Suchergebnisse

Problem setting. The coronavirus pandemic has spread across the planet, not only affecting the health of the population and the world's medical system but also disrupting the global information space, economy and all other spheres of human life. Both domestic and foreign policies of states are changing. Success in overcoming the pandemic and its economic consequences is affecting security and polarization within societies. The pandemic leads to enhancing public power and strengthening nationalism, the intensification of rivalry between great powers, and strategic disunity. In this context, the paper objective is to consider authoritarian and democratic approaches to solving the problems of the current crisis. Recent research and publications analysis. The general scientific and scientific-journalistic literature has not yet created a generalized work on the socio-economic and political consequences caused by the crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, some views caused by global crises are noted in the studies of J. Vynokurov, L. Kolinets, O.Nevmerzhytska, A. Petryk, and others. Ukrainian and foreign philosophers, political scientists, publicists A. Baumaster, O. Koval, R. Sushchenko, S. Walt, V. Katasonov, K.Mahbubani, J. Nai, Y. N. Harari expressed their reflections on the future development of the world after the pandemic. The famous American thinker F. Fukuyama notes that after a long crisis, the world will eventually be renewed and democracy will be strengthened.Highlighting previously unsettled parts of the general problem. The history of mankind is inseparable from the accompanying constant crises that have shaken societies and states. The peculiarity of modern crises is their unpredictability and globality. Due to the lack of effective crisis prevention mechanisms, inefficient functioning of international financial institutions, the presence of mass financial speculation and the virtualization of the world economy, favourable conditions are created for the spread and generation of crisis phenomena in the world. So far, there is no generally accepted view of the likely consequences of crises for the world's economies, and thus unpredictable socio-political changes. Paper main body. The Covid-19 pandemic has become the world's largest global crisis since the Great Depression. Its depth and scale are enormous. As a result, it is capable of surpassing the Great Recession of 2008 – 2009. Thus, only in the second quarter of 2020, the economy of the Eurozone countries fell by more than 12%. There is a record drop in GDP, world trade is declining. The pandemic is projected to increase poverty, with more than half of those in Africa. The peculiarity of the new crisis is not only that it creates unprecedented uncertainty, but also that it destroys entire sectors of the economy, including tourism, transport and even energy.The Coronavirus pandemic can cause significant changes not only in the economic but also in the political, social and cultural spheres. A protracted epidemic, combined with huge job losses, a protracted recession and a debt burden, could create tensions that will escalate into a political reaction. Nationalism, isolationism, xenophobia and attacks on the liberal world order may intensify. As the COVID-19 crisis spreads, it discredits traditional politics and public institutions, which are perceived by the general public as a systemic failure, and democracy is replaced by populism and the rhetoric of radicalism.Conclusions of the research and prospects for further studies. The crisis of the coronavirus has a significant impact on all spheres of society, causing negative consequences in the economy, health care and socio-political relations. There are growing populism, nationalism and authoritarianism, which increases the likelihood of social and international conflicts. That is why it became topical to defend the opposite concepts of further development of political systems of societies - to join forces to overcome the common threat, international cooperation, exchange of information, support for democratic values. ; Розглянуто проблему розвитку світового порядку, становлення політичного ладу суспільств після COVID-19. Доведено, що кризи в Європі ХХ ст. спричиняли появу як авторитарних, так і відновлення альтернативних демократичних режимів. Визначено, що COVID-19 може стати поворотним моментом епохи глобалізації, втрати довіри додемократії та зміцнення авторитаризму.

