CC BY
84 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017
POSITIVE FUNCTIONS OF POLITICAL CONFLICT
The article considers the positive functions of the political conflict. The political field of the study is the most topical in the modem world nowadays. There is a great need in the study for positive functions of political conflict as it is the least researched in fundamental and applied fields. The key notions of the description are politics and political power that are the main component of the most developed theoretical concepts, namely, the Marxist, behavioral, systemic and structural-functional theories. The conflict as a phenomenon is defined on the bases of two conflictological paradigms: antagonistic and systemic. The antagonistic paradigm is based on the works of L. tazer, G. Simmel, R. Darendorf and other conflictologists and sociologists who interpret the conflict through clash and confrontation. The systemic paradigm is based on the Unified Theory of Conflict by V. Svetlov and the scientific studies of V. Semenov and M. Nevzorov this theory). Correlating the concepts of politics, power and conflictological approaches that are engaged in the study, the role of the conflict in politics is determined and the concepts of political conflict are defined. On the basis of the main fundamental works and the findings of research on conflictological paradigms, positive functions of social conflict were identified. These functions are extrapolated to the political field of the society; their application to real politics is described and backed up by historical examples interpreted in a number of scientific monographs and articles.
As a result, positive functions of the political conflict have been singled out according to antagonistic and systemic paradigms. It is concluded that for a more complete study of the role of a political conflict there is necessasity in a dialectical unity while considering the components of the political conflict, i.e. parties of the conflict and the political project. There should be studied components as interdependent and interconnected structural elements, i.e. as system of the conflict. In the terms of an eclectic logical construct is made a conclusion about a two-part nature of the political conflict.
Keywords
political conflict, positive functions of political conflict, policy, power, Marxist approach, behavioral approach, structurally-functional approach, system approach, conflictological paradigms, antagonistic paradigm, system paradigm, United conflict theory, group integration, group consolidation, group self-identification, system stabilization, system evolution
AUTHOR
Alexander S. Fedorov
Student, Faculty of History and Social Sciences, Russian State Pedagogical University named after A. I. Herzen. 48, Embankment of the river Moika, St. Petersburg, 191186, Russia. E-mail: AlexSerFedorov@yandex.ru
1. Introduction
1.1. Relevance of the problem
The phenomenon and specific cases of political conflict have always been relevant for study by researchers of the global humanitarian and social scientific communities.
5 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 Scientists and public figures either used to substantiate the necessity and benefit of such a conflict for the party they took side of or condemn the any manifestation of this phenomenon and even the tendency to it.
Over time both science and society abandoned this understanding of a political conflict. A political conflict and a conflict in general as a phenomenon was primarily associated with violence and destruction in a society. Scientific communities have tried to abstract from any side of the conflict, seeking to study and describe the conflict as a whole. The numerous scientific fundamental and applied research, the monographs and articles showed that the conflict is a multifunctional phenomenon having both negative and positive features. In society there are doubts and objections to this ambiguous statement but in the scientific community it has become universally recognized over time. On the basis of this statement conflictological theories began to be created and worked out. Nowadays two paradigms of the conflict have formed and almost any conflictological concept can be attributed to them. The first concept interprets the conflict as antagonism as crash and struggle; the second one understands the conflict as a system, e.i. the structural interconnectedness of its constituent elements. In the works devoted to the political, economic, ideological, cultural and other social areas and conflicts in them there has been growing tendencies to abstract from the sides in conflicts and the desire to describe various cases from different points of view.
Nevertheless, when describing the conflict in general, the conflict as a phenomenon, in the study, are given the theses that are relevant exclusively to conflictology. With rare exception theoretical studies of sociology and / or biology can be used. When the question of a narrower area of research such as a political conflict the categories, works, methods of political science and interdisciplinary sciences are involved in the research rather than conflictology. The definitions, interpretations and classification system of conflictology are used rarely and only in a particular case when a very specific analysis is required. The same can be said about Economics, Cultural Studies and other social sciences and the Humanities. Their theoretical and hermeneutical bases are interdisciplinary with the theoretical and hermeneutical base of conflictology. Hence, there is no ability to bring fundamental and applied research on social conflicts into an integrated single common system, so it is consequently impossible to carry out a clear comparative analysis.
