Political culture depends to a large extent on the level historical development; it changes in the course of any significant political events or under other rather significant and important circumstances (but does not always keep up with them). The type of political culture is used to fix the common features of political consciousness and behavior among people living at the crossroads of one historical era, belonging to similar strata of society and having similar clichés of behavior and reactions to events taking place in the political sphere.

There are different approaches to the classification of types of political cultures. For example, the Marxist approach, according to which political cultures that exist in the same type of society, have significant similarities, thus, this approach distinguishes three types of political culture: slave-owning, feudal and bourgeois society. Irkhin Yu.V. etc. Political science: Tutorial, from. 28

The most developed classification of political cultures based on this approach was carried out by the Polish scientist Jerzy Vyatr. In his opinion, the type of traditional political culture corresponds to the slave-owning and feudal society, characterized by the recognition of the sacred nature of power and tradition as a regulator of political relations. Within the framework of this type of political culture, the scientist identifies its tribal, theocratic and despotic varieties, which can in various ways match with each other. In bourgeois society, Vyatr distinguishes two main types of political culture: democratic and autocratic. The first is characterized by high activity of citizens and their broad political rights. The second type of political culture recognizes as the ideal of the state a strong and uncontrolled power that limits the democratic rights and freedoms of citizens.

In modern political science, for the analysis and comparison of political cultures, the typology proposed by G. Almond and S. Verba is widely used. They distinguish three main types of political culture, not strictly tying them to a specific time or social group, but focusing on values, patterns of behavior, ways of organizing power:

• - patriarchal political culture, its main feature is the lack of interest in the political system in society;
• - subservient political culture, characterized by a strong orientation to the political system, but a weak active participation in its functioning;
• - activist political culture, with features of interest in the political system and active participation in it;

A patriarchal, or parish, political culture is inherent in social communities whose political interests do not go beyond their community, village, or district. Its distinguishing feature is the complete lack of interest among members of the community in political institutions, in the central authorities. In modern reality, the closest equivalents of such a political culture may be the relations that exist in African tribes.

In modern society, two main types of political culture dominate and interact: submissive and activist, or political participation culture.

The advantage of the first type of political culture is its ability to be a factor in the effective and rapid mobilization of huge masses of people, directing their energy to carry out socially necessary or, as it may turn out later, far-fetched transformations. The bearer of the expediency of these transformations is not an individual - a direct participant in the events, thanks to whose energy they are carried out, but history, which subsequently gives an assessment of the usefulness and necessity of the work done.

Since the socio-political initiative and the person acting in politics are separated from each other in such a situation, it is possible to set in motion a large mass of people in this case only with a very high level of discipline, orderliness, and organization in the functioning of the political mechanism. A necessary component of this type of streamlining of social ties is the rigid, ever-increasing centralization of management, the localization of the process of making political decisions in an ever narrower circle of trusted, dedicated persons.

Initiative as a political quality is leaving society, being replaced by discipline, diligence, work on the implementation of regular instructions and the fulfillment of plans. Since there is a deepening need for a source of guidance and direction, there is an increase in purely authoritarian methods of political leadership, and there is a growing need for a visible embodiment of the strength and authority of political power - in a political cult. Therefore, it is inevitably reproduced again and again around the personality of the highest political leader, practically regardless of the abilities, qualities of the real person holding this post.

In an activist political culture, a person becomes the main source of political action, and the most important criterion for evaluating a political organization is its ability to initiate active political action.

Activist political culture is more complex in content, structure and forms of expression than the type that preceded it. A different level of knowledge and understanding of the political process is required to replace mere diligence by qualified and constructive initiative in politics.

Changing types of political culture, no matter how urgent the need for this, requires a certain time. The features of the transition are the diversity of political orientations in the absence of a definite and obvious dominance of at least one of them, the rapid change of political preferences, the outbreak of extremism with its tendency to use extreme forms, means of political influence, such as hunger strikes, strikes, etc. In turn, the authorities in this period go to the use of criminal and administrative measures, where political ones can be applied, etc.

