Содержание
1. Географическое положение США
2. Экономика США
3. Население США
4. Религия США
5. Политическая власть в США. Характер и исторические этапы
6. История образования государства
7. Список литературы
The geographical position of the USA
The continental part of the country extends from ocean to ocean across the central part of the North American continent. United States share a border with Canada in the north and with Mexico in the south. Alaska is the extreme north-west of North America and is separated Беринговым strait from the extreme north-east Russia. The Hawaiian Islands (50-th state) - an archipelago of 24 islands, located in the central part of the Pacific Ocean and is separated from the mainland USA 4 thousands of kilometers of Pacific waters. All the largest islands: Hawaii, Кахулави, Oahu, Maui, Kauai - mountainous and low. In the north-west of the atolls of the Hawaiian Islands Crown underwater volcanic mountain range and are the highest in the land of the volcanoes. The total area of 9.36 million square kilometers.
Bank of North America is washed by the waters of the three oceans: The Atlantic, Arctic and Pacific. The sea is deeply divided eastern and northern coast of the mainland, to a much lesser extent - its west coast.
The Atlantic Ocean forms off the coast of North America sea and gulfs, deeply вдающиеся in the land. Some of them are located within the mainland, the shoals, others are deep depressions with plots which continues to bend the bottom. The greatest width of the mainland sandbank reaches on the distance from the coast of the peninsula Florida to Land. Almost entirely within the bays are St. Lawrence.
At the south-eastern coast of the mainland обособляются two deep-sea basin. The Gulf of Mexico, almost isolated from the ocean Florida peninsulas, Yucatan and the islands, is a depression, formed in the Mesozoic with depth in the central parts of more than 4000 m. The Caribbean Sea, separated from the ocean connection Antilles, appeared in the Neogene. The depth of the Sea exceed 7000 m; on the other side of the islands in the Atlantic Ocean, the neck of Puerto Rico reaches the depth of 8440m.
Around the Atlantic coast in the narrow, deeply вдающихся in land bays high tides. In the Bay of Fundy tides reach their maximum height on the ground (18 m), in the strait of Гудзоновом - 12 m, and the coast of Hudson Bay - only 4-5 meters. At the south-eastern suburbs of North America is the greatest in the world system of warm currents is the Gulf Stream, providing a significant impact on the natural conditions throughout the North Atlantic Ocean and adjacent continents.
Waters of the Arctic Ocean, The омывающие north-east and the north coast of the mainland, constantly have low temperature. Межостровное Баффина sea washes the eastern coast of the islands Land and Devon and the south-east of the island of Элсмир. The narrow straits sea Баффина is associated with the most northern from all of the Arctic seas - the Sea of Lincoln. The western part of the arctic coast of North America washes окраинное Beaufort sea.
The geographical position of the USA affects the soil-plant zone, they as well as the terrain and climate, are replaced in the меридиональном direction. The north-east are mixed forests located on the soddy-podzolic soils. Area of broad-leaved forests at the красноземах and желтоземах is located to the south. And the south-east this is an area of subtropical pine forest. For the South Florida is characterized by the tropical rainforest and mangroves. The Central and the great plains are located on fertile soils. These territories are used mainly under arable land and pastures. The Cordillera For, as for all high mountains are characterized by a distinctive vertical zoning. The coniferous mountain forests are gradually replaced by alpine meadows. Sometimes in these forests sequoia occurs. In Alaska is dominated by tundra and forest-tundra, on the southern territory - taiga. In the country a great number of picturesque places, created a lot of parks nature reserves. In Alaska, and CORDILLERA saved the wild fauna. However, most of the country's forests is of artificial nature. These forests in the main are planted on the second, or even third circle in place previously cut depleted. The entire forest constitute about 30% of the entire territory of the country.
Economy of the USA
The United States is the world's greatest economic power, measured in terms of gross national product (GNP). The nation's wealth is partly a reflection of its rich natural resources and its enormous agricultural output, but it owes more to the country's highly developed industry. Despite its relative economic self-sufficiency in many areas, the United States is the most important single factor in world trade by virtue of the sheer size of its economy. Its exports and imports represent major proportions of the world total. The United States also impinges on the global' economy as a source of and as a destination for investment capital.
The country continues to sustain an economic life that is more diversified than any other on Earth, providing the majority of its people with one of the world's highest standards of living.
The United States is relatively young by world standards, being barely more than 200 years old; it achieved its current size only in the mid-20th century. America was the first of the European colonies to separate successfully from its motherland, and it was the first nation to be established on the premise that sovereignty rests with its citizens and not with the government.
In its first century and a half, the country was mainly preoccupied with its own territorial expansion and economic growth and with social debates that ultimately led to civil war and a healing period that is still not complete. In the 20th century the United States emerged as a world power, and since World War II it has been one of the pre-eminent powers.
Although the United States still offers its residents opportunities for unparalleled personal advancement and wealth, the depletion of its resources, contamination of its environment, and continuing social and economic inequality that perpetuates areas of poverty and blight all threaten the fabric of the country.
The United States of America is a highly developed industrialized country. Shipbuilding, electronics, automobile industry, aircraft industry, space research are highly developed in the States.
Each region of the United States has characteristics of its own due to the differences in climate, landscape and geographical position.
Great Lakes, Atlantic Coast, Pennsylvania, New Jersy are biggest industrial regions of the country.
The United States has a lot of mineral deposits or resources such as coal, gold, silver, copper, lead and zink. The south, especially Texas is rich in oil. The coalfields of Pennsylvania are rich in coal. There are plenty of coal mines.
Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska is the richest farming region of America and it is known as the Corn Belt. The land is fertile and well watered. They grow mostly corn and wheat there. Much livestock is also raised here.