However, developing of approaches to social conflicts common basis of approaches to social conflicts it would be possible to compare not only intra-regional conflicts and conflicts of different social spheres. In the world's humanitarian and social scientific communities the both fields are considered to be interrelated. But when such an important part of their functioning and interaction as a conflict is actualized the research, as a rule, focuses on only one aspect of the conflict. The related conflicts are informally tabooed. And such concepts as political-economic, economic-ideological or ideological-cultural conflict almost never occur. We can talk about the principle of "Occam's razor" and the unnecessary multiplication of entities. Isn't it worthwhile to absolutize these presumptions in this particular case?
According to the research work "Positive Functions of Political Conflict", there is a necessity of comprehensive and detailed interdisciplinary study in any conflictological field as well as of integrated approach to research the phenomenon of conflict as a combination of antagonism and the system.
6 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017
2. Methodological Framework
2.1. Foundations of methodology
Political science: methodological approaches to politics and power: Marxism, behavioral concept, systemic and structural-functional theories.
Conflictology: conflictological paradigms: antagonistic (conflict as collision, confrontation) and systemic (conflict as a system, interconnectedness of structural elements).
Sociology: research related to the political and / or conflictological sciences supporting some scientific provisions and theses of individual scientists.
History: research related to the political science and / or conflictological sciences backing some scientific provisions and theses of individual scientists.
2.2. Logical structure
The object of our study is the phenomenon of political conflict in terms of various methodological approaches.
The subject of this work is the positive functions of the political conflict.
The aim of the study is to identify the interpretation of the positive functions of the conflict by applying various methodological approaches.
To achieve the goal means to solve three problems:
1) Define the policy and power in terms of different approaches to political science;
2) Identify approaches to understanding the conflict;
3) Identify the positive functions of political conflict at the domestic level.
The personal contribution of the author to this study is to examine the phenomenon of political conflict through various scientific approaches, to generalize its positive functions and to justify their stabilizing and constructive feature in the political system and political process.
2.3. Methods of research
Analysis of the sources of scientific information: monographs, selected works, articles, author's abstracts, etc.
Generalization: theory of politics and power, conflictological paradigms, positive functions of political conflict on the basis of these paradigms.
Comparison: antagonistic and systemic approaches to the phenomenon of conflict, positive functions of political conflict within these two approaches.
Classification: the positive functions of a political conflict according to the authors-supporters of the interpretation of the conflict as a collision and as a system.
Systematization: correlation of Marxist, behavioral, systemic and structural-functional concepts with antagonistic and systemic paradigms of a conflict.
Analogies, inverse interpolations and extrapolations: evidence-based analogies based on the distribution of the positive political conflict functions derived from antagonistic and systemic approaches to the political conflicts of the past.
Deduction and Induction: logical transition from general theses of antagonistic and systemic conflictological paradigms to the particular theses of the approaches mentioned above; logical conclusion from the particular positive functions of the political conflict according to the paradigms mentioned above to general inter-paradigmatic understanding the positive role of the political conflict.
2.4. Theoretical development of the research topic
The theoretical base is represented by the works of political scientists, conflictologists, sociologists and economists. They are "Manifesto to the Workers' Party" by K. Marx and F. Engels, "State and Revolution" by V. Lenin, "New Aspects of Politics" by C. Merriam, "Political Theory: What Is This?" by J. Catlin, "Power and Politics: basis of
7 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 political research" by G. Lassuel, "Political System" by D. Easton, "On the notion of «political power»" by T. Parsons," Formation and essence of the system approach" by IV Blauberg and E.G. Yudin. These works helped to uncover such concepts as politics and power within Marxist, behavioral, systemic and structural-functional approaches. "Functions of Social Conflict" and "Conflict: Social Aspects" by L. ^zer, "Contemporary Culture Conflict" by G. Simmel, "Elements of Social Conflict Theory" by R. Darendorf, "Universal Evolutionism" by N.N. Moiseev, «Esperanto for conflictologists (on the way to the creation of the Unified Theory of Conflict)» by V.A. Semenov, «The Universal Model of Conflict» by V.A. Svetlov, These works were used to represent two conflictological paradigms, their correlation with the categories of power and politics in various scientific approaches and the identification of positive functions of a social conflict, as well as articles and monographs to comment on scientific theories, concepts and examples of the positive role of the conflict extrapolating to the political sphere.