Problem setting. The coronavirus pandemic has spread across the planet, not only affecting the health of the population and the world's medical system but also disrupting the global information space, economy and all other spheres of human life. Both domestic and foreign policies of states are changing. Success in overcoming the pandemic and its economic consequences is affecting security and polarization within societies. The pandemic leads to enhancing public power and strengthening nationalism, the intensification of rivalry between great powers, and strategic disunity. In this context, the paper objective is to consider authoritarian and democratic approaches to solving the problems of the current crisis. Recent research and publications analysis. The general scientific and scientific-journalistic literature has not yet created a generalized work on the socio-economic and political consequences caused by the crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, some views caused by global crises are noted in the studies of J. Vynokurov, L. Kolinets, O.Nevmerzhytska, A. Petryk, and others. Ukrainian and foreign philosophers, political scientists, publicists A. Baumaster, O. Koval, R. Sushchenko, S. Walt, V. Katasonov, K.Mahbubani, J. Nai, Y. N. Harari expressed their reflections on the future development of the world after the pandemic. The famous American thinker F. Fukuyama notes that after a long crisis, the world will eventually be renewed and democracy will be strengthened.Highlighting previously unsettled parts of the general problem. The history of mankind is inseparable from the accompanying constant crises that have shaken societies and states. The peculiarity of modern crises is their unpredictability and globality. Due to the lack of effective crisis prevention mechanisms, inefficient functioning of international financial institutions, the presence of mass financial speculation and the virtualization of the world economy, favourable conditions are created for the spread and generation of crisis phenomena in the world. So far, there is no generally accepted view of the likely consequences of crises for the world's economies, and thus unpredictable socio-political changes. Paper main body. The Covid-19 pandemic has become the world's largest global crisis since the Great Depression. Its depth and scale are enormous. As a result, it is capable of surpassing the Great Recession of 2008 – 2009. Thus, only in the second quarter of 2020, the economy of the Eurozone countries fell by more than 12%. There is a record drop in GDP, world trade is declining. The pandemic is projected to increase poverty, with more than half of those in Africa. The peculiarity of the new crisis is not only that it creates unprecedented uncertainty, but also that it destroys entire sectors of the economy, including tourism, transport and even energy.The Coronavirus pandemic can cause significant changes not only in the economic but also in the political, social and cultural spheres. A protracted epidemic, combined with huge job losses, a protracted recession and a debt burden, could create tensions that will escalate into a political reaction. Nationalism, isolationism, xenophobia and attacks on the liberal world order may intensify. As the COVID-19 crisis spreads, it discredits traditional politics and public institutions, which are perceived by the general public as a systemic failure, and democracy is replaced by populism and the rhetoric of radicalism.Conclusions of the research and prospects for further studies. The crisis of the coronavirus has a significant impact on all spheres of society, causing negative consequences in the economy, health care and socio-political relations. There are growing populism, nationalism and authoritarianism, which increases the likelihood of social and international conflicts. That is why it became topical to defend the opposite concepts of further development of political systems of societies - to join forces to overcome the common threat, international cooperation, exchange of information, support for democratic values. ; Розглянуто проблему розвитку світового порядку, становлення політичного ладу суспільств після COVID-19. Доведено, що кризи в Європі ХХ ст. спричиняли появу як авторитарних, так і відновлення альтернативних демократичних режимів. Визначено, що COVID-19 може стати поворотним моментом епохи глобалізації, втрати довіри додемократії та зміцнення авторитаризму.

В условиях глобального давления на демократию и внутрен ней турбулентности, каковы риски того, что Украина скатится к авторитаризму? Вопреки многочисленным предосте режениям автор обосновывает тезис о том, что для авторита ризма в Украине нет социальных оснований, а запрос на "силь ную руку" является свидетельством патерналистских, а не авторитарных ценностей. Вместе с тем в Украине при сутствуют как минумум три группы структурных, институцио нальных и социокультурных факторов, ко торые стоят на пути авторитарного режима. К ним относятся: низкая леги тимность руководства, низкая экономическая эффектив ность, региональные различия, низкий репрессивный потен циал государства, относительная слабость "партии влас ти", фрагментированная структура элит, усиление связей с Западом, полупрезидентская форма правления, институци ализированная гибридность режима, отсутствие хариз матичного лиде ра, сме шан ные об щес твен ные ори ен та ции и опыт трех волн ан ти ав то ри тар ных про - тес тов. Те о ре ти чес ким осно ва ни ем статьи яв ля ет ся те о рия кон гру эн тнос ти, со глас но ко то рой ре жим ста би лен при усло вии, что его спо соб осу ще ствле ния влас ти со от ве - тству ет пред став ле ни ям лю дей о ее над ле жа щем функ ци о ни ро ва нии. Дан ные по след ней вол ны Гло баль но го ис сле до ва ния цен нос тей по зво ли ли рас счи тать по ка за те ли ли бе раль - но го и ав то ри тар но го по ни ма ния де мок ра тии. Пер вый в Укра и не ока зы ва ет ся вдвое выше, чем вто рой (0,82 про тив 0,41). К тому же первый показатель усиливается умеренным ростом эмансипативных ценностей. Таким образом, представление об авторитарной склонности украинцев не имеет эмпирических оснований, а любая попытка навязать авторитарное правление сверху будет на талкиваться на ку муля тив ное сопротивление трех групп указанных факторов. (Given the global rise of illiberalism and Ukraine's own post-revolutionary turbulence, what are the risks that the war-torn society descends to authoritarianism? In contrast to numerous alerts, I argue that none of the modern forms of authoritarianism is likely in post-Euromaidan Ukraine. There are at least three groups of structural, institutional, and agency-based factors that make the emergence of the authoritarian regime in Ukraine highly improbable. These are: poor leadership legitimacy, poor economy performance, regional polarization, weak state repressive capacity, the relative weakness of the 'party of power', fragmented elite structure, the growing linkage with the West, semi-presidentialism, institutionalized hybridity (the legacy of being hybrid regime), lack of charismatic leadership, mixed public attitudes, and gravity of three (1990, 2004, 2014) waves of anti-authoritarian protest. Theoretically, this article draws on the congruence theory, which posits that the regime is stable in so far as its authority pattern meets people's authority beliefs. The empirical data from the latest wave of the World Values Survey demonstrate that Ukrainians share mixed authority beliefs, as exemplified in liberal and authoritarian notions of democracy. The score of the liberal notion of democracy for Ukraine is twice higher than that of the authoritarian notion(0.82 to 0.41) and is supported by the growing score of emancipative values. 'The authoritarian congruence', therefore is hardly achievable in the post-Euromaidan Ukraine, while any attempt to impose authoritarian rule from above would face the cumulative resistance effect produced by these three groups of factors.)

