Saint Petersburg State University

Keywords

youth, political activity, sociological survey, youth, political participation, sociological survey

Article View

⛔️ (refresh the page if the article is not displayed)

Annotation to the article

The article examines the political activity of Russian youth in its various subgroups. The degree of involvement of young people in the political life of the country and the forms of political activity that most attract young people are being studied. The materials of a sociological survey conducted in 2013 among students of St. Petersburg universities are analyzed.

Scientific article text

The problem of political activity and the formalization of the socio-political consciousness of today's youth continues to be relevant and attractive to many sociologists working within the framework of this issue. In recent decades, many youth organizations and youth wings of political parties have emerged in Russia. As a result, there is a sense of significant politicization of youth. However, comparative studies do not reveal an increase in the political activity of young Russians in the last decade. Moreover, many studies reveal a low level of youth interest in politics, their weak involvement and passive participation in the political life of the country, which is expressed only in participation in elections. There are only isolated bursts of young people's interest in politics in connection with bright political events. Thus, a survey by the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences showed an extremely low level of youth participation in the political life of society - only 1% of those personally involved in political activities and 14% of those who closely follow information about political events in the country. While 35% are interested in politics only occasionally and 49% are not interested at all. Other authors, on the contrary, point to the recent growth of youth interest in politics and participation in it, especially in the context of recent events in Ukraine. The study presented in this article is based on the materials of a sociological survey of students of St. The sample included 494 university students from St. Petersburg. The analysis and interpretation of the data presented in the article belong to its author. The purpose of this study is to study the political activity and involvement of young people in the political life of the country. These indicators are studied in various subgroups of young people, grouped according to gender, age, material security and place of residence of the respondents. The data obtained during the study show that the majority of St. Petersburg students (71%) show only some interest in politics. Only 16% constantly follow the political life of the country. And 13% of respondents are not interested in politics at all. According to the respondents themselves, a third of them (35%) do not participate in the political life of the country. The majority of respondents (60%) participate only in elections. And only 5% of young people consider themselves politically active. Only 3% are members of any political organization. Let us analyze the level of political activity in various subgroups of young people. Thus, young men are somewhat more likely to consider themselves politically active (see Table 1) and vote in elections more often (64% versus 56% of girls). Whereas among girls there are more of those who do not take any part in the political life of society (41% against 30% of apolitical boys). This distribution of responses is not surprising, since politics is traditionally a male area of ​​activity and interests. Table 1 Distribution of answers to the question "To what extent are you included in the political life of the country?" depending on the gender of respondents (in % of the number of respondents) In general, for the array Men Women I am politically active 5 6 3 I take part only in elections 60 64 56 I do not participate in political life at all 35 30 41 Young people aged 17-18 are much less likely vote in elections compared to older respondents (27% versus 70%). This, of course, is largely due to the fact that those under the age of 18 do not have the right to participate in elections. As a result, 65% of the surveyed young people aged 17-18 do not take any part in the political life of the country, compared to 26-28% of older respondents who do not (see Table 2). Underage respondents who are deprived of the opportunity to vote in elections more often than others refuse to be politically active in general, because they do not see other ways of showing political activity. On the other hand, among the youngest respondents, most of all consider themselves politically active - 8% against 4% of activists among 19-22-year-olds and 3% over 22 years old. Table 2 Distribution of answers to the question "To what extent are you included in the political life of the country?" depending on the age of the respondents (in % of the number of respondents) 17-18 years old 19-22 years old 23 years and older I am politically active 8 4 3 I take part only in elections 27 70 69 I do not participate in political life at all 65 26 28 It is interesting to note the dependence of political activity on the academic performance of students revealed in the analysis of the data. It turns out that the better the students study, the less often they vote in elections: from 56% of the excellent students participating in the elections to 59% of the voting good students and 64% of the three students (see Table 3). At the same time, there are more active participants in political life among excellent students (8% compared to 4% of good students and 3% of C students). Table 3 Distribution of answers to the question “To what extent are you included in the political life of the country? » depending on the progress of the respondents (in % of the number of respondents) I study mostly with “excellent” I study with “good” and “excellent” I study with “good” and “satisfactory” I am politically active 8 5 4 I take part only in elections 56 59 64 I do not participate in political life in any way 36 36 32 There is a certain dependence of the level of political activity of respondents on their financial situation. The higher the material well-being of young people, the less often they participate in elections (52% vs. 60% of the middle-income and 67% of the low-income) and more often turn out to be apolitical (39% vs. 36% of the middle-income and 30% of the low-income) (see Table 4). Apparently, dissatisfaction with their financial situation stimulates young people to become politically active. Table 4 Distribution of answers to the question "To what extent are you included in the political life of the country?" depending on the financial situation of the respondents (in % of the number of respondents) many of them lived in other cities or rural areas before entering the university. Analysis of the data showed that the most politically active are residents of small towns (see Table 5). They are more likely to take part in elections (69% compared to 58% of residents of large cities and 50% of residents of rural areas). Also, among the inhabitants of small towns, the least number of those who do not take any part in political life (27% against 37% of residents of large cities and 50% of rural residents). Young people from rural areas showed themselves to be the most apolitical in the survey - half of them do not take part in politics and do not vote in elections. And none of the young villagers interviewed called themselves politically active. Table 5 Distribution of answers to the question "To what extent are you included in the political life of the country?" depending on the main place of residence of the respondents (in % of the number of respondents) I live in a big city I live in a small town I live in a rural area I am politically active 5 4 0 I take part only in elections 58 69 50 I do not participate in political life at all 37 27 50 As expected, patriotic young people turned out to be more politically active (see Table 6). They are more likely to take part in elections (65% compared to 56% of unpatriotic respondents and 51% who did not think about their patriotism) and are less likely to be apolitical (only 29% versus 40% unpatriotic and 47% who did not think about it). The least politically active were those young people who did not think about whether they were patriots. Apparently, politics, like patriotism, are not included in the circle of their interests. Table 6 Distribution of answers to the question "To what extent are you included in the political life of the country?" depending on the patriotism of the respondents (in % of the number of respondents) I can call myself a patriot of Russia I can’t call myself a patriot of Russia I didn’t think about it I am politically active 6 4 2 I take part only in elections 65 56 51 I don’t participate in political life in any way 29 40 47 This study allows us to draw some conclusions. As you might expect, young men are somewhat more politically active than young women. The following main dependencies are traced: the younger the respondents, the better they study and the higher their financial situation, the less often they take part in elections, but the more often they personally participate in political activities. The most apolitical group was the rural youth. Respondents whose main place of residence is the countryside are less likely than their urban counterparts to participate in elections and do not find other ways to display their political activity. Apparently, rural youth have fewer opportunities for political activity and, even moving to cities, are less likely to try to be politically active. The youth of small towns proved to be the most politically active. She often takes part in elections and is an active participant in the political life of the country.