Of decisive importance for determining the type of political culture is the combination between those elements of political relations that are associated with the past, present and future of politics. The optimal state is when the elements of political culture are associated with all these aspects of being.

The whole variety of national typologies of political culture varies within three main types:

• -liberal-democratic;
• -authoritarian;
• -totalitarian.

There are other types of typology of political culture. For example, W. Rosembaum developed the concept of Almond. There are two types in his classification: fragmented and integrated, and between these two types there are many intermediate variations. The fragmented type of political culture is characterized mainly by the lack of agreement in the sphere of the political structure of society. This type dominates in most African and Latin American countries, partly in northern Ireland and Canada. It is based on a noticeable social, socio-cultural, confessional, national-ethnic and other fragmentation of society. This creates conditions for ideological irreconcilability and uncompromisingness between the conflicting groups, hinders the development of certain generally accepted rules of the political game, and so on. The integrated type differs comparatively a high degree consensus on fundamental issues of the political system, the predominance of civil procedures in settling disputes and conflicts, low level political violence, a high degree various forms pluralism (which must be distinguished from fragmentation).

D. Elezar proposed his own typology of political culture. It is based on three main types: moralistic, individualistic and traditional. W. Blum recognized only the liberal and collectivist type of political culture.

The listed types of typology allow us to conclude that there are many quite developed concepts of types of political culture. Each researcher focused on something special, and having studied in detail all the main types, one can get a holistic view of the typology of political culture, and therefore better understand its structure and essence.

That. political culture in modern society plays an important role, is an actual science, its methods are widely used in studies related to the political sphere. And now political science can no longer be imagined without political culture.

Political culture depends to a large extent on the level of historical development; it changes in the course of some significant political events or under other rather significant and important circumstances (but does not always keep up with them). For a more convenient study and classification of political culture in large areas of historical periods, political "epochs", social formations, the concept of the type of political culture is introduced. The type of political culture is used to fix the common features of political consciousness and behavior among people living at the crossroads of one historical era, belonging to similar strata of society and having similar clichés of behavior and reactions to events taking place in the political sphere. Considering the fact that the criteria by which different types there is a lot of political culture (these are historical epochs, and all kinds of attitudes towards politics, and the nature of political activity, and the social strata and groups that make up politics, differences between regions and worldview positions), then the types of political culture themselves, respectively, should be quite a significant amount.

There are various approaches to the classification of types of political cultures. For example, the Marxist approach, according to which political cultures that exist in the same type of society, have significant similarities, thus, this approach distinguishes three types of political culture: slave-owning, feudal and bourgeois society.

The most developed classification of political cultures based on this approach was carried out by the Polish scientist Jerzy Wyatr. In his opinion, a type of traditional political culture corresponds to a slave-owning and feudal society, characterized by the recognition of the sacred nature of power and tradition as a regulator of political relations. Within the framework of this type of political culture, the scientist distinguishes its tribal, theocratic and despotic varieties, which can be combined with each other in various ways. In bourgeois society, Vyatr distinguishes two main types of political culture: democratic and autocratic. The first is characterized by high activity of citizens and their broad political rights. The second type of political culture recognizes as the ideal of the state a strong and uncontrolled power that limits the democratic rights and freedoms of citizens.

In modern political science, for the analysis and comparison of political cultures, the typology proposed by G. Almond and S. Verba is widely used. They distinguish three main types of political culture, not strictly tying them to a specific time or social group, but focusing on values, patterns of behavior, ways of organizing power:

patriarchal political culture, its main feature is the lack of interest in the political system in society;

servile political culture, characterized by a strong orientation to the political system, but a weak active participation in its functioning;

an activist political culture, with features of interest in and active participation in the political system;

A patriarchal, or parish, political culture is inherent in social communities whose political interests do not go beyond their community, village, or district. Its distinguishing feature is the complete lack of interest among members of the community in political institutions, in the central authorities. Both local leaders and subjects have no feeling for the central government, their attitude towards it is not determined by any norms. In modern reality, the closest equivalents of such a political culture may be the relations that exist in African tribes.