There is a lot of fruit raising area. For example, California oranges, grapefruit, lemons, as well as other fruits, wines and vegetables are shipped all over the States and to other parts of the world. The most important crops grown in the States are also tobacco, soy-beans, peanuts, grapes and many others.
There are a lot of large and modern cities, but a great proportion of the country consists of open land dotted with farmhouses and small towns. The usual average town, in any part of the United States, has its Mam Street with the same types of stores selling the same products. Many American residential areas tend to have a similar look. As to big cities their centres or downtowns look very much alike. Downtown is the cluster of skyscrapers immitations of New York giants.
New York City is the first biggest city of the States. Its population is more than eight million people. It is a financial and advertising business centre. It is also a biggest seaport of the Hudson River.Industry of consumer goods is also developed here.
Chicago with a population of more than three and a half million is the second largest city in the USA3t deals in wheat and other grains, cattle meat processing and manufacturing. Other big cities are Huston, an oil refining and NASA space research centre, New Orleans, a cotton industry centre, Los Angeles with Hollywood, Phyladelphia, a shipping commercial centre, Detroit, a world's leading motor car producer and many others.
3 US population
The USA is one of the major states in the world (fourth place on the territory of the third population). According to the 2010 live here 309 469 203. The population of the United States, or Americans, is a mixture of various ethnic and racial elements. There are representatives of various nations, The исповедуются practically all world religions, use all the most common languages.
The U.S. population represents a relatively young ethnic education. However, it was in the process of quite a long and difficult process - domestic, cultural, ethnic and other interactions, as well as through the mixing of the descendants of all races.
According to the 2010 population in the United States is estimated at 310 million people, including 11.2 million illegal migrants, tentatively living on the territory of the state. About 82% of the US population reside in the territories of the city type, i.e. directly in cities or in the suburbs. About half of all the inhabitants of the country lives in cities with populations in excess of 50 thousand inhabitants.
In the year 2010 in the United States, the population of 9 cities of more than 1 million people (without taking into account the suburbs), including 3 cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago) have the status of mega-cities of world importance. In fact, the importance and significance of the many medium-sized and large cities more, due to the presence of the majority of them have developed "mother country" - the urban agglomerations, surrounding the city. For example, in the United States there are 52 urban agglomerations, whose population exceeds 1 million people. It should be understood that the data on the number of metropolitan areas may vary slightly in mind the peculiarities of counting.
4 Religions in the USA Religion plays a fairly large role in the United States. Believers call themselves about 88% of the US population; it is much more than in most developed countries of the world. According to various estimates, from 21 to 41% of US residents attend church at least once a week.When conducting US state censuses, the question of religious affiliation is not asked; therefore, information about the number of believers in the United States was obtained as a result of surveys conducted by non-governmental organizations and may vary slightly depending on the source.The most common religions in the US:Christianity - about 78% of the US populationAtheists or agnostics - about 15% of the US populationJudaism - about 2% of the US populationIslam - about 1.5% of the US populationBuddhism - about 0.8% of the US populationHinduism - about 0.4% of the US populationMost believers in the United States are Christians. They are dominated by Protestants - about 51% of the US population (about 158 million people). The second largest Christian church in the United States is Catholics, about 25% of the US population, or about 75 million people. In third place are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons), approximately 1.7% of the US population, or about 5.5 million people.For Christians of the USA, there is a large number of denominations.The percentage of Christians among the US population is declining, in 1990, about 86% of the inhabitants of the United States of America called themselves Christians, in 2001 - about 78.6%, now - about 78% of US residents. Judaism in the USA The second after Christianity in the prevalence in the US religion is Judaism. About 16% of Jews living in the United States attend the synagogue at least once a month.Every sixth American Jew eats only kosher products.There are more Jewish believers in the Northeast and Midwest than in the South and West.In recent years, interest in Judaism has increased among American Jews, although in general among US Jews, the percentage of atheists is higher than the average in the United States of America. Islam in the USA The third most common religion in the United States is Islam.Many of the slaves brought to America from Africa were Muslims. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, many people from the Arab regions of the Ottoman Empire immigrated to the United States, most of whom also professed Islam. In 1915, the first US mosque was built in Maine.A significant increase in the number of Muslims in the United States occurred at the end of the twentieth century, mainly due to an increase in immigration to the United States from traditionally Islamic regions: Pakistan, the Arab countries of southern Asia, etc. Buddhism in the USA Buddhism is the fourth most common religion in the United States. Most of the Buddhists in the United States are Asian Americans, but there are many Buddhist supporters among other US ethnic groups.Buddhism appeared in the USA in the 19th century, when immigration from East Asia began in America. The first Buddhist temple in the United States was built in San Francisco in 1853 by Chinese-Americans.In the eighties of the XIX century, Chinese immigration to the United States was restricted by law, but approximately in these years the number of immigrants to the United States from Japan increased, and at the beginning of the twentieth century from Korea. The number of Buddhists in the United States grew.At the end of the 19th century - the beginning of the 20th century, interest in Buddhism among the US intelligentsia increased significantly.One of the most famous US Buddhists in our time is Hollywood actor Richard Gere. 5.Political power in the United States. Character and historical stagesThe theme of political power - one of the central in the study of political history. Research the results obtained by specialists in the field of political history, and in other branches of historical knowledge, largely depend on how they determine the nature of the studied or in the field of view of political power, and what methodological positions of its research. Needless to say that the theoretical and methodological views on political power in our historical science on the modern stage in connection with the radical socio-political and seriously changed. But this is quite an understandable and natural updated often has a spontaneous character, at least, I don't know any substantive discussion, where it had been delivered and discussed (with the achievement of real theoretical results) This is an important topic. As a consequence, its lighting with new positions in the modern national studies (not only the historical) is accompanied by costs, among which the most serious.
