TRADITIONAL AND NEW THEORIES OF ELITES

ანოტაცია

Modern theorists of elitism seek to argue that the urgent requirements of high professionalism, extraordinary skills and knowledge, effective leadership, etc. do not contradict the democratic principles of the social order, but on the contrary, according to the same theory of behaviorism, the rapid institutionalization of the profession gives rise to all untalented and average, absolute automation of the work of political and deprives administrative elites of creativity. Elitists offer their own, original understanding of leadership, representative democracy, social equality and justice; justify the idea of pluralism of elites, the mutual balance of various social forces, the concept of consensus of social interests as a prerequisite for the development of democracy.

The relevance of the research is determined by the following factors:

• a significant number of theoretical ideas of Western supporters of the elitist approach to social and political processes are still little known to our social scientists, and therefore are not properly used by analysts;
• the lack of vision of a holistic picture of the sociological and political theory of the elites will not only stop the development of the country, but also leave room for unscientific, ideologically biased views and assessments.

The purpose of the article is to investigate both classical and modern concepts of elitism, in particular: «theories of democratic elitism», the concept of pluralism of modern elites, «consensus unity of elites», neocorporatism. In order to achieve the set goal, it is assumed: to distinguish the political elite from other social elites, to analyze the genesis and evolution of elitist ideas in political thought, to determine the role and functions of elites in the conditions of current political transformation.

The practical significance of the article lies in the proof that the process of formation of elites is a purely hereditary, natural and necessary process in the history of any nation.

The degree of theoretical development of the topic is determined by the works of widely recognized scientists such as G. Moska, V. Pareto, R. Michels, M. Weber, K. Schumpeter, K. Mannheim, K. Popper, A. Gouldner, A. Giddens, etc.; and some domestic scientists, such as V. Lypinskyi, N. Ostrogorskyi, M. Drahomanov, M. Hrushevskyi, and others.

As a result of the implementation of the assigned tasks, conclusions were established: first, the ruling class is people who should be the highest manifestation of citizenship, the driver and conscience of society. Secondly, the real guarantee of successful state-building is a patriotic elite uncompromisingly devoted to society. Thirdly, the activity of the elite is an «optional» compliance with the requirements of morality, that is, where it is possible. It means the constant manifestation of responsibility or, as M. Weber said, the possession of «ethics of conviction», «ethical public», the presence of the qualities of «politician by vocation».