In modern society, two main types of political culture dominate and interact: submissive and activist, or political participation culture.

The advantage of the first type of political culture is its ability to be a factor in the effective and rapid mobilization of huge masses of people, directing their energy to carry out socially necessary or, as it may turn out later, far-fetched transformations. The bearer of the expediency of these transformations is not an individual - a direct participant in the events, thanks to whose energy they are carried out, but history, which subsequently gives an assessment of the usefulness and necessity of the work done.

Since the socio-political initiative and the person acting in politics are separated from each other in such a situation, it is possible to set in motion a large mass of people in this case only with a very high level of discipline, orderliness, and organization in the functioning of the political mechanism. A necessary component of this type of streamlining of social ties is the rigid, ever-increasing centralization of management, the localization of the process of making political decisions in an ever narrower circle of trusted, dedicated persons.

Initiative as a political quality is leaving society, being replaced by discipline, diligence, work on the implementation of regular instructions and the fulfillment of plans. Since there is a deepening need for a source of guidance and direction, there is an increase in purely authoritarian methods of political leadership, and there is a growing need for a visible embodiment of the strength and authority of political power - in a political cult. Therefore, it is inevitably reproduced again and again around the personality of the highest political leader, practically regardless of the abilities, qualities of the real person holding this post.

A political cult is a visible embodiment of the presence in society of a subservient political culture, with its long existence, it has a destructive effect on the cultural foundations of the political process and its regulation: initiative, responsibility, confidence, accumulation and use of historical and political experience, purposefulness. There is a gradual exhaustion, degradation of the initiative at the personal, micro-social level, rooting of the difficult to overcome disease of the eternal expectation of benefits from above.

In an activist political culture, a person becomes the main source of political action, and the most important criterion for evaluating a political organization is its ability to initiate active political action.

Activist political culture is more complex in content, structure and forms of expression than the type that preceded it. To replace simple diligence with qualified and constructive initiative in politics, a different level of knowledge and ideas about the political process is required, and there is an urgent need for real, practical knowledge that can be used to influence the mechanism of political power, participate in political decision-making, possess skills in organizing political processes.

Changing types of political culture, no matter how urgent the need for this, requires a certain time. The features of the transition are the diversity of political orientations in the absence of a definite and obvious dominance of at least one of them, the rapid change of political preferences, the outbreak of extremism with its tendency to use extreme forms, means of political influence, such as hunger strikes, strikes, etc. In turn, the authorities in this period go to the use of criminal and administrative measures, where political ones can be applied, etc.

Of decisive importance for determining the type of political culture is the combination between those elements of political relations that are associated with the past, present and future of politics. The optimal state is when the elements of political culture are associated with all these aspects of being. Those. through tradition, various components of historical experience, political culture is connected with the past, with the help of norms, institutions, values, methods of political action, it actively influences current political practice, and through goals, political orientations, it is able to influence future political events and processes.

National typologies of political culture determine the following circumstances:

• 1. a special combination of values ​​peculiar to this particular people, expressed in the dominance of some values, in the humiliation, non-actualization of others;
• 2. the influence of the religion professed by this people;
• 3. features of the historical experience that the national community has.

At the same time, the interaction of three main characteristics is of decisive importance for determining the specific appearance, type of political culture (and culture in general):

• 1. its orientation towards dominance or subordination to the environment;
• 2. temporal orientation of political action;
• 3. the importance attached to the action, establishment and maintenance of horizontal or vertical links between people in the community.

The whole variety of national typologies of political culture varies within three main types:

• 1. liberal democratic;
• 2. authoritarian;
• 3. totalitarian.