In particular, these are the articles "The Popular Front: Conceptual Foundations, Historical Experience" by V.A. Trofimova, "History of CDU Development" by G. Bukhshtab, "Russia-NATO Relations: From Partnership to Hard Opposition" by А. P. Koshkin, A. E. Khmelov, "Two-party system of the USA: continuity and renewal" by V.V. Sogrin, "Why we will soon miss the cold war" by J. Mirsheimer, monograph "Portugal: the era of change" by N.M. Yakovleva, P.P. Yakovleva, V.M. Tayar et al., As well as an article by M.V. Nevzorov "Ethnopolitical conflict on the territory of the partially recognized state of Kosovo: the experience of modeling the situation."
3. Results
3.1. Politics and power: definition of concepts
Finding of the scope and subject of a political conflict implies the interpretation and description of such categories as politics and power.
3.1.1. The Marxist approach
The Marxist approach suggests understanding politics and power as the organized violence of one class to suppress the other one (Marx, Engels, 1980). The sources of power are seen by Marxists in capital and wealth (Lenin, 1986). It is suggested that political power belongs to the owners of the means of production, who use it to consolidate their economic position, i.e. key position in the sphere of material production and the concentration in their hands of the greatest possible share of social wealth. But at the same time, Marxist theory does not reject the need for power in general, since its impact must be turned against the ruling class, and the resources and strength of the state should be used at the initial stage of building a communist society (Lenin, 1986). Thus, Marxist theory outlines a very contradictory antagonistic society. Both contradictions and antagonism concern all spheres of social life including political one as well.
3.1.2. Behavioral concept of power
According to behavioral theory power is represented as the dominant of the human psyche (Kathleen, 2008), the desire for which largely determines the behavior of people, and politics creates a balance of these aspirations, the political system is understood as the "market of authorities" (Anipkin, 2008). Politics is a kind of game "will to power". In the opinion of the supporters of behavioral theory, human nature itself needs, therefore, the creation of power structures. At the same time, the desire for freedom from these structures, expressed in life, for example, in riots against the authorities, is not excluded. The aspirations to power and freedom are equivalent and natural
8 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 (Dahl, 2008). Between these aspirations is set a kind of market relations, in other words, the very "political market".
3.1.3. Systemic and structural-functional approaches
Systemic and structural-functional approaches define politics as a system interacting with other systems of society (economy, social and cultural spheres) to maintain their viability (Mickiewicz, 2012).
Thus, D. Easton defines the political system as a set of those interactions through which values are authoritatively brought to society. The environment is nothing more than a society whose life includes other spheres not only the political sphere. Responding to requests of the society in any way the political system receives the support of the society. Thus, the political system provides its own existence, maintaining stability and balance (Blauberg, Yudin, 1973)
Power according to these concepts is a mediator, that allows the political system to function being symbolic and a generalized tool governed by norms (Parsons, 1997).
3.2. Conflict and its place in politics: a clash and a system
Political conflict is a type of social conflict (Repieva, 2015). Hence, there is legitimacy of extrapolating a social conflict to a political conflict.
There are two main approaches to understanding the conflict: an antagonistic approach that explains the conflict as mutual rejection, clash and struggle, and a systemic interpretation of the conflict in the context of the system and its development.
3.2.1. The antagonistic paradigm
Understanding a conflict as a clash, confrontation, confrontation dominated in conflictology for many decades, science its origin. The founder of conflictology, L.A. Kozer, defined the conflict as "a struggle for values and claims for a certain social status" (Kozer, 1968). According to A. Kozer, the goals of the parties to the conflict are "to neutralize, weaken, damage or destroy the rival" (Kozer, 1968). An American economist and sociologist K. Boulding proposed to understand the conflict as "a situation of rivalry in which the parties realize the incompatibility of possible positions and each side seeks to take the position that is incompatible with the position the other side wants to take" (Boulding, 2012).
The similar definitions are given by Russian researchers interpreting the conflict as a clash and confrontation. According to a philosopher and political scientist Yu.G. Zaprudsky a social conflict "is an explicit or implicit state of confrontation between divergent interests, goals and trends in the development of social actors and processes in public life, a direct or indirect clash of social forces on the basis of the existing social order" (Zaprudsky, 1992).
The variety of concepts and interpretations of the conflict as collisions can be expressed most clearly by the word "antagonism" (an acute irreconcilable struggle). Thus, the definition for a political conflict according to the antagonistic paradigm can be formulated as follows: a political conflict is a clash of parties (social groups), the cause of which are mutual rejection, claims and struggles caused by different interests and values. The goals of this confrontation are to obtain the power resources, powers and benefits or certain possibilities for their distribution.