social and political activity of youth public organizations

Baranova G.V., Kostenko B.B.

Academy of the FSO of Russia, Orel, Russia

SOCIO-POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF YOUTH PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS

Baranov G.M., Kostenko V.V.

Academy of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation,

The article substantiates the importance of the development of constructive socio-political activity of youth public organizations. The analysis of the protest activity of youth formations of the modern post-Soviet period is presented. Based on the dynamics of protest activity, the most active youth associations were identified and classified into groups.

Key words: socio-political activity, youth public organizations, protest activity, constructive nature, destructive socio-political activity, dynamics of protest activity.

In article the importance of development of constructive sociopolitical activity of youth public organizations is proven. The analysis of protest activity of youth formations of the modern Post-Soviet period is submitted. On the basis of dynamics of protest activity the most active youth associations are allocated and classified in groups.

Keywords: socio-political activity, youth public organizations, protest activity, constructive character, destructive socio-political activity, dynamics of protest activity.

The formation of Russia as a legal democratic state actualizes the need for the formation of a civil society in it, which, distinguished by a high degree of self-organization, regulates not only its political, cultural, but also economic and social life. This is a society whose stability is supported not so much by the power of state coercion, but by the socio-political activity of the citizens themselves, aimed at solving the problems of transforming society, which is one of the most important conditions for its evolutionary development and predetermines the tendency to strengthen all public associations and the state as a whole.

Modern civil society in Russia is only at the stage of formation. “Democratic institutions as a whole have been formed and stabilized, but their quality is far from ideal. Civil society is weak, the level of self-organization and self-government is low,” says D.A. Medvedev in his address to the citizens of the country.

An increase in the level of socio-political activity, its constructive manifestation, is axiomatically significant for the development of society. Despite the fact that in the country as a whole the degree of civic initiative, self-organization of the population, responsibility leaves much to be desired, nevertheless, the contradictions and opposition of public structures, social state institutions and subjects to power structures are expressed in various forms of disagreement with the position, image and the quality of life imposed on them from above. The growing interest in the problems of the country at the local and state levels indicates the development of democracy in Russia and a certain level of socio-political activity.

of people. At present, there is an objective interest of the state and citizens in the development of socio-political activity, its constructive form and, as a result, the development of initiative and self-government in all spheres of public life, as an institution of democracy.

Based on the analysis of the results of scientific research on this issue, the secondary processing of sociological surveys conducted by the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion, the Analytical Center of Yu. modes, and, consequently, the conditions for the development of society, under the influence of external and internal factors, the forms of manifestation of socio-political activity change, become more complicated, and are supplemented by new ones. This is due to the fact that under different conditions, prerequisites are created that stimulate the growth of certain potentials of people, social groups, generating new stereotypes of behavior, abilities and opportunities. Purposeful initiative sometimes spontaneous actions of subjects (as an expression of socio-political activity) have an ambiguous degree of impact on society, which allows us to speak about the inconsistency of the nature of socio-political activity.

One of the forms of expression of the socio-political activity of people is their protest activity aimed at expressing dissatisfaction, opposing the plans and actions of the authorities, the attitude of citizens to the existing socio-political system, to socio-political institutions, parties, movements, documents, decisions, phenomena and processes, politicians, socio-economic problems, interethnic and confessional relations.