Both in domestic and foreign political science literature there has long been a tradition of studying, comparative analysis of various national types of political culture. The use of the obtained results helps to better understand the roots of many political events, to foresee many political processes, and to develop a mechanism for influencing political behavior.

Thus, it is noted that the political culture of the British is distinguished by a peculiar hierarchy of political values:

• 1. mercy of the government;
• 2. freedom;
• 3. rejection of equality;
• 4. personal integrity;
• 5. diffusion of leadership, power;
• 6. the limits of government power;
• 7. welfare;
• 8. external defense;
• 9. evolution and assimilation.

In American political culture great importance has a combination of two types of rules of behavior: norms-goals that aim a person to achieve success and consider intense competition as a condition for social and personal dynamics, and norms-frames that ensure the stability of social organization and consolidate the results of competition.

The political culture of the French is characterized by:

• 1. the weakness of the tradition of restraint and tolerance;
• 2. a tendency to ideologization of political interests;
• 3. developed sense of belonging to a single nation;
• 4. strong republican tradition;
• 5. respect for the rights of the minority and the opposition.

There are other types of typology of political culture. For example, W. Rosembaum developed the concept of Almond. There are two types in his classification: fragmented and integrated, and between these two types there are many intermediate variations. The fragmented type of political culture is characterized mainly by the lack of agreement in the sphere of the political structure of society. This type dominates in most African and Latin American countries, partly in northern Ireland and Canada. It is based on a noticeable social, socio-cultural, confessional, national-ethnic and other fragmentation of society. This creates conditions for ideological irreconcilability and uncompromisingness between the conflicting groups, hinders the development of certain generally accepted rules of the political game, and so on. The integrated type is distinguished by a relatively high degree of consensus on the fundamental issues of the political system, the predominance of civil procedures in settling disputes and conflicts, a low level of political violence, and a high degree of various forms of pluralism (which must be distinguished from fragmentation).

D. Elezar proposed his own typology of political culture. It is based on three main types: moralistic, individualistic and traditional. W. Blum recognized only the liberal and collectivist type of political culture. The listed types of typology allow us to conclude that there are many quite developed concepts of types of political culture. Each researcher focused on something special, and having studied in detail all the main types, one can get a holistic view of the typology of political culture, and therefore better understand its structure and essence.

Introduction. 3

1Types of political culture.. 4

2 Political culture as a socio-historical phenomenon. nine

3 Characteristics of the constituent elements. eleven

3.1 Cognitive element. eleven

3.2 Characteristics of political culture.. 13

3.3 The structure of political culture.. 18

3.4 The structure of value relations of political culture. 19

4. Paternalism in the political culture of Russia. 26

5. Political culture modern Russia. 33

Conclusion. 40

List of used sources. 41

Introduction

The relevance of research. Having entered the new millennium with the hope that it will save humanity from the burden of past troubles, mistakes, disappointments, we often and justifiably associate our future with the moral improvement of man, the orientation of his intellect towards humanistic ideals. The basis of this approach is, first of all, a multi-colored cultural background, the enduring values ​​of truth, beauty and goodness, as guidelines for finding ways to humanize human relations, the consent of a person with the natural environment.

The cultural component, as the basis of the humanization of mankind, also includes a political culture that best regulates consciousness, behavior, actions, in accordance with the socio-cultural, historical characteristics of various ethnic groups, takes into account the "spirit of the people", and acts as an instrument for achieving stability.

Culture, like history, has a social and subjective beginning. Without setting ourselves the task of studying the category of culture, because this is a special and voluminous topic, we will define only a number of initial provisions that testify to the relevance of research through the prism of culture, as an integral component of society, reflecting wide range spiritual, including political life, for it is culture that includes the way of life of the people, the level and nature of its material and spiritual needs, education and the state of enlightenment, the system of moral norms of behavior of its members, etc.

