Suchergebnisse

Communication between political elites & the general public is suffering from information overload. The best way to remedy the problem is to improve political language. Ideology is the most 'rational' political language available: it carries information about elite decision making at a relatively modest cost. Three questions are considered: (1) Do the decisionmakers have an ideology? (2) If 'yes,' is it instrumental in the decision-making process? (3) If 'yes,' why does this ideological factor rarely reach the public? The last two questions are considered from a formal viewpoint. It is shown that ideology can be important in the private decision-making forum & disappear when the elites address the public. The private forum is dominated by the need for policy output & by the necessity for coalition formation. The adaptation of ideology to this situation depends on its articulation degree & on the coalition-formation type. Generally, the salience aspect of ideology is less likely to suffer than its position aspect. The public forum is dominated by the needs for recruiting support & legitimizing proposals. Ideology is generally too costly a device to be used for these purposes. HA.

Typical of current work in contemporary Soviet political theory is the work of V. N. Danilenko, a specialist in French political theory which appeared in Sovjetskoje Gosoedarstvo i Pravo (1976, Apr). Danilenko analyzes some French political theorists. The needs of ideological struggle require attention to new development in bourgeois ideology. The crisis of world capitalism as well as the emergence of formerly colonial nations has created a need for a renovation of political theories. Today's interest in the typology of political systems is typical of that renovation effort. The French theorists are criticized for assuming the independence of the political & economic structures & for not recognizing the role of ideologies as well as of social & geographic factors. They absolutize political systems & study them abstractly. By contrast, Marxist-Leninist political science asserts that a political system is an expression of the relations between classes & of the means by which the dictatorship of the ruling class is enforced. Therefore, the important criteria in the classification of bourgeois systems are: the rights & liberties of the Wc, how the Wc is represented in the parliamentary institution, what share the Wc has in state power & to what extent the state is forced to respond to PO & use democratic means of government. The Soviet juridical literature is criticized for not recognizing the full diversity of bourgeois systems. However, Marxism-Leninism brings to light what all these systems have in common: they are dictatorships of the bourgeoisie. A. Orianne.