The article author describes the elements of the political legacy of S. Stambolov in the process of state power implementation in Bulgaria. They comprise of the strengthening the monarchy institution and widespread implementation of various ways to ensure the victory of pro-government forces in the elections as well as building the special party system. The researcher draws the conclusion that S. Stambolov's reign resulted in formation of the authoritarian regime of Ferdinand. ; В статье автор охарактеризовал элементы политического наследия С. Стамболова в процессах реализации государственной власти в Болгарии после смерти политика. Среди них: укрепление института монархии, широкое внедрение различных способов обеспечения победы проправительственных сил на выборах и формирование характерной партийной системы. Исследователь приходит к выводу, что правление С. Стамболова предопределило становление авторитарного режима Фердинанда. ; В статті автор охарактеризував елементи політичної спадщини С. Стамболова у процесах реалізації державної влади в Болгарії після смерті політика. Серед них: зміцнення інституту монархії, широке впровадження різних способів забезпечення перемоги проурядових партій на виборах та формування характерної партійної системи. Дослідник приходить до висновку, що правління С. Стамболова визначило становлення авторитарного режиму Фердинанда.

The author explores the reasons for the development of authoritarian tendencies in mass political consciousness in modern Russia. It was shown that one of the determining factors in the formation of this consciousness was a crisis of social identity. At the same time, in the very beginning of the existence of the Russian Federation, a well-defined request of the majority of citizens for democratic values was established. The failure to implement them in the process of long-term reforms ordered the emergence of a request for authoritarianism as a way to protect individuals from the tyranny of officials and oligarchs. The mass political consciousness of the Russian Federation during the quarter century of its existence as a state is a mosaic picture, composed of elements of the communist, neo-liberal and national-patriotic ideologies, which are conducting a mutual struggle, pretending to dominate the role in society. As a result of this struggle, none of these ideologies failed to establish in their public consciousness their values and to unite the majority of citizens around them. At the same time, in the mass political consciousness of Russia, the most significant segment represents values orienting to Western standards of life. Therefore, the idea of identity, which implies the priority of state interests over individual freedom, can not consolidate society. At the same time, a democratic idea, which at the beginning of the 1990s played the role of a unifying factor in mass political consciousness, soon ceased to be generally recognized in the context of ineffective socio-economic policies. Institutions of self-government and public opinion in Russia are not developed and are mostly formal. Compensation for the loss of political and national identity has been made through authoritarian power, which performs an important adaptive function. However, this does not mean the refusal of Russian society to expect the realization of democratic rights and freedoms.

