, fundamentalism, etc. Among these, alternative ideologies, or ideologies of new social movements, are distinguished - those that put forward non-traditional goals and objectives of social development, as well as specific methods and methods for achieving them. Such ideologies usually include feminism, pacifism, environmentalism, anti-globalism, etc.

It should be noted that different types of ideology are often distinguished, so to speak, according to spheres or directions of social life: humanitarian ideology, economic ideology, ideology of human rights, ideology of statehood, etc. However, it is still not entirely correct to define the last of these concepts as special types ideology. Strictly speaking, with this kind of concept, ideology as an integral set of ideas, values ​​and concepts, determined by the position of their bearer in the system of social relations, is replaced by individual problems and tasks of social life, even if expressed in conceptual form. Essentially, these kinds of concepts denote theories, concepts or doctrines in which the position of the cognizing subject on certain social problems is stated and justified. This circumstance, however, does not exclude, but on the contrary, presupposes the use of such concepts in ideological constructions themselves. Moreover, they can be included entirely as constituent elements of certain ideological systems. However, this circumstance is not a sufficient basis for qualifying such concepts and doctrines as an ideology. Ideology, being a form of consciousness of groups of people, correlates not with the pronoun “what” (ideology of what), but with the pronoun “whom” (ideology of whom, or whose ideology).

Ideological and political spectrum

In political science, the concept of an ideological spectrum or, more precisely, an ideological-political spectrum is used to designate a certain systematization of various types of socially significant ideologies, as well as their carriers - political parties and social movements. The word “spectrum” (from Latin - visible) means the totality of all values ​​of any quantity characterizing a system or process. In the concept of “ideological and political spectrum” it serves as an indication that the entire set of ideological and political currents existing in society can, like color spectrum, arrange in the form of some kind of sequential row. This arrangement of ideologies and their bearers in the ideological and political spectrum occurs, as a rule, along one of two axial lines: “left-right” or “liberal-conservative.”

The definitions “left” and “right” characterize the content and degree of radicalism of political ideologies and their bearers. It is customary to call all ideological and political movements whose participants generally share a commitment to the ideas of freedom, equality, fraternity and social progress. The right refers to ideological and political movements whose participants generally share a commitment to the existing social order, the principles of authority, hierarchy and duty. In the domestic analytical tradition, it is customary to classify as “right” those who defend the interests of the propertied segments of the population, i.e. minorities, and to the “left” - those who protect the interests of employees, i.e. poor majority. The full spectrum of ideological and political trends along this axis looks like this: extreme left (or ultra-left) - left - center-left - center - center-right - right - extreme right (or ultra-right).

The tradition of dividing ideologies and their bearers into “left” and “right” dates back to the seating order of the deputies of the French National Assembly in 1789, according to which on opposite sides of the speaker were supporters of the ideas of freedom, equality, fraternity, progress (on the left) and those who advocated the preservation of the monarchy (right), and deputies who stood on moderate positions took places between both (center). This model has become widespread in other parliaments. Over time, the concepts of “left”, “center”, “right” served as the basis for the concept of “ideological and political spectrum”.

The use of the concepts “right” and “left” to characterize political ideologies and movements, although based on historical precedent, nevertheless affects much deeper levels of consciousness where pairs of opposites play vital role. According to traditional ideas about the structure of existing reality, the right side was considered “positive”, “good”, corresponding to the light, spiritual, divine sides of reality. In the qualitative space of traditional society, the orientation “to the right” in itself implied a positive ethical and ritual load; hence the meaning of the words “correctly”, “truth”, “right”. The right side is part of a series of symbols associated with positive concepts - “spirit”, “light”, “day”, “good”, “truth”, “order”, etc. The left side, on the contrary, was considered “bad”, “bad”, “evil”, “false”. It was associated with a series of negative symbols - “lie”, “night”, “darkness”, “delusion”, “disorder”, “deception”, etc. “Left” was synonymous with “bad” and corresponded to the negative side of existence. In Christian doctrine, when describing the Last Judgment, it is emphasized that “the righteous will stand on the right hand” (i.e. on the right), and “sinners will stand on the left” (i.e. on the left).