It is the context that the works of K. Marx are mentioned in conflictology. His concepts of politics and power were described in the previous some paragraph of this work (3.1.1. The Marxist approach). Marx and his followers saw the main cause of the revolution in the conflict between social productive forces and production relations (Marx, Engels, 1959). Marx calls the relations of production "... the last
9 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 antagonistic form of the social process of production ..." (Marx, Engels, 1959). Here is the conflict that has a pronounced form of antagonism.
A certain antagonism is present in behavioral theories and represents a clash of aspirations to the power of various individuals. But here it is important to make clear that antagonism exists within the political system that balances these aspirations to power, and in which the aspirations are somehow embedded (Merriam, 1996). Therefore, we cannot talk about the concepts of power and politics of the behavioral concept in political science solely in the context of understanding conflict as a collision.
The antagonistic paradigm does not correspond to the theses of the systemic and structural-functional approaches. Within these theories, conflict is built into the logic of the system and its structure. The dynamics of the conflict is the continuation of social processes rather than the destructive deformation and confrontation of elements (Solomatina, 2012).
3.2.2. System paradigm
This approach has been recently developed and it is actively used by scientists and researchers at present (Semenov, 2003). In the opinion of the proponents of this approach the definition of conflict as a system and as a developing relationship allows to argue a conflict as one of the natural conditions for the existence of interacting entities, that help to develop the society, social organization and social evolution (Moiseyev, 2003). This point of view is close to the ideas of L.A. tazer (Cozer, 2000), G. Simmel (Simmel, 2006), R. Darendorf (Darendorf, 1994).
However, understanding a conflict as a system needs a broader definition of the conflict, its embeddedness into the social, biological and psychological realities. For such an approach, an interdisciplinary character and an appropriate theory is required to structure, generalize and compile the findings of various sciences to some degree studied the aspects of conflict as a phenomenon. Nowadays, a Russian scientist V.A. Svetlov has been developing the Unified Theory of Conflict (ETK), who has made an attempt to combine system analysis and elements of graph theory, probability theory, dynamic analysis, game theory and hyper games (Semenov, 2003). Defining the conflict as an imbalance of the system, Svetlov suggests describing it according to the characteristics of the scientific theories mantioned above (3.2.1., Antagonistic paradigm).
According to Svetlov the conflict is "a form of self-regulation of the behavior of systems, is the search, creation of new forms of behaviour and transition from unjustified forms of behavior to new ones to achieve their internal goals" (Svetlov, 2001). And only conflict self-reflexivity gives the system the opportunity to implement a qualitative transition. In the field of politics, a political conflict should be understood as an imbalance of the system, caused by negative feedback between actors, the reason for which is due to different attitudes towards a particular political project. Moreover, its role also lies in the qualitative development, in this case, of the political system.
And if this approach is correlated with the above-described concepts of politics and power (3.1 Politics and power: the definition of concepts), then the positions of the systemic and structural-functional theories fit the categories of systemic understanding of the conflict and partly some statements of the behavioral concept.
The first two approaches, defining the political sphere as one of the systems (Blauberg, 1973) of society, built into interaction with other systems (Parsons, 1997), in the study of social conflict suggest focusing on the search and description of the components of conflict interaction. The conflict, according to the system and structural-functional approaches is a mobile phenomenon, but it also has stable elements (the object of conflict, the composition of its participants, the level of tension
10 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 of conflict interaction, etc.), which are a structure, have certain functions and have systemic integrity (Solomatina, 2012). These theories do not determine the role of conflict as a form of self-reflexivity of the system and like the ETK they consider this phenomenon in a system context.
The behavioral theory is correlated less with two previous ones as far as approach to conflict as a system. There is no clear conception of conflict in behavioralism that is why in our judgments we proceed from the theses given in the first paragraph. According to G.D. Lassuel politics is a "market of authorities" within which clashes of aspirations to the power of individuals occur (Anipkin, 2008). There is a definite conflict in the antagonistic understanding of this phenomenon. But at the same time these clashes take place within the political system that balances the aspirations to power. According to the behavioral concept it maintains this balance and consists of political dynamics and development (Anipkin, 2008).
