|
|
|
V.J. Chalupa On Post-Modern Politics
|
|
|
CHAPTER 3 POLITICAL
ORGANIZATION Politics
is actions whose purpose is the betterment of the situation of a certain group
of people through participation in the directing of public affairs.
Political
activities fall into two categories: one has as its purpose attaining (or maintaining) a share of the central means of politics --
the share in the directing of public affairs, the other has as its purpose the utilization
of this means, i.e., the implementation of the betterment of the situation of a
certain group of people. Attaining
a share in the directing of public affairs and the implementation of the
political program are two different purposes which generate two separate systems
of derived objectives ascribed to two different subjects of will. Providing the
general means of politics is the role of political
organizations; the
utilization of this means -- the implementation of the betterment of the
situation of a group of people belongs to the state. A
political organization aims at sharing in the power of the state -- this is its
primary purpose, actions aimed at implementation of changes without the
intervention of state power would not be politics but self-help. Therefore,
political organizations do not have their own organs for their program's
implementation. The division of labor among members of a political organization,
their relationships, their actions make sense only in view of their common goal
of attaining the ability to use the coercive power of the state and/or of its
autonomous units A
political organization builds its structure as a means of accomplishing its
purpose. By following its goal of attaining a share in state power, a political
organization selects secondary, tertiary, etc. objectives, and creates
appropriate organs for their utilization. Actions of a political organization
are not determined by its structure, on the contrary, its structure serves its
activities. Structure then becomes one of its instruments, a means in the
political struggle and is therefore contingent upon the environment in which the
political organization acts (the nature of the state, the structure of society)
and upon the means the political organization selects to attain its goal
(bombs or ballots). The
organizational structure of political organizations tends to be somewhat vague,
the functions of its organs not strictly defined, statutes formulated in
generalities or not at all. This applies especially to new political
organizations and to those created under pressure. While vagueness brings
obvious disadvantages, in certain situations it may be beneficial: it may
enhance flexibility and facilitate adjustment to changed circumstances. A
political organization selects its structure to suit its strategy and tactics,
its strategy and tactics are determined by changes in the circumstances in which
it operates and the changes require the creation or adaptation of the
organization's organs. Organizing is thus a precondition of its activities.
Because of this subordination of organization to changing strategies, tactics
and conditions this section mentions only functions which are indispensable to
all political organizations; the variables will be dealt with in connection with
the forms of political struggle which produces them, as they appear in various
types of government under various operational modes.
Decision making The
goal of a political organization can be defined also as gaining power in order
to acquire the ability for implementation of its plans about how to improve the
life of society. Those who formulate the image of an improved society and how to
attain and use public power create
the will of the
political organization. According to the manner in which this process takes
place, the will of the organization is created autocratically or democratically. Autocracy
(“normative heteronomy") is justified either on the basis of a special
quality of the decision makers ("leadership belongs to the best"), or
by demands of efficiency (an organization executing orders of one leader is more
efficient than an organization which at every step must expend a part of its
energy and time to obtain a decision from members). The
key question of an autocratic organization is to determine which person or group
of persons is "the best." The
answer of this question is not left to members; it is decided on the basis of
qualifications which do not depend on the will of members. Historically, such
standards were origin (reigning
family, aristocracy), authority received supernaturally (vision, mission by a
supernatural being), in modern times mostly scientific knowledge. The
democratic forming of will
("normative autonomy") is justified either on the basis of a
fundamental equality of the decision makers ("inalienable human rights and
civil liberties") or by demands on correctness of decisions ("more
heads are better than one"). In practice, members mostly decide between
several opinions and/or persons without proposing their own opinions or
candidacy; they entrust the leadership of the organization to those who
represent most closely the membership's opinions and desires. The will of
members can be expressed either directly (voting, elections) or indirectly (by
electing delegates who conceivably elect other delegates). The more levels of
delegation there are, the lesser is the influence of members on the final
decision. (A memorable example of such process is the "democratic
centralism" of the communist parties.) The
system of delegation (indirect democracy) allows a combination
of autocratic and democratic principles
by allocating a certain fraction of delegates to be elected
by members and another fraction to be nominated by the existing
leadership or by granting to members of the present leadership the automatic
right to be delegates. Another option is to entrust the selection of delegates
(or some delegates) to special bodies that are not under control of the
membership. Justification for these combinations are the necessity to preserve a
continuity of the organization and the fact that, in large organizations, the
members do not have access to knowledge sufficient to make an informed decision. The
manner in which the will of the organization is formed is expressed in the
organizational statutes (which may be written or unwritten, gleaned from
practice and tacitly accepted and observed as normative). Because political
organizations are occasionally somewhat amorphous, the functions of their
various organs are not clear and binding and change with changing circumstances
and needs, actual practice
is often more reliable than written rules when judging their degree of
democracy.