By comparing the symbolism of “right” and “left” in tradition with the principle of seating of deputies in the French National Assembly, one can discover the correspondence of the then understanding of political logic to the symbolism considered: the “right” stood in the position of defending traditional society and therefore they were right, i.e. positive, good; "left", i.e. revolutionaries sought to overthrow the old order, wishing for its destruction, and therefore, from the standpoint of traditional thinking, they were leftists, i.e. “sinners”, “troublemakers”, “evildoers”. However, the picture changes from the point of view of those who advocate social progress: in their view, it is the “left” that defends the right, i.e. a right, good deed, and the “right” personify everything dark, outdated, and therefore are evil forces.

The initial seating arrangement of “left” and “right” in the French National Assembly greatly contributed to the formation of a linear picture of understanding the logic of the historical process. The “progress” of society was seen as a movement “from right to left,” with traditional society on the right flank and modern or modernist society on the left. The impact of this scheme on political thinking in the 19th and 20th centuries. was so great that entire ideological systems were built on its basis: Marxism, which asserts the historical inevitability of the complete overcoming of not only traditional, but also liberal-democratic society; social democracy, which insists that the vector of evolution of bourgeois society is deliberately set in the “left” direction; traditionalism, whose supporters (for example, R. Guenon and Y. Evola) are convinced that the modern era is ending last revolution in its movement, after which will follow the beginning of a new historical cycle with a repetition of everything that happened before.

When placing ideological and political trends along the “liberal-conservative” axis, the first include those that are focused on implementing social innovations, and the second include those that are aimed at preserving the existing social order or advocate a return of society to a certain past state. The idea of ​​which part of the political spectrum along the “liberal-conservative” axis this or that ideological movement or this or that political party is located in is also given by such terms as radicals, moderates and reactionaries. Radicals occupy either the far left (left-wing radicals, or revolutionaries) or the far right (right-wing radicals, or reactionaries) flanks of the ideological and political spectrum. Between these poles are liberals, moderates and conservatives; The listed positions differ in their attitude to the pace, depth and methods of the changes implemented, but they all advocate innovative assistance to social development. Only reactionaries are focused on the reverse course of the socio-political process. If these ideologies are arranged in the indicated order along one line from right to left, we get the following row, or linear scale: communism - socialism - liberalism - conservatism - fascism.

The above diagram of the alignment of political forces and their ideologies, called linear, reflects the idea of ​​​​social “progress” as a movement from right to left (Fig. 1). In it, to the right of the center are those who advocate the preservation of existing social foundations, in the center are those who defend the institutions and values ​​of the modern, i.e. modernist society, on the left - those who seek innovation in various spheres of public life. The picture of the relationship of political forces becomes even clearer if a segment of a three-part linear diagram (left - center - right) is represented in the form of an arc, where the opposite poles - the extreme left and the extreme right - will be close to each other (Fig. 2) Such a diagram, called circular, reflects the fact that “left” and “right” relate to each other not only through the center, but also through that ideological and political space, which, according to A.G. Dugin can be called an “anti-center”. Here a certain continuity, the continuity of the ideological and political space, is fully represented. The center, passing through itself the impulses of the poles, serves as a kind of mediator in their irreconcilable enmity. At the anticenter point there is no similar situation, which creates the effect that there is a wall, a break in the chain. But, nevertheless, a certain interaction between the forces located at this point is possible, which can be observed in real life. political life. In certain circumstances, the “extreme left” entered into an alliance with the “extreme right” against the center.

The name of an ideology or party does not necessarily correspond to its place in the ideological and political spectrum.

The problem of identifying ideologies

The classification of ideologies presupposes a methodology for identifying ideological doctrines. In other words, we are talking about ways to clarify the characteristic features of an ideology and determine its belonging to one or another type of ideology; We are also talking about the mechanism of identification by a social subject of his individual views with one or another already existing system of ideas.

