|
|
|
V.J. Chalupa On Post-Modern Politics
|
|
|
CHAPTER 4 POLITICAL
PROGRAM Its Nature A
political organization is a phenomenon whose parts are formed into a whole by
its purpose which must be generally understandable, because it is on the basis
of this purpose that a political organization attracts supporters, enlists
members and acts, i.e., acquires means and utilizes them. This common purpose is
expressed in its program and this program is the source
of the cohesion of
its parts; therefore the program of a political organization must contain the
basic elements of the definition of politics, i.e., at least: the
purpose of the
organization's politics, i.e., the description of the situation it aims to
achieve; its
object, i.e., its object of care which is identical with the group
of people whose betterment the political organization pursues; its
means, i.e., an overview of measures the state should take in
order to achieve the desired goal. The
political program is frequently accompanied by enumeration of principles of a
normative moralizing nature which are supposed to justify and explain the
demands of the program. If the political movement whose product the political
organization is, originated from an ideological movement (religious,
philosophical, scientific), the political organization underpins its program by
the reasoning that preceded its formation and which it accepts as its ideology or, if it is sufficiently systematic and extensive, as its world
view which again, according to its character, may be religious,
philosophical, scientific. In
addition to this ideological program,
a political organization must also state the means by which it intends to obtain
(or extend or maintain, which means the same thing in the context of political
struggle) participation in the government. The sum of these means constitutes
its practical program which also determines the political organization's
structure. The
ideological as well as the practical programs frequently include postulates
which are impossible to achieve or are mutually incompatible, either because of
insufficient and uncritical reasoning or intentionally in order to attract
supporters -- they are only slogans. Therefore actions of a political
organization are not infrequently inconsistent with its proclaimed goals. Political
programs are not always formulated exactly and at one time -- amendments,
additions and interpretations, sometimes contradictory, may be presented in
various speeches or publications. Moreover, they are affected by the evolution
of the ideological movement in which they are rooted. Notwithstanding these
uncertainties the program is the reason for the existence of a political
organization and the process of formulating its program is identical with the
process of the organization's forming its political will. Its Goal The
purpose of politics is the betterment of the situation of a certain group of
people. In
order to be able to recognize "betterment," it is necessary to know
not only the present situation but also to know what is the ideal, the goal
pursued by the subject of volition, in the given case by the political
organization. Only then is it possible to qualify as "betterment" any change which brings closer the
willed ideal or goal, and a change in the opposite direction as deterioration. The
term "betterment" does not indicate what are the concrete contents of
the objective, how does the pursued ideal look. The usage of such a term in the
definition indicates that views about the situation to be achieved vary.
Politically active subjects harbor different, even contradictory, ideas about
the arrangement of the society which is their object of care; nevertheless,
their actions are politics insofar as they pursue the attainment of their sundry
ideals through participation in government. They may go in different directions,
but they all go "forward," all pursue "progress," they all
agree in pursuance of a better future, a better society, a better world, but
this agreement is meaningless unless they fail to agree also in the concrete
contents of their respective visions. Nevertheless,
there are certain elements of the "betterment" common to all political
organizations because all their programs are, in the last instance, derived from
the common goal of all people, namely the goal of happiness: man wants to be
satisfied as much as possible. And
man will not be satisfied until he adjusts to his ideas also society with its
elements: culture and civilization, and extends them to other societies or at
least does secure his own society from changes caused by some other society. Society's
ability to impose one's own arrangement on the environment, i.e., on its own
members and on members of other societies, is its power. The sum of material conditions securing the growth, the
expansion of its nature, is its
wealth. There is an
interrelationship between power and wealth: power is the expression of a
society's ability to organize its own material conditions, i.e., to ensure its
own wealth; wealth as the sum of material conditions supporting the development
of a society, contributes to its ability to impose on other societies its own
goals, i.e., to an increase of power. In this sense, the increase of power and
wealth is included in every primary political goal. There is, however a
difference in a political goal which aims at the increase of power and wealth of
the society as such,
or the increase of wealth and power of its individual
members. These two
versions of the term "betterment of the situation of a group of
people" are not mutually exclusive, but they are not identical and could be
contradictory. Its Object of Care Purpose
of politics is the betterment of the situation of a
certain group of people.
The targeted "group of people" is the object of care of politically
active subjects and must be identified in the program of political
organizations. Individuals
form groups on the basis of most varied sources of cohesion: causal (territory,
origin), intentional (interests) and normative (religion) and such groups and
individuals form other groups which sometimes overlap, sometimes are mutually
exclusive. Because there is a presumption of free will of political subjects,
any group of people can be their object of care. In practice, only groups that
have considerable importance for a larger number of politically active subjects
(individuals or organizations) become the object of care of politics. As the
situations of societies change, the interests of their components shift, and
therefore also politics' objects of
care change. As a general rule, however, it can be stated that objects of care
of political actions are those groups to which politically active subjects
belong. Empirically, the following groups of people have been or are objects of
care in the recent past and present: A
class is a plurality of people who have the same relationship
towards the means of production. In modern society, the following classes are
objects of care: The working class (proletariat) are people who do not own means
of production and are constrained to making a living by working with them for
wages, and bureaucracy
whose members work with them indirectly in administration and organization
for salaries. The name of bourgeoisie
was given to those who own the means of production. They are subdivided into two
groups: those who own so many means of production that it frees them from the
need to work with them personally, the capitalists,
and those who must work with them personally (small
entrepreneurs).
