The main role of the state is to ensure the normal socio-economic development of the country.
In fact, it is an organized form of management of public processes carried out by both state bodies and civic associations. From these provisions, the significance of the system responsible for relations between the state and the individual can be deduced.
The political system, the definition of which is expressed by the totality of state bodies, various public entities and citizens participating in the regulation of social processes, is a way of such interaction. There are several more definitions of the political system. This concept can be defined as the structure of state and public social institutions that play certain roles in the political process. Also, this system must be understood as the interaction of state bodies, public associations and democratic institutions in a single political space.
The state in the political system of society is in a special situation, due to its sovereignty, that is, domination in relation to other sources of power. State acts prevail over any prescriptions of public associations and are protected by a powerful law enforcement system. The state does not represent the local desires of individual groups of the population, but national interests. It monopolizes lawmaking.
The degree of state involvement in the country's social processes largely determines the political culture that characterizes the integrity of an ethnic group in the field of public power. It is created from the traditional values and beliefs of the subjects of the political process. There are various typologies of political cultures. However, the classification put forward by S. Verba and G. Almond in the scientific work "Civic Culture", which was published in 1963, gained particular fame. These sociologists have identified three types of relations between the state and society: a subservient political culture, parochial and participatory.
The last two types are extreme states of civic identity. Given the parochial nature of culture, the political interest of the population is extremely small, and knowledge is scarce. Whereas in a participatory society civic activity is massive, the relevance of political life in such a noosphere is high for the layman. The subordinate political culture occupies an intermediate position between these polar states of society and is distinguished by a highly oriented society in relation to the institutions of power.
In practice, these species interact and mix. The authors note that from the point of view of the interests of the stability of the socio-political regime, the most positive is the political affiliation. This form of social consciousness can also be attributed to Russia. The symptomatic picture of the civic sentiment of our country speaks in favor of such a diagnosis. A characteristic feature of this state of society is a pronounced orientation towards the political system with an extremely low manifestation of participation in it. The absence of a developed civil society is the main evidence that a subservient political culture does not evolve into other types.
To overcome this stagnant political situation in which a Russian citizen found himself, first you need to forget the atavisms of the Soviet period by clearing the space for private initiatives and creative potential. In the meantime, it remains to pin hopes on those weak shoots of the new civil society that are breaking through the asphalt of historical heredity.