According to L.S. Sanisteban, the author of one of the Western textbooks on political science, when analyzing the content of any specific set of political ideas, one should highlight at least two sides in them, or distinguish between two plans: explicit and hidden. An explicit plan in the content of ideology is represented by openly put forward ideas, theses and arguments. Therefore, the first task of analyzing ideology is to fully understand the statements contained in it and

messages, in precisely defining their meaning. At the first stage of the analysis, answers are given to the questions: what are the statements contained in this system of ideas and how do they relate to the existing socio-political reality? Having established the explicit side in the content of ideology, one should move on to analyzing its implicit or hidden side. At this stage, a correspondence is established between the messages contained in the ideology and the real interests and goals of certain social actors. The second task of analyzing ideology, therefore, comes down to finding an answer to the question: which social subjects (individuals, groups, classes, communities) and why identify themselves with a given set of socio-political ideas? In other words, at the second stage of analysis it becomes clear whose interests are expressed and whose political aspirations and actions are justified by this ideology.

Since each social subject strives to present its system of socio-political ideas as an expression of the interests and needs of the whole society, not every ideological doctrine declares, as Marxism does, the interests of which social classes or groups it expresses and serves. The identification of social subjects with one or another existing ideological doctrine occurs mainly spontaneously. Only intellectuals who create political ideologies are aware of which social groups they address their creations to. The political positions of individuals and social groups are, for the most part, determined by their position in the system of socio-political relations, and their ideological preferences are determined precisely by this fact. As they accumulate their own political experience and their awareness of the processes taking place in society, social actors begin to discover that this or that system of views set forth in existing specific texts also corresponds to their vision of socio-political reality. This is basically the mechanism for identifying social subjects with one or another ideology.

It should also be noted that the position occupied by individuals and social groups in society determines their self-identification with one or another ideological doctrine, but does not mechanically determine it. Sometimes the position occupied by an individual or a social group in society may conflict with the ideology shared by the subject. This happens, as a rule, at turning points in the development of society, when new socio-political ideas take possession of the minds of people occupying different social positions. These are situations when the hidden side of the new ideology is still far from being realized, i.e. It is not yet clear which social subject’s interests this outwardly attractive system of ideas meets. This happened, for example, with those nobles who shared the ideas of the Great French Revolution, or with representatives of various layers of the bourgeoisie in Russia who adopted socialist ideology, and finally with broad categories of the population in the Soviet Union who suddenly took the position of liberalism.

The internal inconsistency inherent in political ideologies, i.e. eclecticism and lack of coherence of their individual provisions may be the reason for discrepancies in understanding their content. In an ideological text one can always find a provision that leads to different interpretations of the most important issues of socio-political life, or a provision that, when interpreted, can be given the opposite meaning. It follows from this fact that competing political movements can arise and develop on the basis of the same ideology. In such cases, each of them claims to be a genuine “interpreter and follower” of the corresponding ideology. Examples of this kind can be given for any of the traditional ideological movements - liberalism, conservatism, socialism. Almost within each of them, various schools and directions coexist or are in confrontation with each other. Particularly indicative in this regard is the Marxist socialist ideology, on the basis of which in the 20th century. two very powerful political movements developed - communist and social democratic.

Babosov, EM. The essence of ideology, its structure, functions and role in society // E.M. Babosov. Ideology of the Belarusian state: theoretical and practical aspects / E.M. Babosov. Minsk, 2004.

Bell, D. Renewing History in the New Century. Preface to the new edition of the book “The End of Ideology” / D. Bell // Questions of Philosophy. 2002. No. 5.

Weber, M. “Objectivity” of socio-scientific and socio-political knowledge / M. Weber // Weber, M. Selected works. Minsk, 1990.

Ideology // Political science: encyclopedia. dictionary. M., 1993.

Ilyin, V.V. The Great Confrontation: Ideology and Science: On the Possibilities of Scientific Ideology and Ideological Science / V.V. Ilyin // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 12. Socio-political research. 1992. No. 5.

Manhesh^K. Ideology and utopia / K. Manheim. Diagnosis of our time. M., 1994.

Marx, K. German ideology / K. Marx, F. Engels. T. 3.