In this article the comprehension of the new theoretical approach to the historical study of political power, and the main part of the article will be devoted to such an approach to the analysis of the nature of the political power of the US and its contents on the main stages in the history of this country. I believe that this approach can be used, or will be useful in the study of political history and other western countries in the new and newest time. Before I turn to the presentation I used theoretical approach and received on the basis of the research results, The brief assessment of American political power in the domestic and foreign (American) literature.
The study of domestic американистов soviet period differed from each other, among them were very superficial and very serious, which in the development of a number of specific issues remain scientific value today. But all of them had been inherent in common (fortunately, today had lost her identity as a rule) ideological installation - the superiority of soviet socialist democracy over the American bourgeois and interpretation of the latter as the dictatorship of the capitalist class. In the post-Soviet period, Russia extended evaluation of the opposite varieties, including the adoption of that power in the UNITED STATES belongs to the people, and the crucial role in its administration of plays a middle class.
Perceived it, and some professional. Popular was the view that the institutions and rules of the American sample (the separation of powers, the legal state, checks and balances, federalism, etc.) guarantee the adoption of exemplary democracy. As you can see, the use of in estimates of American political power has not disappeared, but a positive is that we now have their competition, and not the monopoly of any one.
In the United States there are several basic points of view on the American political power.
The first of them, matching with the national ideological doctrine that proves that the USA are exemplary democracy. The main characteristics of American democracy recognizes the people's sovereignty, The democracy, the rule of civil society in relation to the state, political pluralism and the separation of powers and federalism.
Second, the opposite point of view, claims that the American political board is The oligarchic. Its representing the small group (but from time to time, as it was in the 30s or 60s of the XX century significant influence) left-wing and scientists, proving that real power in the USA belongs to a narrow ruling class or elite [1].
The third common point of view considers the American political power as the pluralistic. According to this position, in America contends many social and political groups, the interaction which gives rise to a real political power.
The fourth point of view considers the American political governance as a hybrid, in which the present and democracy, and the elitism and pluralism.
Recourse to its own analysis of American political power be Prefaced as estimates of state and public authorities, formulated by the authoritative representatives of the contemporary Russian society of knowledge. They are remarkable, since the show what major changes (in comparison with the Soviet period) occurred in the domestic social sciences, always providing and have an impact on the historiography.
In the published in 2001, the Institute of state and law of the Russian Academy of Sciences fundamental Legal Encyclopedia" gives the following definition of the state, as is well known, the core and the main component of the political power:
"The State is a legal form of organization and functioning of the political power... In the legal understanding of the state - the state sovereignty means that the state of public power is supreme, it introduced in the legal framework, to a greater or lesser extent restricted the freedom of citizens - participants of the state-legal communication" [2].
Thus, the state appears as a product of the treaty of citizens of this society, independent role and separate functions in society. The question of which group or class of citizens is dominated by the public authorities, was withdrawn, and together with it is dropped and the class approach to the state, although the presence thereof is not denied.
In the most senior seems to labor the synthesis of modern Russian political scientists provides the following definition:
"The State is a set of interrelated institutions and organizations, governors of the society; link in the political system of society with the Authority. The State has sovereignty, i.e. the power over the specific politico-geographical space, establishes a system of law. Having a monopoly on violence, it forces the universal enforcement of laws, and generally provides protection of the existing order" [3
In this definition, the state appears as an independent institution, acting in the interests of society as a whole, and not of any one class. The functions of the state included only those which contribute to social harmony.
I cannot agree fully with one of the contemporary evaluations of state power, but I do not consider satisfactory in the Soviet period The Marxist-leninist concept.
If the latter was the politico-economic view on the state, separated from the realities, the two listed modern assessments of state power lies seem to believe, The functional components in the activities of the modern democratic states of the West. Without denying the values of these components, I object to their absolution and propose, taking fully into account the politico-economic, legal, political approaches, based in the American political power and its main component - states located in the center of my attention, and the historical approach, i.e., to explore how this authority has responded to the requests and the will of those or other classes and social groups in those or other specific historical periods.
Based on this approach, I came to the following an overall evaluation of the American state. Since the outbreak of the present day American state has acted in bourgeois society, the fundamental values of which (private property, the market economy, social and political rivalry of different social groups, the separation of powers, the rule of law and a number of other) endorsed his majority, including layers.
Existing in a society and protecting its values, the American state, even if they are not and not as the domain of the economically dominant class, could not be in nature bourgeois. As the bourgeois, it becomes, since the bulk of the people shared his bourgeois principles, it supports, sees no alternative to it, is involved with the electoral process in the formation of its leadership.
For the American state of one of the most important functions that affect its essence was, and still is, the integration and agreement of different, primarily large, social interests. The implementation of this function is only possible if the state socio-political and institutional autonomy. But this autonomy is not a guarantee that the state is equally all social classes and groups. In the United States, as well as in any society, the presence of those or other individuals and social groups of the Economic and elite benefits gives them the greatest potential influence on the power of the state and the most use it in their interests. Therefore, in order to identify the nature of the American public and in a broader sense of the political power of the most important task is the identification of the measures of different social groups, as well as the majority and the minority of society.
For the study and indicate that the measures are very important, in my opinion, the three categories, are widely used by all of the social sciences is a democracy, pluralism and elitism.