Types of political culture

IN modern world there is a wide variety of national types of political cultures. In order to study and classify them, it is necessary to have an adequate tool, that is, some ideal model (or models) of political culture. What should it consist of? Taking into account the main provisions of the structural-functional approach to the analysis of political systems, G. Almond and S. Verba singled out the political system as a whole, its “input” and “output” (that is, requirements and support, as well as a reaction to decisions and their implementation), the individual as a political actor. In their opinion, each model of political culture (each “ideal type”) has its own combination of orientation towards these objects. Based on these premises, G. Almond and S. Verba identified three main models (“ideal types”) of political culture:

× "Parochial" (parochialculture) political culture (sometimes called parochial, traditional, patriarchal). This type of political culture is characterized by gender. a significant separation of the population from the political system, a complete lack of knowledge about it. In such societies, there are no specialized political roles; the main actors (leaders, shamans, etc.) perform simultaneously political, economic, and religious functions. In addition, the political, economic and religious orientations of the population are not differentiated. Territorial and socio-cultural identification prevails: a person identifies himself, first of all, as part of a local community (clan, village, etc.).

× "Subject" political culture (subject culture). This type of political culture is characterized by passive political behavior, orientation to the prevailing official values ​​and norms, and the lack of independent understanding of these values. In general, a kind of consumer-paternalistic attitude towards the political system prevails among people: members of the community either expect benefits or are afraid of punishment. This type of political culture can be found in societies where there is no clear identification of the input channels of the political system, and individuals do not consider themselves as political actors.

× "Participatory" political culture (participant culture) or culture of participation (activist political culture). The "participatory" type of political culture is characterized by the active participation of individuals in political life, based on a sufficiently high political literacy of citizens and their conviction in the ability to influence the process of political decision-making through their own participation. Such societies are characterized by a relatively high degree of functional differentiation: different spheres public life are relatively autonomous, and the subsystems are sufficiently developed and branched out (in particular, the political subsystem).

In the modern world, these types of political culture are absent in their pure form. In particular, in democratic countries it is impossible to find a purely participatory type of political culture: “citizens of democratic countries rarely live in accordance with this model. They are neither well-informed, nor deeply involved in politics, nor especially active, and the process of making electoral decisions is anything but a process of rational calculation.”

In fact, national political cultures combine different types, that is, they are mixed. Combinations of these types can be different. G. Almond and S. Verba comparative study political cultures questioned whether there is a democratic political culture, that is, some set of orientations that favors the stability of democracy, i.e. "fits" a democratic system.

Their main conclusion was that the most optimal for countries with stable democracies is a mixed type of political culture, identified in the UK and the USA - a civic political culture (or a political culture of citizenship). Within this culture, “many citizens may be active in politics, but many others play the more passive role of subjects, even in those who play a civic role, the qualities of subjects and parishioners are not completely supplanted ... This means that the active citizen retains his traditionalist, non-political ties, as well as the passive role of the subject. Political activity is only a part of the interests of a citizen, and, as a rule, not a very important part of them. Preservation of other orientations limits the degree of its involvement in political activity and keeps politics within the proper framework. Moreover, the orientations of the parishioner and the subject do not just coexist with the orientations of the participant, they permeate and modify them. So, for example, primary connections are important in the formation of types of civil influence. In addition, the interpenetrating structures of social and interpersonal relations tend to influence the nature of political orientations - to make them less sharp and separating.

× According to G. Almond and S. Verbe, civic culture is characterized by two “contradictions”:

× between a high assessment of their potential influence on political decisions and a lower level of real influence;

× between the degree of dissemination of verbal recognition of the obligatory participation of citizens in political life and the real significance and volume of participation. These two contradictions, according to the authors of "Civic Culture", help to understand how in countries of stable democracy the dilemma is resolved, the optimal combination of sides of which is extremely important for maintaining stability: between the activity and influence of non-elite groups and their passivity and lack of influence, between the power of the ruling elite and its control and responsibility. On the one hand, the inactivity of the common man helps to provide the ruling elites with the power necessary to effectively solve problems. On the other hand, the role of the citizen as an active and influential factor in holding elites accountable is supported by his adherence to the norms of active citizenship and his conviction that he can be an influential political actor.