3.3. Positive functions of political conflict: theories and examples
3.3.1. Positive functions of political conflict: antagonistic paradigm
Positive functions of the conflict in the antagonistic paradigm are identified and described in the work "Functions of social conflict" by L.A. Cozer, a German and American sociologist, a founder of the theory of conflict. Our choice was due to the fact that L. Cozer studied all the works had been written on the subject (the main one is "Conflict" by German philosopher and sociologist G. Simmel), and he tried to generalize the functions of social conflict correlating them with scientific theories in sociology, economics and political science (in particular, the Marxist and structural-functional approaches). L.A. Cozer took into account the contradictions associated with the theories. (Vasilyeva, 2015)
Referring to theses given in L. Cozer's "Functions of Social Conflict" (Cozer, 2000) and to the writings of other authors the following positive functions of social conflict are singled out:
1) Group formation and integration;
2) Establishment and maintenance of group identity;
3) Maintaining the integrity of the social system;
4) Group storage;
5) "Safety valve" or the creation of substitute institutions;
6) Activization of social life;
7) Mechanism of adaptation of norms to new conditions.
Positive functions of political conflict understood as a collision are in its constructive and stabilizing influence on the group. Conflict can create a community since individuals are in confrontation with a common enemy. They realize that being united they can achieve their goals, consolidate and create a group (Vasilyeva, 2015). As for political parties they are united in a single party or coalitions. Unions and blocks are created between the countries. Antagonism helps self-identification processes and understanding the boundaries of your community and the alien area to be aware of selfness while struggling and being in collision. (Vasilyeva, 2015). A national factor is manifested in ethnopolitical conflicts, that unites people due to common identification based on their ethnicity. At the same time, the confrontation strengthens ties within the group convincing its members of the need for this association (Vasilyeva, 2015). Political leaders in the years of wars and trouble call on the people of the country to unite, to act as a united front. In the society there is consolidation. Social life also intensifies (Vasilieva, 2015), patriotic movements are created, people of different nationalities, religions, political opinions have a lot of in common, they share common values. The conflict is able to save from acute forms of struggle, because by expressing mutual claims the accumulation of internal tension can be
11 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 leveled, that will protect social relations from "explosion" (Vasilyeva, 2015). In politics this thesis has long been adopted and the confrontation of certain political forces is translated into a peaceful form through rivalry in elections, internationally public discussions, bilateral meetings, compromises and agreements.
In the antagonistic paradigm there is an emphasis on the role of the conflict for the group to create and preserve the group. Tracing back to political history one can recall the unification of leftist parties of the National Front in France in 1936 (Trofimov, 2014), or the CDU/CSU (Christian Democratic Union / Christian Democratic Union) in Germany, which first entered the elective race in 1956. (Bukhshtab, 2007). The political struggle and common goals and values served as an integrative factor. A military-political bloc of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) united the United States, Canada and Europe in 1949 to protect the countries from Soviet influence is a telling example of interstate cooperation. (Koshkin, 2016).
The role of conflict in society as a coherent structure in general terms is also reduced to maintaining the society and its steady development (Vasilyeva, 2015). Antagonism sets certain rules with which participants in social interaction are forced to reckon. The order is created and changes fit the order anyway. At the domestic level this function can be illustrated by bipartisan system of the United States where the competition between the Republican and Democratic parties over many decades has created a kind of political tradition, such values and relations that have become the "rules of the game" that set the formal and informal framework for the political process (Sogrin, 2003). At the international level there was integrity of the system clearly demonstrated at the second half of the 20th century, when a bipolar world order and a confrontation in the cold war between two superpowers, the Soviet Union and the United States, created a relatively stable order. The actions of any state fitted into it, world politics was constituted by global antagonism (Mearsheimer, 2008).
3.3.2. Positive functions of political conflict: a systemic paradigm
The explanation of the conflict and the logic of its development through the system needs understanding of this phenomenon as a form of its self-regulation. It is important to note that within the systemic paradigm attention is not focused on individual groups but rather on the integral interconnectedness of the system elements as individuals, political movements, states or alliances of states.
Political history gives us many examples of realizing the function of conflict. The first one is so-called Carnation Revolution in Portugal on April 25, 1974 and the second one is the ethnopolitical conflict on the territory of Kosovo, a state of limited recognition from 1989 to 1999.