The category of democracy helps to determine the impact on the political power of the majority of the society. It should be noted that democracy today is interpreted by different schools обществознания, primarily in political science, in different ways, and I, taking into account the different definitions of democracy, however, stick to the classic its understanding. In this understanding of democracy is tantamount to the will of the majority, and in the United States, its most чеканная language belongs to Abraham Lincoln, "rule of the people, by the people, for the people".
The category of pluralism helps to examine the degree of influence on the political power of the different social groups, among them the upper, middle and lower economic classes, black and white races, men and women, as well as the various religious denominations.
Finally, the category of is useful to determine and indicate the impact on the power of the upper layer of the society.
Consideration of American political power with the help of these three categories and under their three angles will help as it seems, closer to a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of the nature of the American political power. In the historical study, it is important to take into account that the ratio of democracy, pluralism and at different stages was not the same and each of the historical stages should be given its own characteristic. You can highlight five such major historical stages:
1) 1607-1776 years - stage of the genesis of American political power;
2) 1770-1810 The 1990s - stage its first radical transformation;
3) 1820-1860 The 1990s - the second stage of the radical transformation;
4) 1870-1920 The 1990s - stage of conservation;
5) Since the 1930s to our days - modern phase, which includes a variety of evolutionary changes and innovations.
1607-1776 The 1990s
The Colonial Period American political power since the beginning was characterized by the development of representative government, which translated in the activities of the elected assemblies. But what was the relative weight of the representative governance and how it was DEMOCRATICALLY? These two issues have consistently caused sharp disputes researchers. All the historians admitted that the colonial political power has had a significant impact as the English political traditions and political will of the English monarch and parliament. Historians also agree that with the end of the 17th and 18th centuries British intervention in political control has increased, as reflected in the increase in the number of Royal colonies. Eight of the thirteen colonies became the royal, three were proprietary, and two - Rhode Island and Connecticut - corporate. In only two small business the colonies power was completely elective, in all other provinces of the Representative Assembly, shared it with others, who are appointed by the British monarch or the owners of the colonies.
Formally, the power in the royal and proprietary colonies embodied such почитаемую in England mixed model of governance, сочетавшего theoretically three start - aristocratic and democratic. If you use feature of one of his contemporaries, the power of the colonies "in the governor, representing the king, was the monarchic, represented by the Council - the aristocratic, in the person of the House of Representatives or the representatives of the people - the Democratic" [4]. But the ratio and the real value of these three components have had serious differences from England (where they were embodied in the monarchy, the House of Lords and the House of Commons).
The key figure in the management of the colonies was the governor. The governors of the royal and proprietary colonies (below it will be only about them) possess the fullness of the executive power, as well as maintain extensive legislative powers, first and foremost possess the right of absolute legislative veto the decisions of the colonial assemblies, as well as the right of their convening and dissolution. Finally, the governors have the fullness of the judiciary: created the colonial courts, appoint judges of different levels and executors of judicial decisions, granted a pardon and amnesty [5]. Judging by the number of concentrated in their hands the powers were the governors of something like absolute monarchs within the limits of their colonies. But in reality they were severely limited to already for the reason that it was secondary: all governors were appointed from England or the monarch or owners.
As the second component of the American Board of mixed opposed the colonial councils. They were appointed by the governors and approved in England (the exception in Massachusetts, where the Council elected lower chamber and was approved by the governor and Pennsylvania, where the Council was not at all). Tips have linked both the executive and legislative powers: on the one hand, they were like ministerial cabinets with governors, helping them in all the cases, on the other hand, they acted as the upper house of the legislative branch, having the right of veto against decisions of the lower chambers. Councils are also helped in the governors of judicial decisions. In general, compared to the British House of Lords tips appear as part of the "monarchist", rather than an independent "aristocratic" branch.
If such a large number of powers were "монархическую" thread that remained then for "democratic" branches - the elected assemblies, were the lower chambers of the legislative bodies? This problem has spawned a lengthy debate among historians, and in the second half of the 20th century the most authoritative researchers, among them J. Green, J. Pole, B. Beilin, E. Morgan [6] came to the conclusion that the power of the colonial assemblies, formally, yielding to the power of governors, in fact increased constantly, getting a real impact. The influence of the assemblies were based mainly on the fact that they managed to step-by-step to concentrate in their hands the power over the finances and the budget, putting governors in dependence in their costs. The Assembly acquired throughout the right to impose taxes, determine the annual budget of the colonies, set the size of salaries for officials, including the Governor.
Using the financial dependence of the executive power of the legislature, the Assembly has repeatedly been forced governors to approve those or other bills, to appoint the right of people to various positions, take it's decision. All of this does not cancel, however, evidence that the governors often подчиняли yourself assembly, seek their dissolution, the transfer meeting, impose it's decision and appointment. The relationship between the assemblies with the governors have turned to endless battle, in which, as demonstrated by the colonial experience, the Assembly was not likely the decisive victory.
In the historiography of one of the discussion has always been a question of how democratic was "democratic branch of political power in the colonies. In the first half of the 20th century the influential was the point of view of historians on the relative narrowness of the American electorate and, consequently, The colonial political system. In the middle of the 20th century spread point of view of the school of consensus that in the elections in colonial America participated in up to 90% of adult white men and that rooted "Democracy middle class" [7]. At the present stage of Opinion prevailed, for the first time fully substantiated A.M. Уильямсоном that electoral law in the colonies were from 50 to 75% of adult White Men [8]. The electoral body in America was, of course, more демократичен, than in England, but if you take into account that the adult white men accounted for about 20% of the American population, then we can conclude that it ranged from 10% to 15% of the population and, consequently, was quite narrow.