Thus, a citizen in a country with a civil political culture is potentially active. He does not act as a permanent participant in the political process, he is rarely active in political groups, but at the same time he has a reserve of potential influence. That is, he believes that, if necessary, he can mobilize his social environment for political purposes. A citizen living in such a country is more likely to maintain a high and constant level of political ties, join an organization and participate in informal political discussions. These activities by themselves do not indicate active participation in the political decision-making process, but make such participation more likely.

Each of the ideal types of political culture proposed by G. Almond and S. Verba in practice, as the authors of the typology believed, reflects the specifics of a particular “ideal” subculture. A special combination of these subcultures determines the national characteristics of the political culture in a particular country. Based on the analysis of the results of sociological research, they made an attempt to describe the approximate proportions in which subcultures corresponding to ideal types coexist in national political cultures. An approximate "formula" of civic culture looked like this: 60% "participants", 30% "subjects" and 10% "parochials". Other "formulas" were also identified, corresponding to an authoritarian transitional system, a "democratic" pre-industrial system, and so on.

The given "classical" typology of political culture and the idea of ​​civil culture have caused serious criticism from various researchers. In particular, the methods of measuring the presence or absence of a civic political culture have been criticized. For example, during a sociological study, the respondent was asked to note the features of his country that he is proud of, since G. Almond and S. Verba hypothesized that civic culture implies a high level of pride of the population for their country and, in particular, for its political system (one of the indicators legitimacy). The highest levels were in the UK and the US. At the same time, the authors did not take into account the different historical and general cultural traditions of different countries, as well as the semantic load of certain expressions used in the development of the instrument (in particular, the fact that the word “pride” has a slightly different meaning within different cultures).

The imperfection of the proposed typology and research tool is also evidenced by the fact that the model of civil political culture, the results of the operationalization of this concept and the application of the proposed tool sometimes led to paradoxical conclusions. In particular, according to some Sovietologists, they largely reflected the Soviet reality. The political culture of the United States and Great Britain turned out to be largely identical to the "political culture of the USSR. At the same time, the very approach to the analysis of political culture, based on the comparison of "real" political cultures with ideal types, should be recognized as quite fruitful.

G. Almond proposed another typology of political culture, or rather, identified two "polar" types of political culture based on an additional criterion (the presence or absence of consensus). According to this criterion, political cultures can be divided into polarized and consensus types (most national cultures can be placed on an axis from polarized to consensus type).

The polarized political culture is dominated by extreme right- and left-radical orientations. Only 25% of the population belong to the center, while about 45% belong to the extreme ones. There is no majority agreement on the priority values ​​of development. A consensual political culture is based on the consent of the majority. It is dominated by centrist, moderate orientations (approximately 55%), only about 10% of citizens occupy radical positions.

At present, the use of this criterion (the presence or absence of consensus) is quite common and gives good results. At the same time, the typological scheme based on the identification of various sets of political orientations has also been further developed.

For example, the Dutch researchers F. Hunks and F. Hickspurs in the mid-1990s. tried to improve the typology of political cultures of Almond and Verba, supplementing it with new types: “civic participatory culture” (civicparticipantculture), “client culture” (clientculture), “protest culture” (protestculture), “autonomous culture” (autonomusculture) and “culture of observers » (spectatorculture). These types of political culture should also be considered as ideal types, reflecting the main characteristics of the subcultures represented within the national cultures.