The article reviews the main approaches to the interpretation of nationalism. To this end, the author reveals the etymological origins of the word «nationalism», focusing attention on its meaningful relationship with care for the people and patriotism, and highlights the philosophical principles of prevailing today polar approaches to its assessment. On this background, it is stressed that the methodological difficulties of defining nationalism are caused by the diversity of its social and cultural expressions – it is regarded as an ideology, as a political movement, as a spiritual guidance and as a political credo etc. In the article special attention is paid to the analysis of social and cultural origins of nationalism, so by distancing from economic reductionism the legitimacy of constructivist approach is emphasized. In the frame of the latter nationalism is reviewed as phenomenon consciously constructed by political elite. It is demonstrated that the intentions of constructivist interpretation of nationalism are closely correlated with the traditionalist (especially, perennialist) approach. Among other things, the historical origins and socio-cultural conditions of widespread of ideas of nationalism and the causes of appearance its authoritarian and reactionary forms are analyzed.

The analysis of controversial and ambiguous political processes that have taken place in recent decades in all regions of the world without exception requires further in-depth study. This is especially true of the determining influence of the lack or insufficient utilization of power-volitional aspects in the conditions of transition from authoritarianism to democracy. Fuse deployment destructive processes of social development and statehood must be working effectively state-administrative apparatus at the system level and the political will at the level of functioning of individual and collective actors political and decision-making. In fact, the political will of the national elite as a generator of reforms in the face of modernization challenges appears as a systemic characteristic and prerequisites for the effectiveness of the state-management system as a whole. The lack of consistency in the interaction management, and state authorities, in turn, leads to the expansion and deepening of destructive processes at national or regional level, which is convincing proof of lack of political will in political and business decision-making.The political development of the post- Soviet countries in the last quarter century, that is, after the collapse of the USSR, proves that one of the examples of deliberate election by the representatives of the national political elite of the destructive vector of state development is the countries of Central Asia, where autocratic regimes of the sultanist type were formed, accompanied by the simultaneous archaization of socio-cultural and economic The life of these countries. Choice destructive vector of development of Central Asia in the form sultanizmu demonstrates the lack of political will of the ruling class of these countries at the beginning of national state when making a decision to break as the colonial and Soviet traditions patrymonializmu, cronyism and nepotism and the transition to democratic practices. The choice of archaism socio-cultural and political life of the national elites in Central Asia was primarily driven by their fear of radical systemic change as a potential threat to personal specifically for these elites, quite correctly be interpreted as a manifestation of the lack of will for democratic change.Thus, due to the absence or lack of political will of the ruling class in countries neopatrymonialnymy political systems there involutional public-policy process - from upgrading often quietly move to kontrmodernizatsiyi, preserving or incomplete socio-political transformation and publicly reject any changes as Those that are not inherent in the national traditions and mentality of the people. The indicated processes are extremely destructive for the national-state development of countries with incomplete modernization, because they provoke unpredictable consequences in the future. And these consequences can be unpredictable delays at the time, but they do gosudarstvennichesky national development in the future unsecured and non-competitive compared with countries where the political will of the ruling class helped bring modernization transformation to its logical conclusion. Accordingly, further research of the proposed problem should focus on the study of the classification characteristics of manifestations of individual and collective political will and its absence in the modern world. ; The analysis of controversial and ambiguous political processes that have taken place in recent decades in all regions of the world without exception requires further in-depth study. This is especially true of the determining influence of the lack or insufficient utilization of power-volitional aspects in the conditions of transition from authoritarianism to democracy. Fuse deployment destructive processes of social development and statehood must be working effectively state-administrative apparatus at the system level and the political will at the level of functioning of individual and collective actors political and decision-making. In fact, the political will of the national elite as a generator of reforms in the face of modernization challenges appears as a systemic characteristic and prerequisites for the effectiveness of the state-management system as a whole. The lack of consistency in the interaction management, and state authorities, in turn, leads to the expansion and deepening of destructive processes at national or regional level, which is convincing proof of lack of political will in political and business decision-making.The political development of the post- Soviet countries in the last quarter century, that is, after the collapse of the USSR, proves that one of the examples of deliberate election by the representatives of the national political elite of the destructive vector of state development is the countries of Central Asia, where autocratic regimes of the sultanist type were formed, accompanied by the simultaneous archaization of socio-cultural and economic The life of these countries. Choice destructive vector of development of Central Asia in the form sultanizmu demonstrates the lack of political will of the ruling class of these countries at the beginning of national state when making a decision to break as the colonial and Soviet traditions patrymonializmu, cronyism and nepotism and the transition to democratic practices. The choice of archaism socio-cultural and political life of the national elites in Central Asia was primarily driven by their fear of radical systemic change as a potential threat to personal specifically for these elites, quite correctly be interpreted as a manifestation of the lack of will for democratic change.Thus, due to the absence or lack of political will of the ruling class in countries neopatrymonialnymy political systems there involutional public-policy process - from upgrading often quietly move to kontrmodernizatsiyi, preserving or incomplete socio-political transformation and publicly reject any changes as Those that are not inherent in the national traditions and mentality of the people. The indicated processes are extremely destructive for the national-state development of countries with incomplete modernization, because they provoke unpredictable consequences in the future. And these consequences can be unpredictable delays at the time, but they do gosudarstvennichesky national development in the future unsecured and non-competitive compared with countries where the political will of the ruling class helped bring modernization transformation to its logical conclusion. Accordingly, further research of the proposed problem should focus on the study of the classification characteristics of manifestations of individual and collective political will and its absence in the modern world.