The significance of the Portuguese military coup is described in detail in the collective monograph "Portugal: the era of change" (Yakovleva, Yakovlev, Tayar, Palagin, Ermolieva, Konstantinova, Astashenkov, Udovichenko, 2014). The overthrow of the New-State regime by the clandestine army organization Captains Movement and subsequent political changes led to Portugal's liberalization and democratization: compliance with the Constitution and the rule of law, guarantees of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the citizen, the principle of separation of powers, multi-party system, regular elections to all authorities and, if necessary, national referendums, etc. (Yakovleva, Yakovlev, Tayar, Palagin, Ermoliev, Konstantinov, Astashenkov, Udovichenko, 2014)
The case of Kosovo is considered within the Unified Theory of Conflict in an article by M. V. Nevzorov's "Ethnopolitical conflict in the territory of the partially recognized state of Kosovo: the experience of modeling the situation" (Nevzorov, 2013). In this paper the author shows that thanks to the conflict, "the system was transformed
12 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 into a new quality" (Nevzorov, 2013). Namely, Kosovo became a parliamentary republic: free elections started, a state government was established. Conditions for dialogue between supporters and opponents of the independence for the region were also created. Through democratization, opponents received a platform for meetings and negotiations with a view to a peaceful settlement of the Kosovo issue (Nevzorov, 2013).
Thus, the evolution of the political system is expressed in the change of the political regime, the form of government, the territorial administrative system. Moreover, a positive qualitative change in the system is not just a matter of complicating the power structures, increasing the number of official and unofficial actors in the political process, and multiplying formal and informal ties between them. The positive qualitative change of the system is expressed first of all in increasing the level of efficiency of its functioning and interaction with the external environment. In other words, the new organization of the political system and political process must be built in such a way that their self-reproduction is more optimal than it was before, and the responses to the needs and demands of the society are more adequate and effective comparing to previous system states, other social systems interactions and relations with other political systems (in the case of interstate cooperation). For example, the global political process is more constructive and mutually beneficial.
3.4. Conclusion
Having defined politics and power from the point of view of various methodological approaches of political science and having correlated the interpretations with approaches to the conflict phenomenon (3.1 Politics and power: definition of concepts), positive functions of political conflict have been identified by applying two paradigms: antagonistic and systemic (3.2. and his place in politics: a clash and a system).
In the first paradigm the most attention is given to the integrative, strengthening and preserving value of the conflict. The conflict in the antagonistic paradigm has a positive value for the system. It contributes to the preservation of its integrity and the stability of the changes taking place in it. In politics these functions are reflected in political associations and cooperation of various parties, blocs, states and unions (3.3.1 Positive functions of political conflict: antagonistic paradigm).
In the systemic approach within the Unified Theory of Conflict, the positive role of the conflict is described through the evolution of the system. The issue of the utility of this phenomenon for an individual party or the group is practically not illuminated. The positive significance of the conflict is precisely elaborated for structural integrity as a form of self-reflexivity. It allows the system to make qualitative changes. The political aspect of this statement is expressed in the transformation of political systems, systems of relations between actors participating in the political process inside the countries and at the interstate level. Radical reforms resulted in social confrontations that are a medium of changes, revolutions, coups and other conflicts. These systems become more complicated and more complex. In the case the positive effect of the political conflict prevails it is more effective from the point of view of the self-reproduction of the system, its interaction with the external environment, other social systems as well as other political systems of a higher-level political process (3.3.2. functions of political conflict: a systemic paradigm).
The positive role of the political conflict is two-fold: for political actors, it has a constructive, integrative, identification, preserving and stabilizing significance; for political systems it has strengthening and evolutionary value. At the same time
13 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 positive functions at both levels are interrelated and interdependent, they represent a dialectical1 unity of the partial and the whole.
3.5. Relevance and novelty of the result. Prospective and significance of the conducted research
The relevance of the result of this study lies in a deeper and more detailed study of political conflict positive functions of through the interdisciplinary combination of a number of humanitarian and social sciences including the interrelated and coordinated use of fundamental theoretical positions and methods of political science, conflictology, sociology and history with the involvement of the factual basis of the latter and its various scientific interpretations in the analysis of specific cases of the political conflict.
The novelty of the work is that the analysis of specific cases of this phenomenon through the above-mentioned interdisciplinary combination is a potential new option for evaluating its functional effectiveness 2 . In other words, the operationalized combination of categorical methodological apparatuses of political and conflictological sciences foster a systematized analysis of political conflicts, the introduction of new classifications according to the certain criteria. An attempt was made to consider comprehensively the role of the political conflict as a bi-directional impact on its actors and system.