Based on the scheme of operationalization of the concept of "political culture" given by G. Almond and S. Verba, F. Hunks and F. Hickspurs proposed the following set of indicators for measuring this phenomenon. As an indicator of orientation towards the political system as a whole (pro- or anti-system), they considered the degree of interest of individuals in politics. The level of trust in state institutions and the administrative apparatus was used as an indicator of orientation towards the “output” of the system. An indicator of orientation in relation to one's own political competence was the assessment of the possibility of personal participation and depends on socio-demographic and socio-status characteristics. In particular, the civic subculture is quite widespread only among high-status categories of the population, autonomous and participatory subcultures are also widely represented among representatives of higher social groups, as well as people with disabilities. higher education and men, clientelistic, paro-chial and subservient are most common among representatives of low-status groups.

An analysis of the dynamics of the characteristics of national subcultures over three decades (late 50s-early 60s-early 90s) led to the following conclusions. The "civic" culture, which is characterized by a relatively high level of public trust in government officials, a relatively high interest in politics, has remained an important type of political subculture in the UK and the USA, and has also spread widely in Germany. In the Anglo-Saxon countries, compared with the 60s. became less common "civic participatory" subculture, which is characterized by a lack of trust in civil servants, combined with high level interest in politics.

In Western countries, an “autonomous culture” has emerged and is preserved, which is characterized by a lack of trust in the authorities and a low interest in politics. Along with this, passive types of political subculture (parochial and subject) are gradually disappearing in these societies.

• 1. By scale:general (dominant) political culture, including the most stable features that characterize the political consciousness and political behavior of the bulk of the population; subcultures- a set of political orientations and models of political behavior that is characteristic of certain social groups and regions and differs from the dominant one in society, for example, social-class, national-ethnic, religious-political, gender and age, regional.
• 2. In relation to power:mainstream and counterculture
• (opposing the dominant culture).

Actual for any political system is the problem of formation of the political culture of society. World experience and the experience of our country unequivocally testify that political culture must be formed continuously, although this process is complex, since it itself is constantly evolving.

Political culture is being formed the educational system, the activities of political parties, public organizations, labor collectives.

Exists amount of knowledge necessary for every citizen of the country, without which political culture cannot be formed. These include knowledge:

• political relations existing in the country, ongoing political events and phenomena in the life of society as a whole and its individual regions;
• structures, functions of public authorities, political parties, major public organizations;
• norms, principles, ideas underlying the management of social, economic, spiritual and political processes in society;
• the constitution of the country, the current norms of law (laws), the legal status of a citizen, the program provisions of the main political parties operating in the country;
• forms and methods of participation of citizens in the management of society and the state, in solving political problems;
• the correct combination of public, state, collective and personal interests, which is one of the fundamental problems of political life;
• foreign policy country and the prevailing international relations, understanding the interrelationships of domestic and foreign policy, the problems of the country's security.

Political culture is not only knowledge, but also concrete human activity. The most significant directions of conduct and actions of a politically cultured personality:

• participation in the work of higher and local government bodies as a full-time employee or on a voluntary basis, participation in commissions, expert groups under government bodies;
• membership in political parties and public organizations;
• participation in referendums, elections to higher and local authorities and other political events; participation in specific activities for the implementation of state policy in the field of economic, political, social, spiritual, military, international, environmental;
• constant concern for acquiring skills and abilities to conduct political struggle in a civilized manner, without the use of force, honestly;
• active participation in the adoption of legislative acts aimed at observing the rights and freedoms of citizens of the country.

Main directions of formation political culture can be recognized as:

• systematic study of political theories, political science, political documents of the state, constitution;
• creative processing and execution, own assessment of the facts obtained from the media;
• participation in the political life of the country: elections, referendums, meetings;
• adherence to certain political traditions, ideals, customs of one's family, team;
• communication with other people, exchange of experience in assessing important political events;
• independent analysis of current political life in their own country and abroad, adjustment of their behavior depending on the assessment of political events.

There are various types of political culture.

In modern political culture, two main varieties are usually distinguished: democratic and autocratic. The dominant type is considered democratic. All varieties of modern political culture are characterized by: a more or less pronounced orientation of individuals to an active role in the political system; recognition of civil rights and freedoms, as well as the principle of control over power structures.