People who control factually the means of production without owning them are the
managerial class. This class exists in all economic systems. An
intangible means of production is expertise; those who possess it, form the knowledge
class. Identical relationship towards means of
production is the basis of identical interests which clash with those of other
groups. Political terminology accepted for this clash is the term "class
struggle." Nations
arose historically through suppression of weaker biological groups and their
intermixing. Biological groups are those whose source of cohesion are common
inherited qualities (genes) - tribes, clans, families. The molding of these
groups into a nation took place under strong pressure of the state power used by
or created by the dominant group, through which it assimilated the subdued
groups. The permanence and stability of this new formation grew by suppression
of societal organs of the subdued groups and their replacement by social organs
of the new common society. Because this process progressed with strong
participation of incipient state power, there arose a connection between state
and nation, statehood and nationhood. In some cultural areas, this connection
became so strong that the concept of nationality merged with the concept of
citizenship; in other areas, these two concepts are strictly separated, even
mutually hostile. During years of togetherness biological groups, originally
bound together only by the rule of one of them, developed common cultural
qualities (primarily common language, common religion, common traditions, common
history), and this common cultural environment gradually became the main source
of cohesion of its various parts and overshadowed the primary roots, namely the
belonging to the constituent biological groups. A nation endures as long as the
influx of new biological and cultural elements does not change substantially its
spiritual environment. In view of their biological foundations, nations have
endured as the most indestructible among all human groups. Humanity
is a biological group whose source of cohesion is its members' belonging to
genus Homo sapiens. It has increasingly become the object of care in modern
politics. The
state in this connection (in its sociological meaning) is a group of persons having rights and duties stemming from the
same legal system. There is some uncertainty whether this definition includes
citizens of a state living in the territory of another state. A
church is a community of people believing into same norms of
behavior proceeding from a transcendental normgiver, and practicing their
organized observance. The
group whose betterment is the purpose of the subject of will may, but does not
have to, be the group to which he belongs; the reason of dissatisfaction of an
American can be, as mentioned, the existence of slavery in the Sudan or
suppression of human rights in China. One
result of the maximizing nature of the purpose of happiness ("as much as
possible") is also that the behavior or existence of another group can be
and often is an obstacle to the betterment of the situation of the the group
which is the object of care; therefore the objective of betterment of its
situation may include and often includes deterioration of the situation of
another group; this, however, is not the main purpose of the subject of will, it
is a means towards its achievement. Relatively
new are political movements whose object of care are non-human
-- some types of animals, plants or all of nature. As long as
their demands are included in programs of political organizations, they may be
subsumed under the general term of "betterment of the conditions of a
certain group of people" in the sense that they are a part of the ideal how
human society should behave. State as General
Means of Politics The
behavior of subjects endowed with freedom is directed by norms which belong to
various normative systems: by religious, moral, legal norms, traditions,
customs, social conventions and other. Among them, law (in the sense of the
entirety of legal norms) differs from the others by its consistency and
enforceability; therefore it is the general means chosen by political
organizations for the realization of their vision of a better society. The
law is a consistent, complete, objective, understandable, codified and logically
arranged system of duties. The term "right" in the legal sense denotes
only either someone's duty to act in favor the holder of the right (entitlement)
or a duty of others to abstain from interfering with certain actions of the
holder of a right -- a "right" without a corresponding duty is an
empty symbol. Constitution All
legal norms derive their validity from a constitution.
The constitution is the highest legal norm which does not derive its validity
from any higher legal norm; this does
not exclude its claim to derive from a norm of another normative system: morals,
religion or custom, nor a possibility to be judged (as good or bad) from the
viewpoint of such norms. By the act of creating a constitution, its authors
create at the same time the first organ of a state -- the constitutional body
(assembly, convention). Since the constitution and its origin are not the fulfillment
of another, higher legal obligation, they must be understood as an act of will
of the state, i.e., a purpose attributed to the state. In this sense, the term
"state" covers a number of political organizations which agreed among
themselves (or one political organization which decided) how to impose their
will on the inhabitants of a certain territory by means of a legal system, and
what form the legal system should have in order to accomplish their political
purpose, i.e. their concept of a "good" society. By creating a
constitution they simultaneously create the state; the precondition of this
action is of course that they posses a power sufficient to enforce the norms of
the constitution at least until the state creates its own executive organs which
will enforce its will, its legal system beginning with the provisions of the
constitution through the various layers of norms (laws, regulations) down to an
individual judgment of a duly constituted court or a fine imposed by a policeman
for a traffic violation. A
constitution is the expression of a sovereign (i.e., not subject to a law) and
enforceable will of a political organization or organizations in what way they
will create legal duties binding the population of a territory.