It is important to note that along with numerous types of protest activity that are constructive, peaceful in nature (without material, moral, moral damage, harm to people's health or threats to their lives), which make it possible to reveal existing problems, there is also destructive socio-political activity. It is characterized by negative, conflict, forms of initiative protest activity, the results of which sometimes have unpredictable, destructive consequences that destabilize society, and certainly have a negative impact on the evolution of society. These forms include:

■ concerted boycott of elections;

■ certain types of socio-political protest actions (unauthorized power strikes, blockades, hunger strikes, up to armed conflicts and terrorist acts) that have consequences in the form of material damage, threats to people's health.

In the modern structuring of society, a particularly significant place is occupied by young people due to their demographic characteristics and capabilities. It is the younger generation that is the main driving force of the future state. The future of our country depends on the nature of the vigorous activity of young people, the constructiveness of its impact on the development of society.

Today, as noted by V.V. Putin, “Unfortunately, in the wake of the crisis, a number of problems remain relevant that we could not solve before, I mean aggressiveness, crime, extremism, and national intolerance among the youth. All this, unfortunately, exists, and it is impossible not to pay attention to it.

With the beginning of democratic reforms in the USSR, the proclamation of glasnost, the formation of civil society, social

The political life of the youth noticeably revived and expanded. Voluntary youth organizations and associations of various directions began to form: political, student, human rights, environmental, religious, sports and others. United by common goals, they were actively involved in the socio-political life of the country, putting forward various problems for consideration by the state and society, drawing public attention to them.

Along with various forms of initiative, self-organized, self-governing, creative, innovative activities, the activity of public youth organizations is also expressed in protest actions. Organizations appeared (in which it is young people who represent the main composition), which have an ambiguous, and sometimes anti-state and illegal nature of their activities. Some of them receive financial and other assistance from foreign state and public funds aimed at influencing state authorities and public associations in solving various issues of domestic political life in Russia.

So, on the basis of the illegality of actions that have negative consequences, from 2003 to 2010 the Supreme Court Russian Federation decisions were made and entered into force on the recognition of terrorist and the liquidation or ban on the activities of a whole range of both international and domestic organizations of a radical nationalist persuasion. These include: the interregional public organization "National Bolshevik Party", the movement against illegal immigration (DPNI), the regional public association "National Socialist Workers' Party of Russia" (NSRPR), the interregional public movement "Slavic Union" and others. However, many of them, despite the official ban, continue their activities illegally, initiate various unauthorized protest actions and therefore require constant close attention and control and management from the state.

The need to timely regulate the processes taking place in the youth environment, improve management efficiency to create conditions for the development of its constructive direction, determines the importance of a detailed study of the problem of the origin and development of the protest activity of youth public organizations, the causes, forms and nature of its manifestation.

Currently, a lot of research is devoted to the activities of young people. So, in the works of E.A. Anufrieva, L.A. Gordon, A.I. Kovaleva , Yu.A. Levada, E.N. Smetanina, M.A. Shabanova, E.B. Shestopala, reflects the theory of youth socialization and political adaptation. The concept of youth participation in political processes is presented in the works of such researchers as: S.V. Aleshchenok, P.I. Babochkina, E.A. Grishina, A.A. Kozlova, B.A. Ruchkin and others. "Color revolutions" and youth participation in them are studied in the works of B. Hoffman. Different in nature (positive and negative) forms of youth protest activity, D.I. Aminova, Yu.A. Zubok, and others. However, these studies are mainly devoted to young people in general (as a social group based on demographics). Not enough attention has been paid to the problem of the activities of the youth branches of political parties, socio-political youth organizations, various nationalist,

BARANOV A.A. - 2014

The relevance of the study of the socio-political activities of young people, including students, is due to the specifics of the social status of this group. The level of involvement of the younger generation in political relations largely determines the nature of political transformations in society and affects the stability of the functioning of the political system as a whole.

The youth audience is characterized by the lability of consciousness, manifested in the lack of firmness of life attitudes and the uncertainty of social orientations; transgressivity, i.e. the ability to overcome taboos, stereotypes, constructing a new social reality at the micro and macro levels; extremeness, expressed in maximalism and extremes of individual and group behavior. Thanks to its innovative potential, it updates the socio-political experience for transmission to future generations. From how consciously a young person is included in the socio-political sphere, whether he is able to influence politics, ultimately depends on the possibility of realizing his political interests.

An analysis of the self-identification of the current generation of Russian youth shows that the majority of young people are dominated by a passive type of political culture, nihilism. Such institutions as elections, political parties and organizations occupy one of the last places in the structure of self-identification of this group. The representative participation of young people in state and municipal authorities has significantly decreased. Cannot compensate for the lack of representative forms of creation in the mid-1990s. youth governments.

They are consultative and advisory public groups under the legislative and executive authorities, operating today in about 1/3 of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. However, they do not have a noticeable impact on the implementation of the state youth policy. The representation of young people in self-government bodies of educational and labor collectives is manifested at an extremely low level.

In modern conditions, it is possible to assess the degree of involvement of the age group under 30 in political processes in different ways. On the one hand, Russian youth have a negative attitude towards almost all power structures, negatively perceive the development of the political situation in the country, not seeing the possibility of influencing the political process, therefore they are passive and apolitical. However, this may be due to the increased interest of young people in politics. The socio-economic and political changes taking place in Russian society are seriously reflected in the political behavior of the younger generation.