Matz, U. Ideologies as a determinant of politics in the modern era / U. Matz // Polis. 1992. No. 1-2. ;

On the state of ideological work and measures to improve it: Materials of a permanent seminar of senior officials of republican and local government bodies. Minsk, 2003.

Rachkov, PA. On the death and immortality of ideology / P.A. Rachkov // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 7. Philosophy. 1999. No. 2.

Semigin, G.Yu. Ideology / G.Yu. Semigin // New philosophical encyclopedia: in 4 volumes. M., 2001. Vol. 2.

Soloviev, A.I. Political ideology: the logic of historical evolution / A.I. Soloviev // Polis. 2001. No. 2. :"

Fukuyama, F. The end of history? / F. Fukuyama // Questions of philosophy. 1990. No. 3.

Shatsky, E. Utopia and tradition / E. Shatsky. M., 1990. Shevchenko, V.N. Ideology / V.N. Shevchenkov // Philosophical Dictionary. M., 2001.

Ideology: yesterday, today and tomorrow

Ideology– what is it, what role does it play in uniting people, is it needed in modern conditions of development of society? If necessary, what kind and in what form? I will try to raise these questions in this material and propose to discuss them in the comments below.

After the collapse of the USSR, within the newly formed CIS states, there is a constant search for an ideology that would unite society and strengthen the state system. I can judge the results of this search only by the fact that in two decades of independence I have not been able to find it.

Whether this is good or bad is not for me to decide, and this is not the purpose of the article. Same search "own" ideology happens in . For part of society, both Ukraine and Russia, this issue is relevant, it worries them, and in the process of searching for the necessary ideology they discuss this topic on various information platforms/forums. Initially, on these platforms, during the discussion process, commentators are divided into two camps - conservatives And liberals, but then it turns out that the conservatives cannot determine which of the leaders to resurrect, and the liberals do not want to see everyone in their city. So gradually, the two camps, in the process of disputes and discussions, are divided into many groups that begin to fiercely defend their “only correct” point of view (ideology).

So it turns out that initially 100 people are divided into two camps, which, in turn, are divided into groups (10*10), and it turns out that when you find one ideological supporter in your group, you receive nine more “as a gift” opponents from other groups? Is it possible in such conditions of ideological division to talk about public association and be constructive? Of course, within your group (10 people) it is possible, but the goal should be to unite the whole society, otherwise, why fence this garden?

In my personal experience, it's practically unreal. As soon as the conversation turns into ideology, division and endless verbal chatter of everyone about their own begins. Why does this happen and is it possible to go beyond endless division and antagonism? Let's think about it.

Ideology (idea– prototype, idea; And logos– word, reason, teaching):

• a system of conceptually formulated views and ideas that expresses the interests of various social classes, groups, societies, in which people’s attitudes to reality and to each other are recognized and assessed;
• a system of ideas, ideas, views, characterizing views on the socio-political and other life of some kind. social group, class, political party, society;
• a concept by which a set of ideas, myths, legends, political slogans, party program documents is traditionally designated, philosophical concepts; not being religious in essence;
• by justifying and expressing interests, indicating ways of their implementation and offering appropriate patterns of behavior, ideology unites individuals into a single community. The integration function of ideology is most clearly manifested in national ideologies that seek to unite all representatives of the nation to achieve common goals.

It turns out that ideology promotes bringing people together With certain views and worldview into the corresponding social groups, classes, political parties. If we consider the process of uniting people into ideological groups as a whole from the position of society, then any ideology, as such, shares a single public space into groups of people with different and sometimes conflicting views, ideas, etc.

It turns out that ideology, on the one hand, unites people into groups, and on the other - divides society into groups, pastes. At the same time, the more high level“ideological pumping” in groups, the higher the conflict environment and the stronger their opposition: the core of ideology is a circle of ideas related to issues of capture, retention and use political power subjects of politics. Ideology is based on the conflictual nature of the world, its alignment according to the polar “enemy-friend” model, crystallizing supporters of a particular ideology. The degree of development and visibility of the image of an ideological enemy can rightfully be considered the main basis for the cohesion of a social group - the bearer of ideology.