The question of the degree of democracy of the American state of the colonial period implies the analysis of not only the extent to which was a wide electoral body, but also possessed the ordinary Americans the possibility of re-entry into the power or the ability of a real influence on it. The totality of available today the historical facts allows, in my opinion, to conclude that not only in the "monarchist" branches of the colonial authority, but in "democratic" branches of power concentrated in the hands of a narrow circle of the colonial elite. Its political dominance was determined by a number of factors, among which there are two. First, the property qualification for candidates for deputies in several times (in some colonies in ten) exceeded the property qualification for voters, so it could run mostly come from rich families [9]. Secondly, The procedure of the election was undemocratic nature (because of the lack of secret elections the political culture of the majority of voters and other reasons). As a result of the elected assembly on social composition were in many ways similar to the appointed tips: Tips for 90% consisted of "first family" of America [10], in the Assemblies of 85% of deputies were natives of the upper 10% of the colonial society [11]. With семейственность for the Assemblies was not peculiar to a lesser extent than for councils: in both chambers, from generation to generation met a narrow circle of persons, bore the same names [12].
As can be seen, the democratic features of the American political system during the colonial period remained underdeveloped. Ask now, other important issues: what was the share of the political weight of different social groups and whether the political power is inherent in the pluralism and, if so, what was the nature? It is obvious that such social groups such as women, contracted the white servant, non-Christian religious denominations, the Indians and blacks were generally deprived of the possibility to influence the political power. Influence could only adults free white men of the Christian religion, which were divided into upper, middle and lower economic classes. The institutional political influence had practically only the upper and middle classes, while the direct power was monopolized the top class. The bottom, as well as the average classes to express and try to impose their will in the first instance using the riots, such as the rebellion of N. Bacon in Virginia in 1676, the total impact of such revolts historians have yet to be defined; it is clear that they wanted some of the goals, primarily economic (for example, reduction of taxes), but these successes during the colonial period remained modest and often were of a temporary nature.
Political pluralism in the bulk of the colonies existed and developed almost exclusively in the framework of the upper class, as a result of the competition its different factions and factions for power. The peculiarity of this rivalry in the colonial period was the fact that these factions and groups were family character of the:
For influential positions fought by the representatives of the richest families [13]. The family character of the factional struggle was characteristic for corporate colonies [14]. Entry into the political elites, mainly in the criterion of wealth gives the opportunity to specify another one feature as this elite and political power. They were marked by features.
Despite the abundance of undemocratic features of the colonial elite, its by the standards of the Era can hardly be called conservative (at least without reservations). The fact of the matter is that its most of the shared fundamental values of bourgeois order, among them the ideas of freedom of property and market relations, the principles of freedom of speech, of the press, the separation of powers, the contractual nature of the authorities. The reluctance of the British colonial authority to guarantee all these values in America, their constant (especially in the third quarter of the 18th century.) the limitation and infringement of the mother country was the basis of the fundamental conflict between it and the colonial elite, as well as broad segments of the Americans. On this basis, The First American Revolution.
1770-1810 The 1990s: first, a radical transformation of the American Political Power
The question of political power was central in the era of the war of independence and education of the USA. Among the many historians believed, which is confirmed by a variety of sources and which is true, that the intention of the American elite were limited to the liquidation of the colonial dependence on England and the concentration of several подновленной political power in their own hands. But barely started, the revolution immediately acquired its own logic and momentum, which brought the dramatic political changes [15].
Since the beginning of the revolution for the first time in the history of the american lower and middle layers of the white population occupied (for elite this was a complete surprise) independent political position and become successful in influencing political power. At that stage, the Americans, as pointed out by J. Adams, least of all thought about the "consolidation of the vast continent under a single national government." On the contrary, they were sure that the former colonies, which became thirteen sovereign States, remain forever "confederation of states, each of which will have its own government" [16]. For this reason, on the domestic front," they put to the best possible arrangement of each of the states. In all the states were endorsed by the Republican Constitution. Everywhere was lowered the property qualification for voters and in some cases very significantly. An important democratic innovation was expanding in many States, the rules of the western territories, with the result that the influence of the poor on political power even more intensified. An illustrative example of Pennsylvania, one of the largest states: before the revolution, the more wealthy Eastern districts have in the assembly of 26 deputies, and western counties, where lived half of the colonists, only 15; according to the same standards of representation on state Constitution of 1776 eastern counties, had the legislature 24 seats, and western - 48 [17].
These rapid democratic innovations have resulted in a serious change in the social composition of the political power, in the first place, and primarily the lower chambers of the legislative assemblies. According to J. T. Maine, the proportion of the upper class in the lower chambers has dropped from 60% to 35%, and the representation of farmers and artisans has increased from 20 to 40% [18]. The democrats also attempted to elevate the lower chamber of the over the top. Many of them are generally favored the creation of a legislative assembly from one chamber, which meant the equation of representative of different economic classes, but in practice gave the opportunity to the lower and middle classes even rise above the top. Such a proposal has been the embodiment in Pennsylvania, Georgia and Vermont, but the rest of the states had installed двухпалатная legislative power. In the upper chambers (сенатах) dominance of the upper class, due to the higher property censorship for the senators, been preserved, but on the conclusion of the same Maine, сенаты revolutionary period is generally not resolved to join the opposition to the lower chambers [19].
The supporters of the democratic innovations failed to reconsider the traditional formula of the separation of powers, which executive power over the legislative and achieved by the constitutions of the revolutionary period of elevation is already legislative power over the executive. They have made and the maximum frequency (in the case of the lower chambers - the annual) The re-election of legislators, which were much more dependent on the voters, rather than the governors. Because of these and other political innovations, middle and lower layers were able to substantially put political power in the service of their interests. In most of the states have adopted various economic laws, one way or another to medium layers, the debtors from among the farmers and artisans, and interests of the upper class, first of all creditors.