In the youth audience, current trends in politics are often criticized, acute public issues are intensively discussed, alternative activities are activated (pickets, protest marches, up to participation in various extremist and terrorist organizations). In this aspect, the involvement of the younger generation in political processes (including ignoring participation in them) is presented as one of the forms of protest behavior.

The formation of a politically literate and socially competent young generation is becoming one of the main strategic tasks of the country's development. Since the social positions of the bulk of young people have not acquired a stable form, and the process of forming their own moral convictions (imperatives), which form the core of consciousness, has not yet been completed, the direction of political sentiments often acquires a spontaneous character and depends on the influence of external factors.

In a crisis period, instability as an immanent characteristic of the social status of young people intensifies against the background of economic stratification within the group itself, contributing to the growth of tension and political confrontation. Therefore, interest in the socio-political activity of young people remains one of the priority areas not only of state policy, but also of scientific discourse.

The purpose of this study is to determine the degree of socio-political integration of students, to differentiate the levels of socio-political involvement depending on the structure and specifics of the value-motivational sphere, and to mark the main barriers to the socio-political participation of young people in order to find ways to overcome them.

The methodological basis of the study was the subject-activity approach, which makes it possible to determine the degree of involvement in political processes and the most common forms of political activity of students, to identify factors and motives that form positive attitudes of political participation.

The empirical base of the study was the results of a pilot sociological survey, in which students from several universities in Ivanovo, studying in different directions and profiles, took part (a total of 253 people were interviewed), as well as interviews with representatives of youth political organizations and movements (number of interviews - 6).

Student attitudes towards politics. During the pilot study, the following results were obtained: 61.6% of the students surveyed show interest in political information of a certain direction (news about political events, reports on conflicts, entertainment information, Internet forums on current political topics), take part in elections, are members of political organizations and movements. 38.4% of respondents are not interested in politics or deliberately distance themselves from it, are indifferent to what is happening in the political sphere, have little understanding of political processes and personalities (Table 1).

Thus, most of the respondents are included in the group of active participants in political life, among which women predominate (60.9%). The male audience is less interested in politics and makes up almost 60% of the passive group.

It was also revealed that the nature of the political participation of students depends on the direction (profile) of education. Humanities students are characterized by more active political behavior (67.9%) compared to engineers (54.9%). However, no differences were found in the age groups. The neutrally detached attitude to the manifestation of socio-political activity and the formal implementation of the civil position of bachelors and masters of technical directions and profiles are associated with a lack of knowledge and skills formed by the humanities.

Vocational training in technical universities is currently taking place against the backdrop of a significant decrease in the level of students' orientation towards acquiring humanitarian knowledge. Active educational communication is impossible within the framework of the existing teaching load with the minimum number of hours allocated for teaching the disciplines of the humanitarian block. Under such conditions, students show an inability to systematize and analyze political information, draw adequate conclusions and predict the consequences of social actions/inactions.

Electoral activity of youth. According to the survey, about half of the respondents (49.6%) have never participated in elections, a quarter of the respondents (26%) act as voters extremely rarely (they mostly attend the presidential elections in Russia), 22.7% actively use their suffrage. When analyzing the frequency of youth participation in elections by gender, the following results were obtained (Table 2).

There were no significant differences in the attitude of students to elections depending on the faculty where they study. Approximately the same number of respondents in the humanities and engineers manifest absenteeism. However, it should be noted that among the students of technical profiles, permanent election participants are more represented (Table 3).

When studying the motivational component of the electoral activity of students, the most significant reasons for participating in elections were identified: a sense of belonging to the future of the country, patriotism, and coercion by authoritative persons (Table 4).

Table 4. Reasons for electoral participation of young people, % and ranks

Reasons for voting	%	Ranks
The future of the country is not indifferent	27,3	1-2
This is my civic duty	27,3	1-2
Patriotism	22,7	3
Forcing (parents, university, employer, media, etc.)	13,6	4
I think my vote matters	4,5	5-6
I choose a candidate (party) that can change the situation	4,6	5-6

When ranking causes according to gender identity it was revealed that young people are more concerned about the future of the state than girls (30.8% and 22.2% respectively), about a third of men consider participation in elections as their civic duty (29.3%), for women this figure was lower - only 19.6%. Patriotism, as a factor contributing to the decision to vote in elections, is mainly noted by the female audience (33.1% - girls and 15.4% - young people). The most significant differences among gender groups were manifested in such factors of electoral activity as: coercion by relatives, mass media, teachers, employers and other authoritative persons (98% - men); confidence in the significance of their vote and the chosen candidate/party (95% - women).

Probably, such results are associated with the peculiarities of the psychophysiological formation of the personality in boys and girls in adolescence. Many young men continue to experience a "teenage complex." Young people have a more pronounced ability to abstract, a much wider range of interests, but along with this, they are more helpless and irresponsible in real life situations and need external care. Girls at this age are more independent, prudent and purposeful.