The perspective and significance of the conducted research are presented to the author in the further systematization of the analysis of the political conflict and its evaluation through functional effectiveness. To do this, it is necessary to continue studying the positive and begin to study the negative functions of the political conflict. It seems that the consideration of cases of a political conflict for a more complete study should be carried out in the context of the above-described integrated approach, through understanding its role as a bi-directional impact on its actors and system.
1 Obviously, the listed positive functions of a political conflict (3.3.1 Positive functions of a political conflict: an antagonistic paradigm) (3.3.2 Positive functions of a political conflict: a systemic paradigm) are always collectively present in each conflict case and complement each other. Thus, the stabilization of the political system may not contribute to its progressive development, but, on the contrary, to hamper this process and even have the opposite effect. Determining whether a particular positive function has been implemented in a particular political conflict, how it is related to the implementation of other positive functions, is a topic for the development of new methods for conflict analysis and conducting relevant research.
2 Certainly, such a variant of describing the significance of a political conflict, as an examination of its functional results, can hardly be full, if we analyze its results only through the most obvious changes that this or that political has brought to politics and society. How can you determine, for example, whether the evolution of the political system has taken place? In one of the some paragraph (3.3.2 Positive Functions of Political Conflict: Systemic Paradigm), we have argued that a positive qualitative change in the system may be indicated by its more efficient functioning, primarily in interaction with society. But how to measure this efficiency? After all, changes can only be external. Creation of a design of democracy, modernization does not mean that the country has reached a qualitatively new level of development. Unfortunately, such topics are the subject of numerous political and social manipulations and even speculation in the scientific community. Therefore, in order to interpret the above indicators, it is necessary to develop variants of its channeling by creating analytical algorithms for the study of social conflict in order to avoid a new ideology of the humanities and social sciences. In order to determine the nature and significance of certain changes with high accuracy, it is also necessary to involve the exact sciences and use existing social development indices (for example, the Policy Activity Index or the Quality Index of Public Administration — Governance Matters) and develop new ones. Thus, the analyst of political and in general any social conflict will be more complete and systematized.
14 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 This issue needs a separate and more thorough study. It seems that, at the same time, it is necessary to use the existing developments in the field of political, conflictological, sociological and historical sciences, and to seek new opportunities for their interdisciplinary combined integration in the study of political conflict.
In the long run, similar work will be done to systematize the analysis of economic, ideological, cultural and other types of social conflict for further fundamental and applied research in these areas.
REFERENCES
Anipkin, M. A. (2008). Social and system integration of power: constructing indicators for sociological analysis // Power. №11. Pp. 78-82. - URL: https://goo.gl/fGJ4pY
Blauberg, I. V., and Yudin, E. G. (1973). Formation and essence of the system approach. Moscow: Science. 271 p. - URL: https://goo.gl/3Uu6qH
Boulding, K. (1962/2012). Conflict and Defense: A General Theory. New York: Harper & Brothers. 349 p. - URL: https://goo.gl/VikPUr
Bukhshtab, G. (2007). The history of the CDU development // Actual problems of Europe. №1. Pp. 81100. - URL: https://goo.gl/UA9NbC
Dahl, R. (2008). Political theory: truth and consequences. Political theory in the XX century [text]: a collection of articles. Moscow: Territory of the future. Pp. 137-155. - URL: https://goo.gl/P2pWNK
Darendorf, R. (1965/1994). Elements of the theory of social conflict // Sociological research. №5. Pp. 142-147. - URL: https://goo.gl/ZVPhvf