Those people who are already in a certain ideological group or associate themselves with it may not agree with the above, and from their point of view, from the position of a separate group, ideology unites. The problem is that this unification takes place in a “constructed” reality, with the goal of manipulating and controlling people by influencing their consciousness. In Mythologies (1957), Barthes combined myth and ideology, calling them "metalanguage." Barthes did not consider it appropriate to draw a semiotic distinction between ideology and myth, defining ideology as being introduced into the framework general history and a mythical construction that meets certain social interests.

Let me give you a few more definitions:

• ideology according to K. Mannheim – distorted reflection of social reality, expressing the interests of certain groups or classes seeking to preserve the existing order of things.
• ideology by – this ready-made “mental goods”, disseminated by the press, speakers, ideologists in order to manipulate the mass of people for a purpose that has nothing to do with ideology and very often completely opposite to it.

If the use of various generally accepted ideological models to unite society is ambiguous and leads to its fragmentation with uncertain consequences, then why are individuals/groups still trying to find, approve and impose their ideologies?

I believe that the search for ideology is more disturbing to older generations, and the older a person is, the more pressing this question is, and for some it becomes an obsession: “The idea, and then everything else.” Why older? I think this is due to their life experience and the state of development of society, communication connections in which they became like personalities. Access to information was limited and almost completely controlled, communication links were weak, because not even everyone had a landline telephone.

In such conditions, the idea, which was directively sanitized into a society with weak communication ties, captured minds and played a role stabilization of society and its associations. The problem is that in modern conditions this approach to unification may work, but it is not effective. Almost any resident has access to any information that interests him, as well as the opportunity to communicate with people from different parts of the Earth and exchange information online. Still, attempts to sanitize the idea into society with high degree communication connections are simply “blurred”.

This approach can still be applied somewhere in the world, where you can say that this is true and it is so, the tribes stood up and followed you. But in the civilized World this no longer works. Everyone has the opportunity to determine for themselves: is social equality so equal, is it possible to live without gay pride parades, and is it worth resurrecting the leaders?

Previously used approaches to building society through ideology no longer give the same effect and do not capture minds as before. But we all feel the objective need for the unification, stabilization and development of all social and state institutions. If such a need is felt, then one should look for something outside of generally accepted ideological constructs, something that allows one to unite already existing ideological groups into a single system with a minimum level of antagonism.

Before I start thinking about a free topic and searching for the “ideology” that would correspond modern conditions, I want to quote an excerpt from the speech Evgenia Primakova on international conference “Russia in the world of power of the 21st century”, dedicated to the 20th anniversary of SVOP and the 10th anniversary of the magazine “Russia in Global Affairs” (Images of Russia and the World Beyond Ideology):

“The power of ideas and images” – the theme highlighted at our conference is absolutely justified. In the current conditions, the ideas and images of the participating states international relations influence the development of the global situation no less than the power of money and the power of weapons. First, about general approaches.

First . It is wrong to imagine that after the end of the Cold War, politics and the balance of power at the regional and global levels in general are no longer subject to the influence of ideology. The nature and form of this influence have changed, but it has not disappeared anywhere. Moreover, ideological confrontation, the purposeful introduction of one’s own, often tinted, images while distorting those of others, has become one of the components of foreign policy practice.

Second approach : Liberalism, conservatism and socialism remain as the three most significant ideologies. However, in the current conditions they do not manifest themselves independently, experiencing mutual influences, being in the process of convergence (the process of rapprochement, convergence, compromises), they have become components ideological model inherent various countries. To understand today’s ideology (this also applies to other states), one should proceed not only from the content of ideology, but also from the fact that the determining factor is the relationship between the parts of the ideological model.

Third approach : the policies of individuals or groups of individuals who identify themselves with a particular ideology do not always correspond and correspond to its essence...

I understand this statement by E. Primakov as: “Yes, they still remain the main ideologies, but today they are not self-sufficient, they are forced to interact, make compromises, and the future of the country is determined by the balance between them and the degree of interaction.”