To determine the degree of influence of the media sphere on the political consciousness of young people, relevant questions were included in the questionnaire. The study showed that the Internet has the greatest influence on students - 55.2% (58% - men, 52.7% - women); television continues to be a significant factor - 41.0% (36% - men, 45.5% - women). The least influence in choosing the option of political behavior, according to respondents, is exerted by radio - 2.9% (4% - men, 0.5% - women) and print media - 0.9% (2% - men, 1.8% - women). When answering the question, “from what sources do you get information about political processes, including elections?”, the opinions of the respondents were distributed as follows: almost half of the respondents (46.3%) answered “Television”; 16.3% - Internet (chats, social media, blogs, forums, etc.); 14.4% - press; 10.6% - radio; 9.8% - visual agitation; less than 1% - meetings with government officials, candidates. Thus, the mass media play a significant role in shaping the political position of the youth audience.

Motivation of student participation in political organizations. Joining a political organization is explained by the common desire of people with similar views to unite. From the point of view of the younger generation, participation in political actions, membership in political parties and movements is perceived as a deliberate act that requires certain knowledge, effort, time, therefore, this type of participation is not suitable for everyone.

The motivational basis that stimulates participation in political organizations has its own specifics and depends on the way the subject is involved in the political structure (“spontaneous”, “purposeful”, “old-timers”). Her research was based on data obtained during interviews with activists of youth political organizations. To obtain more complete information about the structure of participation motivation, respondents were asked open-ended questions.

The results of the interviews were the following. The most popular motive for active political participation is the desire for self-development (the satisfaction of private interests). The second most important is the desire to meet new people, the desire for an interesting pastime, communication and participation in joint activities (satisfaction of social interest). Further, in the responses of young people followed the desire to improve the situation in the country, to help others, to benefit society (satisfying the collective interest). For some respondents, collective motivation is quite closely linked to the ideological component, i.e. they see the achievement of a common goal within the framework of a particular political party. As in the case of electoral activity, participation in political organizations is associated with a certain authority. Some students noted as a factor that determines the entry into a political structure, the personality of the party leader, close circle (relatives, friends, etc.). The motives associated with career growth and material wealth turned out to be less significant.

Summing up the intermediate results of the study of the motivational sphere of political participation of students, we can draw the following conclusions. Firstly, the general decline in the interest of young people in political activity did not lead to their absolute political apathy: low, but stable indicators of the participation of young people in the electoral process and politically oriented organizations remain. Secondly, the analysis of the motivation of various forms of political participation shows that the most common motives are collective (the good of society, the situation in the country, caring for those in need). For representatives of the younger generation, a high emotional return is very important. These data must be taken into account in the framework of the state youth policy in order to improve the ways of conscious and purposeful inclusion of young people in political activities.

To enhance the involvement of young people in political processes, emphasis should be placed on expanding educational programs aimed at developing competencies in the field of the basics of organizational and managerial activities, interpersonal communication, political and legal literacy ("schools of leadership", practical seminars, trainings). In educational institutions, it is necessary to organize a discussion platform for discussing and solving problems of youth policy (lectures, conversations, round tables, debate clubs). Within the framework of regional and municipal administrations, it is advisable to create Internet portals focused on informing young people about the most significant youth initiatives, competitions and projects, as well as general civil patriotic actions (rallies, demonstrations, flash mobs) and volunteer events. To satisfy private motives (self-realization, career), youth self-government bodies (student trade unions, youth governments and parliaments, etc.) should be developed and encouraged, contributing to the involvement of young people in political processes.

List of sources

1. Gorshkov M.K., Sheregi F.E. Youth of Russia: a sociological portrait. M.: TsSPiM, 2010. 592 p.
2. Zaslavskaya T.I. Modern Russian society: the social mechanism of transformation. M.: Delo, 2004. 400 p.
3. Zubok Yu. A. Reflection in self-regulation of socio-political interactions of youth // Sociology of power.
4. 2012. No. 2. S. 30-42.
5. Kotova K. A. Participation of youth in youth political organizations as a tool for the development of civil
6. society: evolutionary aspect // PolitBook. 2012. No. 2. S. 21-33.

Kopaeva Ekaterina Vladimirovna

Kotova Ksenia Alekseevna

The article analyzes the activity of student youth in political life. The main factors and motives of the young generation’s involvement in political processes are revealed. The authors pay attention to the analysis of self-identification and peculiarities of the Russian youth’s political orientation. Agreement of collective motives of electoral activity of students and motives of participating in political organizations is noted.

annotation

The article analyzes the activity of student youth in political life, identifies the main factors and motives for the involvement of the younger generation in political processes. Attention is paid to the analysis of self-identification and the peculiarities of the political orientation of Russian youth. The coincidence of the collective motives of the electoral activity of students and the motives of participation in political organizations is noted.

Keywords

youth, students, political activity, political process, political participation, electoral, elections, state youth policy, political interests, mass media, youth, students, political activity, political process, political participation, electorate, elections, political interests (449), mass media

Title in English

Political activity of student youth: problems and tendencies

Organization

Unknown

As for the political activity of young people, in its most general form it is understood as “a form of social activity implemented in the sphere of national and international politics; one of the fundamental elements of human behavior in political life." See: Kapto A.S. Political activity // Sociology of Youth: Encyclopedic Dictionary. M.: Academia, 2009. S. 12.

