Society is dynamic and in the process of perpetual change. The natural course of social development in any case causes a general change. This change can be delayed for a while, but it cannot be completely stopped. When studying the sociology of change, it is clearly seen that attempts at their artificial prevention lead to very serious consequences. In the modern world, the taxonomy of positive change depends directly on the political readiness of society and the natural change of power through elections.
With the violent prevention of the process of change of power, it is impossible to talk about the consistent positive development of society. Inactivity, inertia, stagnation, robbery and legal nihilism reign in all spheres of society. As this syndrome continues to be felt, the system of constructive relations completely becomes useless. The probability of disasters is growing. Society is more sensitive not to gradual, but to fast, rapid processes, and its reaction to destructive tendencies is intensifying.
Analyzing the real socio-political situation in the country, I would like to touch on two simple formulas for the change of power: the self-transformation of power and the change of power by society.
How can self-change of power happen?
Self-transformation power is possible through economic, political and legal reforms. Showing a clear political will, first of all, the government itself must decide on this change. Do the authorities want to transform? What is the real situation? How do the opposition and the public view this change?
If we consider this issue in the context of today’s realities, then it should be recognized that the authorities have no such desire. The practice of voluntary self-changing of groups that came to power through anti-democratic elections is rare. The rule built on the system of total control over the whole spheres of the country provides local and central leadership with such rights and such comfort that it is very difficult to imagine the possibility of voluntary abandonment of all this.
At the same time, officials from the lower and middle levels, persons financed from the state budget, as well as part-time strata of society, have not yet shown interest in changing realities. Despite sometimes socially-oriented spontaneous discontent and minor protests, this is not turning into a large-scale social wave.
The authorities were also able to prevent rallies initiated and organized by the opposition. By establishing illegal restrictions and prohibitions, they managed to create artificial obstacles for the opposition.
In addition, they also have so far used some cosmetic measures to relieve tension that sometimes arises in international relations. Due to the disproportion between the pressure exerted on the government by the international community and the reaction of society, no tension leads to political activity in the country.
The opposition has repeatedly expressed interest in changing the government through real reforms. However, since there is no mutual trust and cooperation, there is no dialogue in this direction. The authorities believe the limit has not yet been exhausted and they can continue without the behavior of real reforms.
Is it possible for the society to change the power?
First of all, we will look for answers to some questions in this direction.
What is needed for social change of power? Has such a shift matured and how real is it?
According to the country’s Constitution, the people are the source of power, and the expression of this will in elections is enshrined in the legislation. However, the reality is that holding democratic elections in the country that meet international standards is a serious problem.
Not only in the statements of the opposition, but in all authoritative international reports, the impossibility of a change of power through elections has been repeatedly noted. The reports and resolutions of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, the US Department of State, the European Union and other influential organizations note this fact. Society”s belief in the possibility of a change of power within the law is also deeply undermined.
Theoretically, the universal will of the people is able to change any power. “Velvet revolutions”, which took place with the active participation of society, have similar and different features. The role and influence of a number of factors here should be thoroughly studied.
Simply put, the socioeconomic and psychological state of the population is crucial. The tension caused by restrictions in the country of rights and freedoms, the growth of unemployment and poverty, as well as discrimination, stratification, corruption, bribery and administrative violence, prepares a good ground for revolutionary change.
In addition, one of the main conditions for the active and consistent participation of society in political processes is the formation of an alternative opposition force. In particular, the management of a single center of power by peaceful protests organized by the opposition may lead to the successful development of political processes. It is not by chance that the authorities themselves are trying in every way to prevent the emergence in the ranks of the opposition of an organization capable of becoming the driving force of progressive processes. Observations show that, despite the repression of the authorities, striking trends have already appeared in this direction.
Moreover, the violation of the system of traditional relations within the government also generates social and political activity in society. Undoubtedly, after the referendum on September 26, 2016, the traditional management situation began to change gradually. The position of groups that have a serious influence on power has somewhat weakened.
At the same time, external influence, conditioned by political, economic interests and considerations of security of regional and global international forces, is also one of the serious factors of revolutionary changes. The military-political processes occurring in the geography of our country, and the realities they create can further increase tensions in the country.
In conclusion, we note that although the results of the revolutionary changes taking place in non-free countries are similar, it is impossible to predict when and how they will occur.
An in-depth analysis of the socio-psychological situation in society shows that discontent and tension are rapidly growing in our country. Attention is drawn to the full or partial maturation of factors that stimulate the activity of the population and create a social wave. Mistrust in relations between the state and citizens is growing. Traditional politics based on violence generates in society not humility, but discontent. In such a situation, the change of power through deep and radical reforms is more important than the revolutionary change of power by society.