We must assume that today and tomorrow these three main ideologies will be present in society, which, due to the development of communications, will increasingly interact and intersect with each other. I believe that in the current conditions it is not worth directing all efforts to eliminate one of the groups. After all, the fight against it does not lead to anything other than wasting resources (temporary, human) and even greater polarization in society. It is necessary to look for optimal forms of interaction between these already existing ideological groups.

When searching for an “ideology” that can establish interaction between different ideological groups, one must identify the basis that unites them all. What will lead to interactions and compromises. It can be called "evolutionary development". socio-economic spheres and public-state institutions without revolutions, coups, economic upheavals, wars, etc. But it's hard for me to call it ideology, rather, it is a natural need of anyone and everyone, regardless of belonging to a particular group.

This can also be defined as “rational pragmatism” or “sound rationalism”, it doesn’t matter. It is important that this is outside the ideologemes, to some extent above it, and allows interaction and compromises to be established between them. The driving force here is not slogans about a “bright future” or ideas about the “City of the Sun”, driving force Any representative of society associated with any ideological group can speak.

He expressed an interesting thought on this matter David Eidelman: new ideological concepts, in order to be successful and in demand, must first pay attention to what is called the “human factor”, “ human capital" In general, it seems to me that man is the cornerstone and guarantee of everything. And tomorrow does not belong to the representatives exact sciences, who are still stuck, because lagging humanity is not ready for their further advancement, but for those who are involved in human resources, building inter-human relationships. People have already accumulated enough weapons to destroy each other many times over. Now progress is not only in further strengthening technology, but in improving human society.

Ideology is a system of views and ideas that express the interests of a particular society. As for political ideology, it focuses specifically on ideas and interests that relate to politics. It expresses the interests and goals of one of the political elites. Depending on the ideology, there are different points views on the political and socio-economic development of society. In the article we will try to analyze the question of what criteria are used to distinguish types of political ideologies and what they hide in themselves.

Structure

Every political ideology must have a certain structure, which is defined as follows:

• There must be a political idea.
• An ideology must highlight its concepts, doctrines and principles.
• In addition, dreams and utopias, values ​​of ideology and its main ideals are distinguished.
• All political processes are being assessed.
• Each ideology has its own slogans, under which leaders speak and illuminate the program of action.

This is political ideology and its structure in particular. A political movement that does not have at least one of the above points cannot be called a political ideology.

Functions of political ideology

Before proceeding to characterize the types of political ideology, I would like to focus the reader’s attention on the functions that are common to any political system.

1. Political ideology expresses and also protects the interests of a particular social group, nation or class.
2. She introduces into the public consciousness political stories and an assessment of political events, which is made according to its own criteria.
3. A process of integration is carried out when people unite depending on political ideas, orientations and assessments of society.
4. General ideological norms and values ​​are adopted, on the basis of which the regulation of human behavior and its organization is carried out.
5. The government sets certain tasks for society and explains to it the motives for their implementation, thereby mobilizing social communities.

Criteria for identifying types of political ideology

Political ideology can be determined by what model of society it proposes, what comes first: society or the state.

1. Next, attention should be paid to the relationship of ideology to the national question.
2. An important aspect is the attitude towards religion.
3. Ideologies have their own special character, which is not repeated in any of them.
4. There is also a conventional classification that divides ideologies into left, right and center.

These are the main criteria for identifying types of political ideology.

Liberalism

This ideology is considered historically the first. Its founders are J. Locke and A. Smith. Their ideas are based on the process of forming an individual who is a prominent representative the bourgeoisie, which is economically active, but has absolutely no rights in politics. But despite this, representatives of this population group have always strived to seize power.

This ideology has certain values, which are to preserve people's rights to freedom, life and private property. Their priorities always rose above the state and the interests of society. At this time, individualism was considered the main economic principle. If speak about social sphere, then there it was embodied in establishing the value of a person’s personality, as well as making equal rights all people. In the economic sphere there was active propaganda free market, which provided for absolutely unrestricted competition. As for the political sphere, the following call was made here - the rights of all social groups and individuals must be recognized so that they can freely manage any processes in society.