Main features of modern democratic political culture:

• traditionalism inherited from the past political culture (loyalty, respect for authority, law-abiding);
• humanism, expressing commitment to universal moral values;
• individualism, standing on the positions that the main value of political culture is private interests, as opposed to collective ones; attraction to relationships based on trusting personal contacts and obligations;
• political activity, consisting in the conviction that active participation in all spheres of life can bring personal success.

In recent decades, under the influence of various alternative movements (anti-war, feminist, youth, etc.), democratic political culture has acquired new values: tolerance for dissent, civil consent, the fall of the authority of hierarchical power, etc.

The autocratic type is represented by two varieties: authoritarian and totalitarian political cultures. The ideal of an autocratic political culture is a state with strong and uncontrolled power, which almost excludes the rights and freedoms of citizens. Authoritarianism reflects an unsatisfied need for stability, support and unites all those who fear socio-political and economic changes, regardless of their social status. The essence of an authoritarian political culture is the boundless merging of public consciousness with the subject of power - the leader of a political party or a monarch. For the subjects of a totalitarian culture, it is significant, first of all, that the totalitarian political culture comes from the bearer of power and is characterized by a complete absence of pluralism in the sphere of political relations, dissent is not only suppressed, but also warned.

In the course of their historical development, various communities have developed many types of political culture, each of which reflects the predominance in the style of people's behavior of certain values, norms and stereotypes, forms of power and relationships with rulers, as well as other elements that have developed under the dominant influence of special geographical, spiritual, economic and other factors.

The basis of the typology of political cultures can be various factors: the specifics of various political systems (Harry Eckstein); originality of countries and regions (Almond, Verba); types of orientation of citizens in the political game, in particular moral and ethical, individual, traditional (Daniel Eleizer); ideological differences (Jerzy Vyatr); general cultural behavioral characteristics of a person (Douglas); differences in the activities of the elite and non-elite layers, etc.

The classification of political culture proposed by Almond and Verba in one of the most important works of world political science "Civil Culture" (1963) has become widely known in science. Analyzing and comparing the main components and forms of functioning of the political systems of England, Italy, Germany, the USA and Mexico, they identified three "pure" types of political culture:

1. "Patriarchal political culture". Using the example of African tribes or local autonomous communities, the authors show that there are no specialized political roles in them, the political orientation towards tribal leaders is not separated from religious, socio-economic and other orientations. Ideas about the political system (which does not exist) and, accordingly, attitudes towards it simply do not exist. This type is characterized by a lack of interest among people in politics.

2. "Subordinate political culture". Specialized political institutions already exist, and members of society are guided by them, while showing various feelings: pride, hostility, perceiving them as legal or illegal. But the attitude towards the political system is passive, without the desire to change anything on their own or to participate in the process of making political decisions, to influence them. This type of culture is characterized by low political activity of citizens.

3. "Activist political culture", or "participatory political culture". Members of society not only form their demands of a political nature, but are also active participants in the political system as a whole.

American authors note that in real political life these types do not exist in their pure form. Interacting with each other, they form mixed forms dominated by one component or another. Along with the selected pure types, three types of mixed political cultures were proposed: patriarchal-subordinate, subservient-activist, patriarchal-activist.

Passive types include already known political cultures from the Almond and Verba typology (parochial and subordination), as well as a new subgroup of types called the “culture of observers”. The latter differs from the first two in a higher level of interest in political phenomena. A common feature of the whole group of this type is political apathy.

The active types of political culture include the following cultures: protest culture, characterized by a low level of political interests and trust in the authorities; clientele, characterized by a low level of political interests, but high confidence in the authorities; autonomous, determined by the average level of political interests and low level of political trust; civil, characterized by an average level of political interests and a high level of trust in power; participatory (participation), characterized by a high level of political interests and a high level of political trust; civil