The classical typology of M. Kaaze and A. Masha is based on the level of activity. They distinguish five groups (of what?) depending on the prevailing forms of participation: 1. Inactive. Representatives of this category either do not participate in politics at all, or, in extreme cases, read newspapers and can sign a petition if they are asked to do so. 2. Conformists. Get more involved. Some of them may even participate in political campaigns. But, for the most part, they avoid direct political involvement. 3. Reformists. Conformists participate more actively, and they can also use legitimate forms of political protest, such as demonstrations and boycotts. 4. Activists. Most actively participate in political life. How? 5. Protesters. In terms of their level of activity, they are similar to reformists and activists, but differ from them in that they practically do not participate in the political process in conventional forms. Kaase M., Marsh A. Political Action Repertory // Political action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies / Ed. by Barnes S., Kaase M. Beverly Hills, London, 1979. P. 153-155. .

Some researchers distinguish between "autonomous" and "mobilized" political participation. Mobilized participation is the involvement of citizens in politics against their will: The individual is included in political life, becoming a hostage to the will of leaders, authorities and their art of manipulating people. Such participation excludes the possibility of citizens to influence the actions of political forces in order to resolve their own problems. The mobilization type of management is one of the most effective ways to maintain and exercise power in authoritarian and totalitarian regimes. But the manifestation of mobilized political participation is not uncommon in democracies, when mobilization is of a milder nature, does not limit the physical freedom of citizens, but directs their actions in the right (for the authorities) political direction. See: I.M. Dzyaloshinsky. Media and social activity of youth. M.: Media. Information. Communication.#3. 2012.

L. Milbras identified three groups of forms of political activity: "spectator activity" - playing the role of an object of influence of political incentives, voting, etc.; "transitional activity" - includes acting as an object of political incentives, voting, initiating political discussions, trying to persuade others to vote in a certain way; "gladiator activity" - participation in a political campaign, playing the role of an activist of a political party, playing the role of a member of the core of the party or participating in the development of its strategy, accumulation Money, playing the role of a candidate for any leading position in the political sphere, holding leadership positions in government or parties. Milbrath L.W. political participation. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965.

Domestic sociologists distinguish such forms of political participation of young people as: voting (the main and most massive aspect of political participation in competitive systems), participation in political campaigns, personal contacts with politicians, participation in local political life, participation in protests (conflict participation). ) and others. See: Goncharov D.V., Goptareva I.B. Introduction to political science. M., 1996. p. 10. In Western society, for example, participation is most common in the form of cooperation between citizens and structures of state or local government. And in Russian? - the question naturally arises. The choice of a certain form of participation is determined by the traditional socio-cultural context of a given society and the nature of the institutionalization of participation in the processes of planning and decision-making. See: ibid., p. 180

The last paragraph does not correspond to this paragraph, it is rather to the first. political activist reform party

As for the characteristics of youth as a subject of political activity, three main features can be distinguished here: the first feature is associated with the incompleteness of the formation of one's own subjectivity in socio-political relations. Youth is still becoming the subject of social and political relations. As a result, there are many age restrictions on her political rights, enshrined in law. At the same time, manifestations of discrimination against young people on the basis of age can often be found. Age, therefore, plays the role of a significant stratification basis and is an important factor in the participation of young people in the socio-political life of society. The second feature is determined by the specifics of the social status of young people. It is characterized by instability, mobility of young people's positions in the social structure, their relatively low social status, and limited social ties. This puts young people in an unequal position with economically and socially more advanced groups and, as a result, many social conflicts with political overtones; groups. See: Eliseev S.M. Political sociology: textbook. St. Petersburg: Publishing house "Nestor-History", 2007.

UDK 323.2-053.6

E. A. Belikova Political participation

youth: analysis of the problems of political activity

The article defines the political activity of young people, identifies the main factors and motives for the inclusion of the younger generation in the political life of the country. Attention is paid to the analysis of problems and tasks of the State youth policy in the Russian Federation.

Key words: youth, political activity, political participation, electoral participation, State youth policy.

Currently, one of the urgent problems of Russian society is the low political activity of young Russians, which is unacceptable for the harmonious development of the state.

In order to understand in detail the essence of political activity and political participation, it is necessary to define the concept of "activity" in general.

B.M. Bim-Bad in the Pedagogical Encyclopedic Dictionary defines activity as an active attitude of a person to the world, the ability to produce socially significant transformations of the material and spiritual environment based on the development of the socio-historical experience of mankind1. In the explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, S. Ozhegov and N. Shvedova define the meaning of the adjective "active" as active, energetic, developing, intensely effective2.

Based on the above concepts, one can interpret political activity as a set of actions of individuals aimed at changing or improving the socio-economic order, achieving certain socio-political, national and ideological goals.

The book by D. Newstrel and K. Davis "Organizational Behavior" defines such a concept as reactivity, which means reaction to events, adaptation to changes and mitigation of their consequences3. In the context of political science, we can conclude that activity is the psychological and political self-movement of a citizen, excited by the actions of the authorities. Accordingly, there are:

Positive or negative reactions of people to impulses emanating from the political system of society, from its representatives and institutions, not associated with the need for high activity;

Activity associated with the delegation of political powers, that is, the electoral behavior of people;

Participation in the activities of various political and public organizations;

The performance of political functions within the framework of institutions that are part of the political system of society or act against it;

Direct activity within political movements or outside them, directed against the existing political system and having as its main goal a radical restructuring of it4.