The Revolutionary period became a unique example of how the lower social groups have managed to achieve a certain preponderance over the top in the struggle for political power. But this is rather an exception from the rules of political competition in the U.S., by the way, and in the history of other countries and consisting in general that in bourgeois society the lower group received a chance to impose its role in the revolutionary and turbulent situations, when the upper group lose their familiar ways of control over power, are in a state of confusion, inferior to the bottom groups largely because that need the support of the majority in achieving the strategic objectives (during the period of the American Revolution - the victory over England).
The political elevation of the poor was a headache for American elites throughout the war of independence. But only after its completion she received a real opportunity to serious changes in the balance of forces and political power in its favor. The aspirations of the elite were embodied in the Federal Constitution of 1787 historians exhibited different assessment of motives and the results of the activities of the authors of the Constitution, some equated it to the triumph of democracy, and others believed that its adoption has caused democracy a crushing defeat.
H. Бирд, the most famous representative of critical school, analyzing the economic interests of 55 participants of the Philadelphia Convention 1787, worn-out The Constitution of the United States, came to the conclusion that they reflect the will of the top four groups: financial capital, owners of public debt, мануфактуристов, chamber of commerce and merchant interests [20]. The Бирда turned out to be a lot of followers, but even more critics. They argued that the Бирд drew a simplified picture of the social composition of the Convention 1787, declaring that it was dominated by the owners of the money capital and public debt, interested in saving with a strong state of personal funds. In reality, the social composition of the Convention, as well as its social support were more extensive [21]. Arguing that the participants in the Convention, rejecting the democracy of majority, have created a higher sample of "pluralistic democracy," обеспечивавшей right to equal representation of different social interests [22]. Finally, it was pointed out that the founding fathers were guided by the advanced principles of Education [23].
In my opinion, unambiguous evaluation can not express the essence and nature of the Constitution of 1787, and the motivation and ideology of the authors of the Constitution were quite complex and rested on three main grounds. First among them is the unconditional interest in the redistribution of political power in favor of the American elite. The second is the commitment to the doctrines of Education, the firm intention to create mechanisms to prevent the possibility of adoption in the United States political despotism or even authoritarian rule. Finally, the third reason - political realism, manifested in the desire and ability balanced their own worldview and the position of the political orientations and views, rooted in North America in the revolutionary period.
Political realism needed to be already for the obvious reason that the draft federal Constitution had to undergo the procedure of approval by the instruments of конвентах States, elected people, одобрившими earlier democratic Innovation Revolution. This reality influenced the design of a long-term strategy of political behavior of the American elite: advocating and asserting their interests, it should be borne in mind, and the need to achieve some of the social contract with the civil community. This strategy, and embodied in the Federal Constitution, which appears to be can be defined as a double public agreement: first, between different groups of the American elite, and secondly, between the elite and the entire civil community.
The participants of the Convention strongly refused to call themselves democrats, and many condemned democracy, demanding to put an end to "democratic despotism," возобладавшим, in their opinion, during the years of the revolution. But when it came to real limitations of democratic innovations of the revolutionary era, the convent has the political caution and its efficiency. So, despite the fact that many participants condemned the expansion of suffrage and the constitutions of the states, the convent saved it, as he and the expansion of the mission of the western areas. The Convention approved the eligibility of all authorities and complete abolition of the monarchy beginning (it is supported by some delegates). Declaring republicanism as the cornerstone of the American system, delegates however, tried to differentiate between them and democracy. In practice, this resulted in juxtaposition is known then the model of democracy, уходившей back to the ancient Greek policy, the new model. In the future, researchers and political thinkers began to distinguish them as models of direct and representative democracy.
Thus, as approved by the Convention model included the beginning of representative democracy, but at the same time it was the elite democracy, because most of the representative institutions were under the control of the elite, very narrow. Soldier in the electorate, which consisted of white men, a specific property censorship, only the elected House of Representatives. The election of senators, members of the upper house, was entrusted to the legislative assemblies states. The election of the President, the head of the executive power, was entrusted to the appointed in accordance with the procedure defined by the States. In most states, the electors became formed state legislatures. The convent has taken exemplary audit of the concept of separation of powers. In contrast to the revolutionary period, sharply возвысившей legislative branch, as the convent has strengthened the executive power, focusing it to the same in the hands of one person - the president.
Cautious attitude of parties to the Convention to democratic innovations of the revolutionary era reflected in the refusal to include in the Federal Constitution Bill of Rights, in all the constitutions of the states. In the eyes of the critics of this turned out to be the most vulnerable Place Philadelphia document. During the discussion of the instruments of ratification of its states, majority of them agreed to endorse the Basic Law only when supplement its Bill of Rights. The American Founding Fathers once again went to the assignment of society. In 1789 J. Madison introduced in the U.S. Congress draft supplement the federal Constitution first ten amendments, which became known as the Bill of Rights.
One of the most important at the convention in Philadelphia was the question of the ratio of the prerogatives of the States and the central Government. Supporters of a strong federal states have achieved success in two important points: the constitution is widely defined the rights of the central government, firstly, and proclaimed the rule federal law over the law states - secondly. Thus, the main U.S. law was The возвышен over more democratic constitutions of States (subsequently their principles were also provided in accordance with the more moderate public-legal model).
The critical innovation in the American political system of The period was the registration of 1790-1810 the 1990s two-party system, which became party headed by The Geferson and the party of FEDERALISTS. Its appearance has led to the creation of models of political pluralism, a characteristic for all subsequent stages of the American system.