The
content of the will of a political organization is relatively stable because
those who harbor radically different opinions and objectives join other
political organizations or form new ones. The inertia of a political
organization brings it into conflict with changes caused by the development of
society which necessitate changes in its existing program and traditional
behavior. This tension produces in many political organizations various
tendencies, and sundry components of the organization pursue goals not identical
with the purpose established by the organization as a whole. Groups that pursue
diverging opinions within the same political organization, are called factions. . Such
disunity does not necessarily endanger the cohesion of a political organization
insofar as it does not affect principles and overall political postulates on
which the organization is based. It may be formalized by a federal
structure of a political organization. Various tendencies and
interests within the organization have their own organization, remain within the
common organization and are represented in its organs entrusted by formulating
its will, with the provision that they will submit to the decision of the
pertinent organs in their actions outside the organization. Another feature of a
federal structure of a political organization is that it allows collective
membership of non-political organizations which, in pursuing their own specific
goals, nevertheless have demands on the government, demands that are identical
with the program of a given political organization. Such organizations may be
granted representation in the will-forming organs of the political organization
proportional to their contribution to the common goal, (an arrangement which
enables the political organization to adjust more flexibly to a changing
political environment and extends its influence beyond the limits of its own
members and/or movement. (The presence of trade unions in the British Labor
Party is an example.) If
the divergence of elements within a political organization is such that it
cannot be reconciled within a common framework or if a faction, part, or member
of a political organization takes action against the stated program of the
organization, it leaves the political organization or is expelled. Propaganda Propagating
its program is an indispensable component of the activity of a political
organization. It serves to gain adherents to its political movement and to
enlist members into its organs. Propaganda
is aimed primarily at the factors which it considers as decisive and which the
political organization expects to open to it access to public power; these
factors can be individuals or groups. In a military dictatorship, the political
organization tries to gain supporters for its goals among key military
personnel, in a democracy, among voters. Its propaganda either tries to convince
its targets that the implementation of its program will aid them in attaining
their own goals, or it tries to change the targets' opinions and objectives (the
contents of their purpose of
happiness) so that they will find the implementation of its political program as
useful. The common denominator of propaganda is the creation
or utilization of a dissatisfaction with the present or impending (future)
situation of society. This
process of fomenting dissatisfaction is called "raising the awareness"
of the targets; subjects of will that do not share the intended dissatisfaction
and the political program to its termination,
are dubbed "lacking awareness"; those who share it, are
"aware" or "concerned," terms which in themselves have
propaganda value. Spreading
a political movement and propagandizing a political organization is done in two
forms: political and non--political. The
political way of propaganda consists of open promotion of the
political organization; the organization openly proclaims
its political nature, publicizes its program,
exalts its leaders and demands a share in the state power. In
the non-political way,
the organization does not act in its own name, it acts through the intermediary
of its members and strives to influence others by their actions; its members or
adherents represent and defend the objectives of its program on the basis of
scientific, moral, religious, economic and/or other arguments and postulates. The
most impotent means of spreading a political movement are the spoken word, print
and electronic media (TV and broadcasting) which put at the disposal of a
political organization a new method of influencing the public combining the
collective approach with individuality (see Appendix 1). A
part of the manipulation of public opinion is the use of slogans, symbols and
terminology with a value laden content that appeal more to the sentimental,
rather than the rational, side of human psychology, endeavor to change the
relationship between the message and its recipient from freedom and reasoning to
cause and effect, from thought to reflex. This "bending" of the human
mind has lately resulted in a systematic and scientific invention of terminology
which introduces new words for existing thought contents so that their
traditional positive connotations are changed into negative ones and vice versa,