In this article, we will consider the features of political activity and the problems of including such a social group as youth in the political life of the country.

In accordance with the Strategy of the State Youth Policy in the Russian Federation, approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated December 18, 2006, the category of youth in Russia includes citizens of Russia from 14 to 30 years old5.

At present, the youth of the Russian Federation is 39.6 million young citizens - 27% of the total population of the country. Such statistics allow us to talk about youth as the most important social and electoral resource of society.

In the near future, it is this category of the population that will determine the mechanisms for managing society, the priority and direction of development of the country's foreign and domestic policy. Therefore, the lack of interest of young people in the public and political spheres is so dangerous and disastrous for Russian society.

The factors that determine the characteristics of the political activity of young people can be combined into two groups. The first group is formed by objective factors, which include:

Age features (lability of political consciousness, high susceptibility to manipulation, due to the social status and socio-psychological transition of this social group, lack of political experience);

Unstable financial situation (lack of work for young students, low income at the start of a professional career for the working part of it);

Phase of socio-economic development6.

The second group consists of subjective factors, including: the degree of trust in the institutions of state power; degree of confidence in the future; degree of satisfaction with their lives; the presence or absence of interest in politics, etc.

According to European experts, young people are less and less investing their energy in the socio-political sphere of society; not active enough at the local level; the activities of socio-political organizations to involve young people in the systemic relations of modern society are ineffective.

It is quite obvious that the activity of young people, their civic and life position, the desire to participate in government decision-making is a guarantee of national security.

However, the practice of holding elections at various levels shows that the activity of the young voter has recently been declining. As a rule, voters aged 50 years and older participate in the elections on a regular basis. At the same time, the activity of women is about 5% higher than that of men. The desire to participate in elections among people of the middle and older generation, as a rule, is associated with responsibility brought up in past years, formed by a civil position. The youth is not in obvious opposition to the whole institution of elections in our country. Its political activity, if not equal to zero, is far from ideal.

Speaking about political activity, it should be noted that it can be of two types: participation in political activities (membership in a party, campaigning, own political career) and participation in the political process (appearance for elections and informed voting)7.

The most clear and revealing indicator of political activity and inactivity of the population is participation in elections.

Most political scientists and specialists in social psychology, analyzing the electoral behavior of such a specific part of the population as youth, distinguish four types of it:

Traditional type (conformist). Motives of political activity: example of parents, habit, desire to be "like everyone else";

protest type. Motives for political activity: dissatisfaction with the current situation, youthful maximalism, the desire to attract attention;

rational type. Motives of electoral activity: the desire to change the situation for the better, awareness of one's own responsibility for the decisions made;

Apathetic ("none") type. It is characterized by "active political passivity", the certainty that nothing will work anyway.

The last type of the above classification continues to lead in Russian reality. Politics for youth is not the most important field of activity. She is more interested in personal life and professional self-realization. Moreover, this situation with electoral passivity has become unmanageable8.

According to official data, only 42% of the population aged 18-35 participated in the 2003 parliamentary elections, while 52% of the population aged 18-35 participated in the elections to the State Duma on December 2, 2007. Thus, the percentage of non-participation in the elections remained relatively low - 48%. The statistics of the 2011 elections, reflecting the quantitative indicator of the turnout in the elections of young people from 18 to 30 years old, was not given by the Central Election Commission. This fact makes it impossible to track the dynamics of youth involvement in the political process over the period from 2007 to 2011.

Based on the above data, we can conclude that the socio-political activity of Russian youth is undulating and unstable, since only large-scale events or fateful events lead to an increase in activity. At the same time, youth is not a simple future of the country, which is a natural process, but most importantly, youth is the quality of this future9. Therefore, wave activity can hardly lead to the required quality. It seems that the quality of political leadership, political elite, political decisions, etc. will be determined by the periodic involvement of young people in the political process, and not by their constant activity and constant political activity.

Obviously, since the low percentage of electoral participation of young people

persists, then in order to develop mechanisms for increasing the political activity of this group of the population, it is necessary to understand the reasons for political passivity.

There are key arguments of young Russians who ignore the social and political life of the country. However, these arguments have changed in recent years. If earlier respondents most often complained about the uselessness of their participation (29%) and insufficient qualifications (27%), then at present the dominant argument is the lack of interest in the political sphere in general (36%). In second place is confidence in the futility of efforts (25%), in third place - insufficient qualifications and lack of opportunities to engage in politics (18-19%).

Significantly less often, the reasons include the absence of socio-political organizations with further career prospects (7%), worthy leaders (5%), confidence that the president can handle everything himself (4% in 2011 against 10% in 2007). d.), the conviction that politics is a "dirty business" (2% in 2011 against 6% in 2007)10.

However, it is impossible to speak unequivocally about the established trend of ignoring the political life of the country by young people, as well as about the fact that the apathy of modern youth is of a total nature. An integral part of political activity is also interest in the political life of the country, in this sense, the figures indicate precisely that young people have an interest in politics.