In a quite dynamic and unsteady modern world such traditional political concepts as «democracy» and «authoritarianism» need to be given with new meanings and to be objectifid in political practice. The non-classical theory of political regimes include category of «hybrid political regime» as well. However, due to diffiult for understanding essence of this political phenomenon and multivariability of its research, the development pace in this fild it is rather low.This article aims at discovering the ambiguity of a hybrid regime and at covering its ambivalent specifiity via the model building. The main task of reaching the goal of this paper is to provide a complex research of democratic and authoritarian subtypes of hybrid regimes. This is to be done by the synthetic unity of the defective democracy and competitive authoritarianism concepts.Using of such methods as neoinstitutionalism, systematic approach, structural-functional analysis and spectral analysis, the method of scaling helped to achieve the aim of this article. Due to the last method, the measurement of the level of democracy and authoritarianism of relevant subtypes of hybrid regime was made. The spectral analysis was used to display the two-way nature of hybrid political regime. The measurement of regimes' competitiveness is important as well as a tool of epistemology. It is the factor that unites two spectrums of a hybrid political regime.Equally important is making a distinction between the hybrid subtype of authoritarian regime and authoritarianism using the intensity of coercion criterion. The competitive authoritarianism uses means of political coercion of low intensity (falsifiation of election results, «legal» opposition repressions, corruption, etc.). The authoritarian type uses high intensity political coercion (physical repression against opponents of the regime, brutal violation of political rights and civil liberties, the destruction of the opposition, etc.).Thus, the «pluralism–monopolism» bipolarity serves as an indicator to differentiate and measure (from the center to extremes) the democratic/authoritarian nature of the regime or subtypes of hybrid political regime. Pluralism and monopoly are the principles of organization and functioning of the society in the system of political actors. Law and coercion are dominant ways of governing in different regimes' types. If in political regime existing democratic institutions are malfunctioning in its institutional setting, such democracy should be considered as a defective one. If competitive «pseudodemocracy» does not shrink from using coercive political means, but they are of a low intensity, it is a competitive authoritarianism. As for the practical value of the results of the article, the most important thing is that the development of different democratization strategies of different hybrid political regime subtypes is becoming possible. ; Синтезированы в единый подход методологические принципы концепций дефектной демократии и конкурентного авторитаризма. Обоснована целесообразность выделения в гибридном типе политического режима авторитарного и демократического спектров. На основании раскрытия сущностных аспектов функционирования гибридного режима, сконструирована его двухполюсная модель ; Синтезовані в єдиний підхід методологічні принципи концепцій дефектної демократії та конкурентного авторитаризму. Обґрунтована доцільність виокремлення в гібридному типі політичного режиму авторитарного та демократичного спектрів. На основі розкриття сутнісних аспектів функціонування гібридного режиму, сконструйовано його двополюсну модель

The role of social network in both democratization and intensification of authoritarian control is analysed. Key words: social network, democratization, authoritarianism, freedom of information. ; Проаналізовано роль соціальної мережі як у процесах демократизації, так і посилення авторитарного контролю. Ключові слова: соціальні мережі, демократизація, авторитаризм, свобода інформації.