According to
international custom, a government of such a territory is considered as
legitimate as and when it succeeds in enforcing its will on a firmly
determined territory for a longer period of time. If
a constitution is created by several political organizations it is necessary to
ascertain to what extent their individual programs will be expressed by the
constitution. The outcome depends mainly on two determinants: the
comparative power relationship between the political organizations authoring the constitution, and the extent of resistance to be expected from non-participating political
organizations and the population. Within this framework, the programs for the
maximum betterment of a certain group of people of the various political
organizations will be implemented by law in proportions whose relationship will
form the material solidarity of the new primary optimal (complex) purpose
ascribed to the state. The
constitution expresses the existing power relationships, but also contains
provisions how their changes can (or cannot) be reflected in the creation of the
state's will. As soon as this agreement, i.e., the constitution, is concluded,
the political organizations that authored it become immediately subject to its
provisions and must submit to them. Constitution's
provisions on what should be (within the limits of its validity) considered as
legal, are of two types: material and formal. Material
provisions list the contents which legislation must or must not have and the
contents of duties the state may or may not impose. Formal provisions determine procedures that must be observed for
legal norms to be valid; among them the most important are those regulating
valid ways of changing the constitution. Each legal system contains rules
according to which it may be changed, and describes the organs authorized to do
so as well as the related procedures. Norms not issued according to the
provisions of formal law are legally invalid; norms issued according to the
provisions of formal law, are legally valid and protected by the entire force of
the state. It
is mainly the type of constitution which determines the type of the state,
whether it be democratic or autocratic, federalist or centralistic, based on
free enterprise and market economy or on central planning and public ownership,
as well as the proportions in which these various options are combined. As long
as the constitution and the law are observed, the state is a lawful state. An entirely different situation arises if any
political organization or their combination attains so much power that it is
able to enforce its will even against the state's will as expressed in its
constitution and law -- this is an unlawful
state which has lost its sovereignty in
favor of the dominant political organization(s). In such a state, law has only a
secondary, supplemental validity -- where the organs of the ruling political
organization do not impose directly their own will. In the present, also other
actors than political organizations manage to share or outstrip the state's
sovereignty (see Chapters 7 and 11). As
the foundation of the state and source of its legal system, it is desirable that
its constitution be stable. Formal law underpins the stability of the
constitution by provisions which make its changes more difficult than changes of
other legal provisions, and surround them by stricter demands. Although
important, such provisions in themselves cannot cloth the constitution with the
moral authority it needs as the keystone of the entire system; such authority is
gained by tradition (long duration of the constitution), and where tradition is
lacking, legal continuity, which means an uninterrupted legally valid derivation
from the original constitution of the state. The
Law One
characteristic of law is its consistency. A legal system
evolves by imposition of new duties and obliteration of old duties.. This takes
place by creation of norms which derive their validity from immediately
superior, higher norms. The validity of legal norms is equal; there are no legal
norms more or less valid than others, but (like purposive systems they reflect)
they are hierarchically ordered. Higher
norms have a wider
scope, i.e., they create duties for a larger number of subjects (individual or
corporate subjects) and their contents are of a more general nature; lower
norms have a narrower scope (fewer subjects of duty), and their
contents are more specific. The
lowest norms are concrete norms:
creation of a duty with concrete specifications imposed on a concrete subject.
Usage has created specific designations for the various levels of the legal
pyramid; using them produces the following picture: constitution constitutional
laws laws government
regulations regulations
of lower self-governing bodies court
findings and administrative decisions. A
legal system thus formulates logical chains derived from the highest norm
(constitution) all the way to the lowest norm. Because all legal norms have the
same validity, even the lowest norms are enforced by the full power of the
state. Organized
enforceability is
the second characteristic of law. Almost all legal norms, and especially
concrete norms are sanctioned, i.e., their violation produces punishment.
Punishment is a harm inflicted on the punished subject. Law imposes on state and
other public organs the duty to inflict on those who fail to fulfill their duty,
a harm on otherwise protected goods, such as life, health, freedom and property. Only exceptionally are certain norms unprotected by
sanctions; their violation has only the consequence that acts so performed are
legally invalid. The special position of legal norms among other norms ordering
the life of societies (moral, religious, tradition, custom) and the key role of
the legislative power in creating laws is substantially different from other
means to better the situation of groups of people, and its use therefore
distinguishes politics from other endeavors pursuing the same objective. A
political victory is not safe unless it is consolidated by the imposition of a
legal system which corresponds to the ideals (objectives) of the victorious
political organization(s). The territory on which a state's legal system is valid, is the territory belonging to the state, its borders are determined by the validity of the applicable law. The inhabitants of the territory are the state's subjects. (4) In general, states enforce the validity of their laws on all persons, citizens or not, during a stay on their respective territories (the one exception being the duty to serve in their military), but deny them the same rights as those granted to their own citizens; however, by the ascendance of supranational organizations, the right of states to do so is being eroded together with some other aspects of their sovereignty (see Chapter 25).
|