More than a third of young Russians (34%) regularly watch news on television, 60% do it less frequently. Every tenth (11%) is keenly interested in analytical programs about the current political and economic life of the country, and another 51% of the respondents watch these programs occasionally. More than a quarter of young Russians (28%) constantly read printed periodicals (newspapers, magazines). Considering that many people receive information from the Internet, it becomes obvious that today's youth are "in the know" of what is happening both in the country and

and beyond 11. Another thing is that today's youth, in addition to politics, have many other areas and areas of application of their energy and activity. This is education, and the creation of a family, and the choice of a profession.

In the context of the weak development of self-organization of young people, the role of the guardianship function of the state is great. Therefore, it is natural that the majority of young men and women expect the state to solve many of their problems. At present, the development vector of the State Youth Policy is quite clearly defined. Modern conditions of modernization of society, growing demands on human capital have allowed the State Youth Policy Strategy to become a tool for including young people in the political life of the country. This requires all participants in the process of social development of youth and the youth themselves to develop and consistently implement approaches focused on the direct involvement of young people in solving their own problems and national tasks.

However, the State Youth Policy aims at the successful socialization of young people, the formation of a young Russian as a person, as a professional, but not the formation of political consciousness, instilling interest in politics and political processes among young people. The emphasis of the state on the problems of youth is certainly important, but not exhaustive due to the emotionality and protest moods of the young audience. The most recent protest activity was caused by the 2012 presidential elections and the 2011 parliamentary elections.

According to Levada Center expert Natalia Zorka, more than 60% of the protesters on Bolotnaya Square and Sakharov Avenue are young people under 40 years old. More than 70% - with higher and incomplete higher education. One in four is a leader or owner of their own business. 12% of the protesters are students. 70% of the protesters share liberal, democratic views, 24% profess leftist views12.

This position is due to the desire of young people to become independent, the opportunity to change the existing political or socio-economic order, to free themselves from any restrictions.

In the Strategy of the State Youth Policy until 2016, there is no adequate perception of youth as a special political object and subject, continuity and consistency in the development of the political process are not visible, and schemes for effective interaction of state institutions with youth and socio-political youth organizations are not proposed.

Insufficient attention is paid to the analysis of the level of socio-political activity of young people and the understanding of the urgent need to identify the conditions and effective technologies for its development in the specific historical space of the regions.

Despite these factors, the state should form a system of positive social values ​​in society to create a favorable moral and psychological atmosphere, motivate young people to participate in political processes. If the work of political parties in this direction is not effective enough, then the future of the country will be in the hands of politically unprepared personnel. Therefore, it is important to find the right approach and find effective methods in working with young people.

Based on the foregoing, the relevance of developing a set of measures to form the political and legal culture of young people, overcome their political passivity, and build a dialogue between the younger generation and public authorities becomes obvious. It is necessary to instill values ​​not by manipulation, but by "open conversation" on a voluntary basis.

The experience of building social programs aimed at the legal education of young people, the formation of a legal culture, increasing political activity, in Russian practice is still small. All levels of government, from state to municipal, should deal with this issue.

Currently, in the regions, the desire of the authorities to motivate young people for active political action is fragmentarily visible. In this regard, the Leningrad region demonstrates an interesting practice. Every year the Regional Government and the Youth Policy Committee organize the international educational forum "Ladoga". The purpose of the forum is to identify and support young talents in the framework of the implementation of priority areas of the state youth policy.

For several years, the regional authorities have been successfully applying the mechanisms of grant support to participants. Experience proves that such support for youth project activity is a universal and effective means for developing political activity and involving civil society institutions in solving regional problems.

All this will form in the future stable conditions for the self-organization of young people, the development of initiatives that meet the scale of the tasks facing the state, and the improvement of social relations.

Only knowledge of their rights and obligations, timely information, presence of motivation will allow young citizens to see their direct impact on the political life in the country.

And politics, in turn, will become an instrument of positive change.

1 Bim-Bad B.M. Pedagogical encyclopedic dictionary. M., 2002. S. 14-15.

2 Ozhegov S., Shvedova N. "Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language". M., 1992.

3 Newstrom D., Davis K. Organizational behavior / Glossary of the book. SPb., 2000.

4 Minnikov V.K. Theoretical approaches to the study of political activity in various social sciences. URL: www.superinf.ru

5 Strategy of the State Youth Policy in the Russian Federation. URL: http://www.newparlament.ru/docs/view/2138

6 Gaifullin A.Yu., Rybalko N.V. Diagnostics of the development of political activity of youth // Bulletin of VEGU. 2011. No. 6(56).

7 Kostrova E. Youth parliamentary movement as one of the forms of youth self-government // On elections. 2008. No. 4.

8 Teplyashin I.V. Electoral and legal activity of youth and the formation of Russian legal statehood. Materials of the interregional scientific-practical conference. Krasnoyarsk. October 26-27. Krasnoyarsk, 2007.

9 Youth of new Russia: lifestyle and value priorities: analytical report / RAS; Institute of Sociology. M., 2007.

10 Gorshkov M.K., Sheregi F.E. The youth of Russia: a sociological portrait. M., 2010.

11 Podkhomutnikova M.V. Political activity of youth as an important component of the political process in Russia // Theory and practice of social development. M., 2012.

12 Gudkov L.D., Dubin B.V., Zorkaya N.A. Youth of Russia. Moscow School of Political Studies. M., 2011.