and intentional provocation of opponents introduces formerly unacceptable
concepts into the public discourse. Financing An
indispensable part of actions of a political organization is economic activity
which provides material means for its functioning, especially finances. Various
possible sources of financing a political organization are membership
contributions and contributions of supporters, profit from its own enterprises,
assistance from public funds, means extorted from subjects who are not members
of the organization nor of its movement. The
first source comprises all goods donated to the political party to defray the
expenses of its political activities, such as regular membership fees, admission
fees to political and entertainment events organized by the political
organization, and occasional gifts. Income from membership fees is significant
only if the organization has mass membership so that the total is significant
even if the individual fees are low. Deserving of special attention is financing
through donations by members and supporters, because they may deeply influence
the policies of the organization, as its organs deciding on the organization's
program and operations, take into account if this or that decision would not
bring about a withholding of further financial support, and thus weaken the
organization. The
second source of financing is return of business enterprises owned by the
organization. Business enterprises owned by the political organization decrease
its dependence on outside
influences and represent a strong support in times of political reversals
because they are able to provide jobs and income for members, and thus preserve
cadres necessary for new expansion. Financing
of political organizations from public funds has a twofold, radically different
character. On one hand, its purpose can be to eliminate or limit the influence
of money on the formation of political will by prohibiting or limiting
contributions from private sources and substituting for them contributions from
public funds granted according to an objective standard, for instance according
to the number of votes received or number of members. On the other hand, the
purpose of financing from public treasury may be used as a means to grant
advantages to political organizations which share in the government, against
those that are excluded (the opposition). The transfer of public funds to
political organizations is done either openly (for instance contributions for
political campaigns based on law), or indirectly (in the form of grants from
various budget appropriations for cultural, security and other purposes).
Finally,
a political organization may obtain funds for its activities by pressuring
vulnerable subject by threats of harm or by harming the attainment of their
objectives. Among its methods are intimidation, blackmail, hostage taking,
theft, robberies and other violent acts. Managing Legislators The
penultimate purpose of a political organization is to transform its will into
the will of the state, i.e., into laws. Because legislative power belongs to the
state, organs of a political organization cannot make laws. It is possible,
however, and from the political organization's view desirable, that legislators
create laws with a content that implements the program and demands of a
political organization. Therefore, the political organization must make sure
that they do so. In
order to ensure the identity of acts of legislators with its program, a
political organization creates special bodies which prepare the material and
proposals for legal norms (study groups) and joint committees or commissions of
its representatives in the legislative or self-governing organs of the state and
of the leading members of its own (territorially, materially or functionally)
corresponding organs. These bodies discuss goals to be pursued by the state or
its autonomous units and formulate their implementation through legislation in
ways that conform with the program of the organization. The solution of public
problems is thus not left to the legislators alone and pertinent organs of the
political organization charged with the implementation of its will watch that
the actions of its representatives do not deviate from its political program and
that their position is united and consistent, i.e., a political organization
assures that, in their performance of their legislative function, its
representatives and adherents act as its subordinate organs. This dependence of
legislators on their political organization is frequently resented by them and
their groupings (clubs, caucuses) strive to reverse their relationships: from
being instruments of a political organization to the organization being their
own instrument. . Political
organizations have seldom legal means by which to force their representatives
into obedience. On the contrary, the law often guarantees and orders legislators
to act independently. Political organizations are therefore limited to rely on
factual power. The most frequent reason why legislators follow instructions of
their political organization is that an organization which caused or helped them
to gain their position can also cause or help them to lose it (if not
immediately, then later), and expelling a member will mostly achieve this goal.