The article investigates the historical background of Russia's socio-political transformation in the age of presidential republic, the Russian society's present state and modernization prospects.Since the Horde Russia would be effected by the oriental despotism. The Russian modernization historically took place under the Western civilization's influence but its instruments were mostly despotic and essentially anti-European.The Russian historical drama is that the social base of its modernization had been exterminated during the Bolshevik Revolution and Stalin's dictatorship, and by now, in the train of the ongoing post-communist transformations, is still in germ. In contrast to the American Great Power doctrine where democracy serves as an important tool, Putin's Russia has chosen the absolute priority of state and corporate interests over rights, freedoms and interests of its citizens.The author concludes that the fundamental problems and challenges, which had confronted the Russian modernization a quarter century ago, have remained unresolved. The most important of them are the key political actors' unwillingness to act within the democratic rules, the values foundation friability, the lack of democratic consciousness and political culture. Since the annexation of Crimea and the start of the hybrid war in Donbas Russia's socio-political transformation has found clear imperial meanings and would rely henceforth on the Eurasian space' resource self-sufficiency with the strictly authoritarian state ideology and elements of the mobilization economy. ; The article investigates the historical background of Russia's socio-political transformation in the age of presidential republic, the Russian society's present state and modernization prospects.Since the Horde Russia would be effected by the oriental despotism. The Russian modernization historically took place under the Western civilization's influence but its instruments were mostly despotic and essentially anti-European.The Russian historical drama is that the social base of its modernization had been exterminated during the Bolshevik Revolution and Stalin's dictatorship, and by now, in the train of the ongoing post-communist transformations, is still in germ. In contrast to the American Great Power doctrine where democracy serves as an important tool, Putin's Russia has chosen the absolute priority of state and corporate interests over rights, freedoms and interests of its citizens.The author concludes that the fundamental problems and challenges, which had confronted the Russian modernization a quarter century ago, have remained unresolved. The most important of them are the key political actors' unwillingness to act within the democratic rules, the values foundation friability, the lack of democratic consciousness and political culture. Since the annexation of Crimea and the start of the hybrid war in Donbas Russia's socio-political transformation has found clear imperial meanings and would rely henceforth on the Eurasian space' resource self-sufficiency with the strictly authoritarian state ideology and elements of the mobilization economy.

The article is devoted to the role of the Ukrainian ruling elite in the process of nation-building and democratic transformation. The specific conditions of its formation in Ukraine, the characteristic features and peculiarities are pointed out. The dynamics of contemporary political regime in the context of the antinomies — democracy/ authoritarianism is investigated. Considerable attention is paid to the disclosure of shadow aspect of policy relations, the role of political and economic groups in determining the vector of social change. ; The article is devoted to the role of the Ukrainian ruling elite in the process of nation-building and democratic transformation. The specific conditions of its formation in Ukraine, the characteristic features and peculiarities are pointed out. The dynamics of contemporary political regime in the context of the antinomies — democracy/ authoritarianism is investigated. Considerable attention is paid to the disclosure of shadow aspect of policy relations, the role of political and economic groups in determining the vector of social change.

The article is devoted to the role of the Ukrainian ruling elite in the process of nation-building and democratic transformation. The specific conditions of its formation in Ukraine, the characteristic features and peculiarities are pointed out. The dynamics of contemporary political regime in the context of the antinomies — democracy/ authoritarianism is investigated. Considerable attention is paid to the disclosure of shadow aspect of policy relations, the role of political and economic groups in determining the vector of social change. ; The article is devoted to the role of the Ukrainian ruling elite in the process of nation-building and democratic transformation. The specific conditions of its formation in Ukraine, the characteristic features and peculiarities are pointed out. The dynamics of contemporary political regime in the context of the antinomies — democracy/ authoritarianism is investigated. Considerable attention is paid to the disclosure of shadow aspect of policy relations, the role of political and economic groups in determining the vector of social change.