Conservatism

Another political ideology is conservatism. Here the main values ​​were stability in everything, order and traditionalism. These values ​​did not appear on their own, but were taken from political theory; if you adhere to it, you can come to the conclusion that the state and society are the result natural evolution. This opinion is completely contrary to the ideas of liberalism, which believed that they are the result of agreement and association between citizens. As for politics, here conservatism was on the side of a strong state; it demanded a clear stratification. This means that power should be regulated only in the hands of the elite.

Communism

Next, I would like to highlight this type of political ideology (and its content) as communism. It's probably no secret that communism was formed on the basis of Marxism. Marxism replaced liberalism, which dominated in the nineteenth century. His teaching was to build a just society where there would be no exploitation of people by other people, and Marxists also sought to completely move away from any kind of social alienation of people. It was this kind of society that was decided to be called communist. At this time, a great industrial revolution took place, which caused Marxism to become the worldview of the proletariat.

The following basic values ​​of this period are identified:

• The regulation of social relations was carried out on the basis of a class approach.
• The government sought to educate completely new people who would not be interested in material values, but there was a huge incentive to implement social work.
• Any human work was done only for the common good; individualism was replaced by serious concern for the interests of society.
• The main mechanism for the integration of social culture was the Communist Party, which sought to completely merge with the state.

As for the type of political, it is considered only a transitional moment from capitalism to communism. During socialism, there was an active call for everything public: enterprises, property, natural resources.

Socialist democracy

An example of a type of political ideology is social democracy, which even now is a political force. Within Marxism there was such a movement as “left” ideology, and it was on its basis that the ideas of social democracy arose. Its main foundations were already formed at the end of the nineteenth century. E. Bernstein was recognized as the founder of these principles. He wrote a lot of works on this subject, in which he categorically rejected most of the provisions that existed in Marxism. To be more precise, he opposed the aggravation of bourgeois society, did not support the idea that a revolution was necessary, that it was necessary to establish a dictatorship on the part of bourgeois society. At this time in Western Europe There was a somewhat new situation, and in this regard, Bernstein believed that it was possible to achieve recognition without the violent pressure that was being exerted on the position of the bourgeoisie at that time. Many of his ideas have become components of the doctrine of social democracy of today. Solidarity, freedom and justice came to the fore. Social Democrats developed many democratic principles on the basis of which the state was to be built. They argued that absolutely everyone should work and study, that the economy should be pluralistic, and much more.

Nationalism

Quite often, this kind and type of political ideology, such as nationalism, is perceived very negatively. But if you look at the substance, this opinion is erroneous. In general, there is now a distinction between creative and destructive nationalism. If we talk about the first option, here the policy is aimed at uniting a certain nation, and in the second case, nationalism is directed against other nations. And at the same time there is a risk of destruction not only of other nations, but also of one’s own. In this case, nationality becomes the supreme value and the whole life of the people revolves around it.

Most politicians believe that a nation is united by its ethnic origin. There is an opinion that if a person calls himself Russian, then he is talking about his ethnic origin, but if a person calls himself a Russian, then this is a clear indicator that he is indicating his citizenship.

If we take a deeper look at the ideology of nationalism, we can see that here the idea of ​​an ethnic group merges with the idea of ​​a country, which is intended specifically for this ethnic group. Here certain movements begin to emerge, the demands of which include combining ethnic and political boundaries. In some cases, nationalism accepts that there are "non-nationals" in society, but in some cases it actively advocates that such people be expelled, indeed it may demand their complete destruction. Nowadays nationalism is considered one of the most dangerous species political ideologies on the scale of the political spectrum.

Fascism

The main types of political ideology include fascism, which is very different from liberalism, communism and conservatism. Since the latter put the interests of individual social groups of the state first, and fascism, in turn, has the idea of ​​racial superiority. He strives to integrate the entire population of the country around national revival.

Fascism is based on anti-Semintism and racism, and is also based on the ideas of chauvinistic nationalism. The opinions of researchers regarding the development of fascism differ greatly, since some argue that it is a single phenomenon for all countries, while others are of the opinion that each state developed its own, special type of fascism. The main thing for the fascists has always been the state and its leader.