Kathleen, J. (2008). Political theory: what is it? Political theory in the XX century [text]: a collection of articles. Moscow: Territory of the future. Pp. 107-136. - URL: https://goo.gl/P2pWNK
Koshkin, A. P., and Khmeleva, A. E. (2016) Russia-NATO Relations: From Partnerships to Hard Opposition // Power. №12. Pp. 25-32. - URL: https://goo.gl/6sfb8G
Kozer, L. (1956/2000). The functions of social conflict (Ionin, L. G., and Tolstov, A. B.). Moscow: Idea-press. 205 p. - URL: https://goo.gl/rex2wT
Lenin, V. I. (1918/1986). The State and the Revolution. Selected works: in 4 tons. Moscow: Politizdat. Vol. 2. 678 p. - URL: https://goo.gl/UOzfE
Marx K., and Engels, F. (1848/1980). Manifesto of the Communist Party. Selected works: in 3 volumes. Moscow: Politizdat. Vol. 3. 630 p. - URL: https://goo.gl/DEyU7Y
Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1859/1959). To the criticism of political economy. Compositions 2nd edition: in 13 volumes. Moscow: Politizdat. Vol. 13. 771 p. - URL: https://goo.gl/sWG82h
Merriam, C. (1925/1997). New aspects of politics (fragments) // Anthology of world political thought: in 5 volumes. Moscow: Thought. Vol. II. Pp. 176-184. - URL: https://goo.gl/e4faev
Mickiewicz, V. (2012). Political system within the framework of the system approach // Diplomatic service. 2012. №5. Pp. 53-57. - URL: https://goo.gl/yn8rSy
Mirshemer, J. (2008). Why will we soon miss the cold war // Russia in global politics. №6. Vol. 6. Pp. 8-35. - URL: https://goo.gl/YW8Qt4
Moiseev, N. N. (2003). Universal evolutionism (positions and consequences). Selected works: in 2 volumes. Moscow: Taydeks Co. 265 p. - URL: https://goo.gl/TBgRNJ
Nevzorov, M. V. (2013). Ethnopolitical conflict in the territory of the partially recognized state of Kosovo: the experience of modeling the situation // Proceedings of the Russian State
15 Modern European Researches No 5 / 2017 Pedagogical University named grom A.I. Herzen. No. 161. Pp. 122—126. — URL: https: //goo.gl/pd5A51
Parsons, T. (1963/1997). On the notion of "political power". Anthology of world political thought: in 4 volumes. Moscow: Thought. Vol. 2. 832 p. — URL: https://goo.gl/k2XfWS
Repieva, A. M. (2015). The phenomenon of conflict in political research: the concept, types and phases of the course of political conflict // Conflictology. №1. Pp. 17—23. — URL: https: //goo.gl/h4Zx4h
Semyonov, V. A. (2003). "Esperanto" for conflictologists (on the way to the creation of the Unified Theory of Conflict) // Proceedings of the Russian State Pedagogical University named from A. I. Herzen. №5. Vol. 3. Pp. 37—49. — URL: https://goo.gl/8QyTK3
Simmel, G. (1918/2006). Conflict of modern culture. Selected works [text]: a collection of articles. Kiev: Nika-Center, 2006. 437 p. — URL: https://goo.gl/hbCtce
Sogrin, V. V. (2003). Two-party system of the USA: continuity and renewal // Polis. Political studies. No. 3. Pp. 164-170. — URL: https://goo.gl/SsD7tW
Solomatina, E. N. (2012). Theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of social conflict // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 18: Sociology and Political Science. №4. Pp. 70—85. — URL: https://goo.gl/x6BLVX
Svetlov, V. A. (2001). Analysis of the conflict. St. Petersburg: Rostock. 512 p. — URL: https://goo.gl/2aeX9Y
Svetlov, V. A. (2014). The functions of L. Cozer's social conflict and the unified theory of conflict // Scientific works of SWORLD. Vol. 16. № 1. Pp. 8—11. — URL: https://goo.gl/2y1cSV
Svetlov, V. A. (2014). The Universal Model of Conflict // Scientific Works of SWorld. Vol. 20. № 2. Pp. 4— 9. — URL: https://goo.gl/qmwSTf
Trofimov, V. A. (2014). Popular Front: Conceptual Foundations, Historical Experience // Bulletin of the Moscow State Regional University. №5. Pp. 40—49. — URL: https://goo.gl/HYyeYh
Vasilyeva, S. I. (2015). L. Kozer on the social conflict // Almanac of modern science and education. №4. Pp. 54—58. — URL: https://goo.gl/U8mZgy
Yakovleva, N. M., Yakovlev, P. P., Taiar, V. M., Palagin, M. A., Ermol'eva, E. G., Konstantinova, N. S., Astashenkov, A. A., and Udovichenko, S.V. (2014). Portugal: the era of change. Moscow: Publishing house of the Institute of Latin America of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 234 p. — URL: https://goo.gl/6p3UfV
Zaprudsky, Yu. G. (1992). Social conflict (Political analysis) [Text] (the author's abstract of the doctoral
dissertation). Rostov State University. Rostov-on-Don. 41 p. — URL: https://goo.gl/jvBLm1