The causes and consequences of the political conflict model formation of relations between the government and the parliamentary opposition in Slovakia in the 90th years of the twentieth century have been analyzed in the article. Internal and external factors that influenced this formation were elucidated. The forms of political opposition institutionalization, the potential and the effectiveness of coalition politic were substantiated. The contradictory nature of the relationships between the government and the opposition are considered in the context of increasing authoritarian tendencies, destabilizing of democracy and weakening of inter-party competition.The weakening of inter-party competition in the early 90s and coming to power of V. Meciar strengthened the authoritarian tendencies and led to minimizing of the parliamentary opposition influence and reducing its control functions. Low level of consensus between the government and opposition parties was observed. This allows to talk about the construction of a conflict model of interaction between the government and the opposition.The relationships between the government and the political opposition was largely depended on the personal factor. Personification of policy in Slovakia clearly seen in the person of V. Meciar. He played a dominant role in politic. The conflicts between him and his main opponents led to the polarization of political life in Slovakia. Curtailment of democratic processes and the slowdown the process of European integration in the country led to the unification of the efforts of the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary forms of political opposition. This resulted to the creation of a new institutional framework. The political opposition has been greatly strengthened by NGOs. Non-party subjects of opposition activities were integrating center for opposition parties. Significant role in increasing of political subjectivity of opposition played the EU. Only since 1998 in Slovakia the practice of democratic change of parties in power was restored. This created the conditions for eliminating the consequences of V. Meciar illiberal regime, implementation of European integration policy and economic reforms. ; The causes and consequences of the political conflict model formation of relations between the government and the parliamentary opposition in Slovakia in the 90th years of the twentieth century have been analyzed in the article. Internal and external factors that influenced this formation were elucidated. The forms of political opposition institutionalization, the potential and the effectiveness of coalition politic were substantiated. The contradictory nature of the relationships between the government and the opposition are considered in the context of increasing authoritarian tendencies, destabilizing of democracy and weakening of inter-party competition.The weakening of inter-party competition in the early 90s and coming to power of V. Meciar strengthened the authoritarian tendencies and led to minimizing of the parliamentary opposition influence and reducing its control functions. Low level of consensus between the government and opposition parties was observed. This allows to talk about the construction of a conflict model of interaction between the government and the opposition.The relationships between the government and the political opposition was largely depended on the personal factor. Personification of policy in Slovakia clearly seen in the person of V. Meciar. He played a dominant role in politic. The conflicts between him and his main opponents led to the polarization of political life in Slovakia. Curtailment of democratic processes and the slowdown the process of European integration in the country led to the unification of the efforts of the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary forms of political opposition. This resulted to the creation of a new institutional framework. The political opposition has been greatly strengthened by NGOs. Non-party subjects of opposition activities were integrating center for opposition parties. Significant role in increasing of political subjectivity of opposition played the EU. Only since 1998 in Slovakia the practice of democratic change of parties in power was restored. This created the conditions for eliminating the consequences of V. Meciar illiberal regime, implementation of European integration policy and economic reforms.

The article examines the modern authoritarian regime, considers its characteristics and manifestations. The author gives an overview of modern authoritarian regimes. The purpose of this article is to determine the nature and features of the authoritarian regime, as a kind of political regime, as well as the reasons that lead to its emergence or maintenance in the country. It is noted, that the authoritarian regime is not an evolutionary form of state development, it is always a logical consequence of the socio-political processes taking place in the country. It is noted, that it appears against the background of breakthrough processes, when the political system of the state needs changes, but these changes occur under the influence of the political elite, not society, which in turn allows us to identify the preconditions for an authoritarian regime in the state. It is stated, that the authoritarian regime is not an evolutionary form of state development, it does not provide high-quality succession of power, it is unable to offer new trends and transformations of public life due to the inability of one person to change their worldview, adapting to social demands and processes. It is noted, that most authoritarian countries do not proclaim, do not identify themselves in this way, but on the contrary try to position themselves as countries that promote democratic values. Authoritarian regime as such is not perceived by most countries in the world, as it is characterized by unstable, non-transparent and unpredictable development of socio-economic and socio-political processes. The dominance of liberal democracy in the tradition of economic relations demonstrates the tendency of socio-political preferences of most business elites to operate in the conditions of projected democratic regimes. It is concluded, that the authoritarian regime is based on the imperative planting of those values that will contribute to the maintenance of power, and therefore dominated by state ideology, which is planted by the forces and ...

UK: Формування теорії демократичного врядування носить системний характер, теоретико- методологічне осмислення і обґрунтування якого у контексті алгоритму розвитку демократії (знизу вгору) є предметом подальших наукових розвідок. Змістовне наповнення ключових термінів такої теорії потребують глибокої наукової дискусії, на що я щиро сподіваюся. EN: State administration as science that investigates and summarizes existent world experience was formed and develops in the world already 200 over on principles of authoritarianism and subject-object cooperation between the state and society.