Other non-legal or illegal means are economic, psychological and physical
pressure which, in terrorist organizations, includes killing the disobedient
member and/or members of his family. Some
political organizations create a specific organ to settle disputes between
members, between a member and the organization or between its factions. This
organ has a judicial function: it examines whether the objects of a complaint or
dispute have violated certain norms, especially acted against the program or
interest of the organization by infringing law or decency. Political
Organizations and Personalities Political
personalities are
individuals who achieved outstanding results in politics. A
political movement arises from a reaction to an unsatisfactory situation and
aims at its correction, i.e., betterment. The translation of such a mood or
movement in a clear political program and the choice of means of its
implementation, and its transformation into a political organization require the
intervention of human reason of which only exceptional individual is capable.
During this evolution of a diffuse mood to a defined political purpose, its
initiator impresses on it certain personal marks, his individual contribution
towards the expression of commonly felt and objectively existing needs. However,
his true function is that of a catalyst, a "spokesman for the times"
who expresses their atmosphere, gives voice to their ambience. Such a
personality rises to the top of a political party or creates his own, and his
rise is the faster the better he articulates the needs of his time. He becomes a
political leader. The
other type of a political personality differs from the spokesman of his times by
not articulating the needs of his era, but by anticipating a coming era; he is
ahead of his time, predicts, anticipates or prepares the future. Such a
"prophetic personality" exerts a long term impact which depends on the
celerity and accuracy with which the development of society corresponds with his
analyses.The fate of such individuals, political and non-political, is usually a
tragic one-- they pay for their uniqueness by crucifixion, execution,
incarceration or rejection. In political parties, they are usually the voice of
reform, innovation, and often in opposition. This type of political personality
becomes a political leader only, if and when events confirm his anticipation, if
and when the means recommended by him are accepted, and if a personality of the
preceding type does not arise to assume leadership by appropriating his ideas
and implementing them when the times are ripe for them,
possibly in an amended form. There
is no inevitable, necessary relationship between personalities and politics or
political organizations. When such a relationship exists, it is not due to the
fact that an individual qualifies as a personality, but it is created by a free
decision of a personality to get involved in politics, to influence the
direction of public affairs. This
decision is of two kinds. It can be evoked by the concern that those who direct
public affairs, do not pay enough attention to knowledge and convictions the
personality has, for instance certain scientific discoveries. Ecologists arrive
to certain conclusions on which activities are permissible if life or nature on
the planet can survive; eugenicist determine what health and mental qualities
people should have to be allowed to live; environmentalists pressure for
measures to prevent the imminent arrival of an ice age or greenhouse effect,
nuclear scientists wish to direct military strategy, and so on. Likewise do
economists, sociologists, educationists, behavioral scientist and experts in
other sciences. Such personalities surround themselves with people of the same
opinion and originate or join movements of identical or similar convictions.
These are breeding grounds for pressure groups which enter politics to promote
their conclusions and to apply or enforce them through sharing in the directing
of public affairs. Such an interaction is not limited to personalities of
science, although it is the most frequent one in modern times; it applies also
to personalities of other spheres of culture: arts, religion, sports. This type
of a relationship of a personality with political organizations, mainly
political parties, can be classified as parasitic
because he uses political organizations to attain goals which by their origin
and character have nothing in common with its existing program. An extreme case
of this approach is the creation of a political organization or party whose
program centers on the implementation of such personality's demands (e.g., the
secret societies of the Enlightenment era). A
different type of relations between a personality and a political organization
arises, if the personality decides to support a political program for its
contents to such an extent that he is willing to assist it by lending his
authority to its efforts. Such cooperation takes on many forms: behind the
scenes or participation in public appearances, in fund raising, in
demonstrations and protests, signing petitions. (Film stars march in
demonstrations, top performers in sports join financial drives, prominent
scientists write articles or appear on TV programs to advocate the party of
their choice.) The assumption here is that the public will extend the respect
for a personality's authority gained in his special field also to the field of
politics. This opinion is erroneous, but nevertheless widespread; many citizens
who respect the authority of a person, for instance, in sports or in film,
assume that a political program cannot be bad if such an authority supports it.
This relationship between a personality and a political organization can be
described as symbiotic. Elitism is an attitude of personalities aiming at implementing a program of a transformation of society mainly through bypassing the political process as well as direct involvement in political organizations. This is the latest non-democratic approach to governing (see Chapter 7 and 22).
|
