Nikovskaya L.I. Social foundations of political conflict. Kazan social and humanitarian Bulletin, 2020, No 5, pp. 31-42.

Текст статьи на сайте журнала URL: http://kazanvestnik.ru/files/5-2020/31-42_%D0%9D%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F.pdf (дата обращения 26.10.2020)

Abstract

The article deals with the sociological aspects of the analysis of political conflict related to the socio-structural and subjective foundations of political processes and relations. It is shown that many problems and contradictions in the social sphere, such as social polarization, excessive inequality, poverty and violation of the principles of social justice, deprivation of basic needs and interests, unstable labor employment significantly determine the field of politics and are projected on the object and subject of political conflict, weighing down their course and positive outcomes. The insolubility of social problems and contradictions, their encapsulation cause either a decrease in the population's interest in politics, in the effectiveness of democratic institutions, contribute to the widening of the gap between private and public, generate a sense of political alienation and powerlessness, or push to meet basic needs beyond the existing social norms and political institutions, to destructive forms of resolving political conflicts, which leads to a loss of control of society and social catastrophe. Sociological analysis of the subject cross-section of conflict interaction shows that a conflict based on group interests (in comparison with class and elitist) contributes more to maintaining a dynamic balance in society and realizing the positive potential of political conflict, since it is characterized by flexible intra-group connections and mobile inter-group barriers in the socio-political system. Class and elitist models of conflict tend more to vertical polarization of society, which strengthens the discontinuous lines of interaction between the top and bottom, makes the dichotomy rule-submission rigid, and reduces the possibilities of dialogical plasticity and flexibility of the political system.