Included in the model of the participants were divided into active and passive. As the active have different groups of elite, formulated two national party, The конкурировавшие in the struggle for power and tried to enlist the support of civil society. As passive participants were of various layers of the electorate, giving preference to one or another of the elite group. This model has both similarities (leadership elite groups), as well as differences from the colonial model.
Elite groups of the new model shared the distinction of the socio-economic interests (федералисты defended the financial and industrial interests and The Republicans - agrarian). Among them were and political differences: were supporters of conservation and reduction of democratic innovations of the revolution, and the republicans - supporters of their expansion. Finally, both the Parties offered to voters for approval to the original contract, in which in one way or another, takes into account the massive social interests.
The fact that increasingly take into account the interests of medium and lower layers of white Americans, they, like The in its social composition [24] and methods of political rule was the elite party. Ways of extending the two parties candidates for senior government posts (through the narrow), the selection and appointment of civil servants cannot be called democratic. The role of the voters in the political process was minor, and political governance generally lacking. But the elite, preserved, as well as during the colonial period, the rule in the system of political power, has taken on a new important characteristics. In one way or another, directly or indirectly, its formation was linked to the electoral mechanism, as the practice of family "inheritance" political posts to naught. In contrast to the colonial era, in the period, there is a real "political market" and mobilized political competition of elite groups.
1820-1860 The 1990s - the second stage of the radical transformation of the political power
This phase, in turn, is divided into two periods. The first, which engulfed 1820-1840 the 1990s, went down in history under the name of the democracy, second, 1850-1860 the 1990s, known as the period of conflict and civil war between the North and the South. The main content of the first period amounted to conflicts between different social segments of the white population on the ways and forms of distribution of economic and political power. The second period was marked by antagonism of the two main regions of the United States on the issue of slavery. But with all of the differences both period solved the common task of strengthening and development of the liberal began to American society, including its political system.
Democracy was a response to the challenge of two deep and long-term socio-economic processes - the industrial revolution and the active colonization of the West. In their crucible formed new layers of entrepreneurship and farming, as well as the working class. Gaining economic weight, they claimed and the political influence and power. Вызревала next after a period of war for the independence of the wave of political democratization. One of the centers became the western settlements, where the new farming claimed more democratic orders, than in the East. The new western states, The отменявшие Property qualifications affected and to the Eastern States [25], so that by the end of 1828, the time of the election of President Andrew Jackson, the property qualification lasted only three of the then existing 24 States. In the 1820s had been implemented the second important democratic reform - the widespread transfer of election of presidential electors from the state ordinary voters. Both reforms were of direct relevance to the election of E. Jackson, the President and the beginning of its transformation.
Together with the new layers of farming political activity began to show and the working class, ae in the second quarter of the 19th century, creating your own parties. These important phenomena have created the ability to change the prevailing model of political pluralism and the treatment of the lower social groups to independent political action. The more that party system democrats, цементировавшая this model to the 1820-m years apart descended from the historical arena as a result of the political mistakes of the Anglo-American war of 1812-1815, and the republicans transformed into the Party of National republicans, which monopolized the political power, which is due to a variety of perturbations "of the people" and was reborn in the party of "old" elite groups.
The period model of political pluralism has managed all the same remain, thanks largely to a kind of "revolution of the elites", occurring as a result of the schism of the Party of National Republicans on the eve of the 1820-1830-ies on The Вигскую party, The position of the old elites, and the Democratic Party, which the new elite and сумевшую enlist the support of new mass social layers. The new party system, The просуществовавшая a quarter of a century, retained the classic for the U.S. model of political pluralism, but at the same time seriously modified it.
The activities of E. Jackson and the Democratic Party of 1820-1840 in the 1990s, known under the name of the democracy, has received a variety of evaluation in the historical literature, until the mutually exclusive. A. de Токвиль saw in it a sample of the dangerous expression of the will of the crowd [26], the historians- Board of the working class and farming [27], and their famous contemporary critic E. Пессен - the power of the upper class, not entity characteristics of American society [28]. Unambiguous and the extreme judgments about democracy are not able to cover its entire essence, she, like many of the historical phenomenon that deserves the multilateral characteristics and uneven ratings.
Jackson and his supporters, of course, does not infringe on the basis of the american order of bourgeois social stratification and political system. But they contributed to its grave of liberalization and democratization, increase social mobility and the change in the relationship between the elite and the majority of the white population. The party has opened access to the highest political power of the new, more democratic elite groups [29]. It approved a number of innovations (the nomination of candidates for presidents of national, not narrow, approval and introduction of the court of voters of the national party platform) that have contributed to the democratization of the political process. Elimination of the Democrats National Bank led renewal of competition in the financial sector and facilitated access to bank credit to new segments of the business.
The negative estimates of democracy can be countered with a lot of arguments that characterize its on the positive side, but also the positive estimates of much can be countered by arguments, evidence of "working capital" undemocratic features of board. This and the suppression of the Jackson workers strikes, and his attitude toward the Indians and black Americans, and his authoritarian political style. A balanced full assessment of the democracy should include all of these contradictory characteristics, including the two disparate evaluation of the political system of the period: (1) the political process in the USA, it broad masses of white male population;(2) this process has remained under the control of the socio-economic elites, and the relative weight of the lower layers in the public administration has not changed.
The liberal-democratic tendencies, period of expansion in the era of the civil war and reconstruction. To a large extent, they were connected with the activities of the Republican Party, created in 1854 and quickly from a two-party system. The victory of the Republican party in the presidential elections of 1860 and the subsequent profound revolutionary changes have led to the marginalization from the political power of slave-holding elite, the abolition of slavery, the empowerment of civil and political rights freed black Americans. As a result of Americans participating in political elections and the, consequently, the political power of the included adult men from both white and black races.