Anarchism

Now I would like to consider the signs and types of political ideology of anarchism. Anarchism is a political movement completely opposite to fascism. The highest goal of anarchism is considered to be its desire to achieve equality and freedom through the abolition of all institutions and forms of power. Anarchism puts forward ideas that are directed against the state, and also offers ways to implement them.

The first such ideas appeared in antiquity. But Godwin was the first to propose the concept of the existence of a people without a state in 1793. But the foundations of anarchism were developed and implemented by a German thinker named Stirner. Now there is a huge variety of forms of anarchism. I would like to focus my attention on the directions of anarchism. First of all, anarcho-individualism stands out. Max Stirner is considered the founder of this movement. Private property is actively supported in this direction. Its adherents also advocate that no government body can limit the interests of an individual or group of people.

Further attention should be paid to mutualism. It appeared back in the eighteenth century among the workers of England and France. This direction was based on the principles of mutual assistance, concluding voluntary contracts, as well as the possibility of providing cash loans. If we believe the beliefs of mutualism, then under its rule every worker would not only have workplace, but would also receive a decent payment for his work.

Social anarchism. It is on a par with individualistic and is one of the main directions of this policy. Its adherents sought to abandon private property; they considered building relationships between people only on mutual assistance, cooperation and cooperation.

Collectivist anarchism. Its second name sounds like revolutionary socialism. His supporters did not recognize private property and sought to collectivize it. They believed that this could only be achieved if a revolution was started. This trend arose simultaneously with Marxism, but did not share its views. Although this looked strange, because Marxists sought to create a stateless society, they supported the power of the proletariat, which did not coincide with the ideas of the anarchists.

Anarcho-feminism is the last branch of anarchism to look at Special attention. It is the result of a synthesis between anarchism and radical feminism. Its representatives opposed patriarchy and the entire existing state system All in all. It originated in the late nineteenth century through the work of several women, including Lucy Parsons. Feminists of that time and now actively oppose established gender roles; they strive to change the concept family relations. For anarcho-feminists, patriarchy was a universal problem that urgently needed to be eliminated.

The role of ideology in politics

In ideology, it is customary to highlight certain preferences of certain social strata regarding the organization of state power. Here people could express their views, clarify ideas, talk about their goals and new concepts. Political ideology is very for a long time developed by representatives of a certain political elite and only then do they bring it to the masses. Their goal is to attract as many people as possible. This is necessary so that their ideology can gain power in the state.

Large groups of people unite under a certain political ideology in order to achieve common goals that were set by the creators of this ideology. It is very important to think through everything to the smallest detail. After all, the ideas of each political ideology must embody the ideas not only of a certain social group, but of the entire people of this country. Only then in this social movement some meaning will appear.

A striking example is Germany, where fascism was firmly established in the thirties of the twentieth century. After all, Hitler was able to discover the most serious problems of his people and promised to solve them as quickly as possible. short time. The Bolsheviks made the same rosy promises when they came to the war-weary people and told them about beautiful life under communism. And people had no choice but to believe and follow the Bolsheviks. After all, they were simply exhausted, and the mighty of the world they understood this and took advantage of it to their advantage.

Ideology has always been very powerful weapon, since it can not only unite and unite people, but also quarrel them, make them real enemies. From the ordinary working class, she can raise real warriors who are not afraid of anything.

The presence of a certain ideology in the state is a mandatory component. A state without ideology is considered amorphous. Here everyone begins to speak for themselves, people can unite in small groups and quarrel with each other. Such a state is very easy to destroy, and you don’t even have to start a war to do this. After all, if everyone defends their own interests, then who will take the side of the state?

Many people believe that ideology is necessarily a movement that is directed against someone, but in reality this is not the case. After all, people may well unite and act in the interests of their own country, glorify their state, fight for demographic growth, overcome poverty and solve many other internal problems, but only together.

Now the Constitution Russian Federation suggests that no ideology is established at the state level in the country. However, people were able to unite for the future of the country. And this is easily visible in their attitude to their state, to their power, to their roots. They strive to make their country better without encroaching on the freedom of others.