The Republican Party of the revolutionary period relied on broad social coalition, which was dominated by medium-sized and small property owners, farmers, artisans, workers, and the guide, along with the representatives of the upper and middle layers of the north-eastern states and those from lower layers. And if we take into account that the social support OBD and the entire Black race, then the Republican Party of the era of the civil war and reconstruction can be defined as one of the most democratic parties for all of American history.
Democratism of the Republican party clearly manifested itself both in its ideology and political practice, which included the famous Act of 1862 (provided the Americans the right to essentially free acquisition of the property of vast areas of the State Land Fund), the radical 13, 14 and 15 of the amendments to the Federal Constitution, black and white race in the civil and political rights. The highest democratic samples were demonstrated in the southern states at the peak of the Reconstruction.
The dismissal of the electoral process many configured southerners and the granting of voting rights of former slaves has led to the fact that black voters numerically surpassed white (735 thousand to 635 thousand) [30]. As a consequence, the Black Americans filled the power structures of the southern states, and in South Carolina they generally accounted for the majority of the Legislative Assembly. Such a level of political representation of black Americans do not have even today. White allies of the Republican party for several years, their sincere support, and as a result of former slaves were not only able to obtain political rights and enter into power, but also improved their economic situation and increased social status. The political activity and influence of black Americans on the political power of the era of reconstruction meant the expansion of both the democratic and pluralistic part of the political system of the United States. Even the modern standards of the southern states has developed a kind of idyll. It lasted until the mid 1970s of the 19th century, after which was followed by the collapse of the, which was so impetuous and radical, as well as its advent.
1870-1920 The 1990s. Stage of PRESERVATION OF THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM
The defeat of the liberal democratic lines in the american Reconstruction in fact is generally recognized in the historical science. E. Фонер in his famous modern study on the Reconstruction of defined it as "the unfinished American Revolution." [31]. But why it has not been completed and whether it could generally be completed? If you follow the logic of the Фонера, completion of the revolution can be understood as the provision of black Americans equal with the white of the economic, social and political empowerment of existence in American society. But, in my opinion, the achievement of this goal was really not only in the case of the relevant legislative measures, but also subject to fundamental changes in the characteristics and mentality as black and white Americans.
The fact of the matter is that white Americans for several centuries, developed within the framework of the bourgeois market-competitive culture and possess the mentality that allowed to succeed in American society, while the black Americans, who were all this time in slavery, existed in the social environment, and to acquire new social culture and mentality, allowing to live and act successfully in bourgeois society, quickly could not. In my opinion, they have not been able to find and to the present day.
Integrated into the American civilization of the black citizens prevented and Racial Prejudice of white compatriots, preserving the real value today. For these reasons, the reconstruction, even in the case of realization of the most radical legislative measures, was not in a position to ensure equality of opportunity for black and white Americans. But the collapse of this goal was, of course, is due and a number of subjective reasons, among which the main was the betrayal and rebirth of the Republican Party.
The degeneration of the Republicans from the Liberal Democratic Party, The coalition of different social layers, the party of the capitalist elite, serving the interests of the upper class, it was, in turn, is due to the fundamental socio-economic advances 1860-1870 abroad in the 1990s to the early 1870s, the danger of the restoration of the slave fails on the South was eliminated, and the adoption of liberal-capitalist world order is guaranteed. In the south there was a change of political, and to a large extent also economic and social elites. The place of the former slave-holding class took the capitalist and new political class is closely associated with the Republican Party. in the ranks of the economic and political elite, they increasingly act and think in accordance with the interests of its economic and political benefits and are less guided by the ideal considerations, which were inherent in many of them in the previous period. Obligations to the black race, which helped them to become the new elite, their increasingly in its own interests, removing the economic benefits of the capitalist world order became The names of the former idealists are increasingly in connection with loud scandals related to corruption, dirty economic machinations. Replaced the Revolution came Thermidor, the final phase of the majority of the revolutionary eras.
The American Thermidor, like any other, was not tantamount to the counter-revolution, it does not canceled the structural socio-economic and political changes of the revolutionary period, and subordinated to the interests of those elites that thanks to the revolution. But ordinary members of the revolution, primarily black Americans, have suffered as a result of the tangible loss. As a result of the ratio of democratic and elitist sides of American political power, as it was in the period after the war of independence, was changing in favor of the latter.
Personification degeneration of the Republican Party, a political leader of that era, a famous and unique in all of american history to deal with the Democratic Party at the end of 1876 - beginning of 1877, in response to the consent of the Democrats to falsify the results of the presidential elections (held in the autumn of 1876) that kept the Republicans as head of state, the leadership.
The republican party has agreed to stop the reconstruction in the South. While in the hands of national political power, the Republicans have continued to actively use it in the economic interests of industrial and financial circles. But the change for the lower layers, especially black Americans were discontinued, and after some time, the revised and largely abandoned. At the same time, 1877 opened a new stage in the evolution of the American political power, one of the most conservative and controversial in the history of the United States.
This phase provides rich material for consideration and an answer to the question, which is fundamental to the researchers political power: what and who plays a more important role in determining its nature - political rules and institutions or participants in the political process? If judged by the norms and institutions, it may give the impression that the democratic component of the American political system, not only has not diminished, but even increased. In fact, all the democratic innovations previous eras preserved and have been supplemented by new ones. Among the latter are three.
The first was the widespread introduction of the secret ballot.
The second innovation - a single ballot for candidates from all parties (before there were separate sheets for each of the parties, th