Interest to a problematics of political change and political development last decades obviously grows in modern political science. The given tendency is directly connected with occurrence after the Second World War of set of the new states, so, and political systems. David Apter writes thereupon that "the new" comparative political science with its accent on development problems has appeared in atmosphere of the general optimism of the post-war period. Preconditions and development prospects were represented by the blessing. The Third World countries balancing between the USA and the USSR have used such statement of a question. For Americans the political problem of global distribution of the influence was reduced to necessity of a combination of decolonization, democratisation of the new states and reorientation of their nationalism to the state building that demanded economic growth. For realisation of such program, according to Aptera, there was very useful the theory of development assuming that the developing world will necessarily reproduce the cores political, social both cultural values and institutes of the western industrial countries.

The theme of changes far is not new to a political science. For understanding of a being of a parity of political change and political development formation of this problematics in the beginning is better to consider in a retrospective show. In antiquity philosophers have allocated and in own way investigated questions of stability of the states and political changes. They were the focus of attention Platonand Aristotle. Thetypology which has appeared in their works of three "correct" forms of government (aristocracy, a monarchy and полиархия) and three "wrong" (тимократия, a despotism and democracy) described certain political dynamics of transition from one of them to another. However these thinkers have drawn different conclusions. Platon - the pessimist: he saw in modern to it the political world mainly the degeneration understood as a turn of changes, movement from aristocracy to тимократии, then to oligarchy, from it - to democracy and, at last, to tyranny.

The above-named typology of the forms of government and their ascending or descending development - one of the most effective conceptual schemes in the history of political thought. In those or other variations it is present at works of such outstanding thinkers, as Tsitseron, Nikkolo Makiavelli, Jean Voden, John Lock, Charles Lui Montesquieu, etc.

But only the Education epoch has brought essentially new components in these traditional representations about political changes - it is a question about прогрессизмеand one-linearities of development. Progress (an armour progressus - advance, success) - a direction of development with transition from the lowest to the higher, from less perfect to more perfect condition, quality. This transition can be fixed in a condition of political system in whole, in its structure and separate elements. One-linearityas concept reflects in itself the theory of a unique line of development of a human society - from simple to more difficult. She assumes that all societies, ascending by the way of evolution, should overcome the same stages.

Through these basic concepts the becoming more and more made economic, social, political and spiritual reality of Europe expressed itself. The industrial civilisation of New time has created the person economic, i.e. the sovereign individual, which basis of activity have already been almost released from "traditional" socially-institutional restrictions. The person began to co-ordinate the actions with own interests, and similar historic breakthrough marked transformation of a policy into rather independent space of public relations operated internal laws and logic of development. Perhaps, since this time boundary of the politician becomes sphere of the constant changes quite precisely reflecting dynamics of economy industrialized in fast rate. Thus, changes have already started to be understood as realised and directed for it was obvious that they gradually resulted political institutes in the increasing conformity with consistently developing social and economic structure, with internal human nature as rationally conceiving and operating beings, from a birth allocated with inalienable laws and duties. This "progressive", ascending movement conducted, as then it seemed, to an ideal of national board. The similar understanding of the maintenance of political development was defended, for example, by the French philosopher-educator Jean Kondorse (1743-1794). “Our hopes of improvement of a condition of mankind in the future can be shown to three important positions: inequality destruction between the nations, equality progress between various classes of the same people, at last, the valid perfection of the person”, - was written by him in «the Sketch of a historical picture of progress of human reason».

The linearly-Progressistsky scheme of political development in XIX century in unusual way was reproduced in Marxism with its representation about linearity of history and the concept of change of socioeconomic structures. For Charles Marx and Fridriha of Engels political changes (dynamic processes in a superstructure) reflected qualitative social and economic shifts in basis. Along with obvious achievements in understanding of problems of development, such its rigid treatment considerably simplified historical process, disturbed to its volume perception.

It is accepted to carry political reform, revolution, revolution to the basic ideal types of political changein political science, is more rare - restoration and partial or full revision (audit) of the constitution. Peace political change in state frameworks - the nations is a reform. Thegiven term reflects first of all evolutionary and nonviolent character of development of political process, ability of concrete political system to adapt to more and more diverse interests and requirements of the national community, new structural factors (economic, social, ethnic and so forth), to consider, changing, environment influence provides its stability. The bright examples of reform - the constitutional changes in executive power (in the government etc.) Reorganisation of a parity of forces and influences in party system or in parliament. Stability of any political system throughout considerable time - at all a sign of absence of changes, and the certificate of flexible and skilful system reforming by not compulsory methods, anticipations of problem situations, adjustment of politiko-standard mechanisms for peace changes. Political reform(фр. reforme from an armour reformo - I transform) - change, a reorganisation in a way of activity and as a part of institutes, establishments not destroying bases of existing political structure Reform is spent, as a rule, in a legislative order and from above with a view of perfection of abilities of political system to adapt for conditions of its functioning changing in process.

The central phenomenon even among the basic types of political change is revolution- the collective, violent and realised capture of the power by any public group. Besides, the word revolution can be used and figuratively for a designation of the powerful tendencies promoting radical restructuring, revolution in any area of ability to live of a society (scientific and technical and information revolutions, «revolution in art»). Revolution (позднелат. revolutio - turn, revolution from revolvere - to overturn) - radical qualitative change in development something. A social revolution - revolution in all political and social and economic structure of a society. As one of two predominating forms of political development revolution противополагается evolutions(an armour evolutio - expansion) - to slow, gradual process of changes in political sphere In the modern politological literature are used also terms инволюция (an armour. invotutio - curling) in value of return development and деволюция as movement back, downwards, decrease in level something.

The general definition of concept of revolution is not present.Dictionaries explain it laconically enough and neutrally. Researchers essentially and differently expand similar interpretation, paying attention to different characteristic aspects of revolutionary process. Марксисты, as well as founders of this doctrine, start with sequence of socioeconomic structures and do conclusions in respect of the development theory: revolution - a quantum leap on its higher step. Peter Shtompka at ordering of explanations of revolution has divided them into three groups. It has included definitions according to which revolutions are fundamental and widespread transformations of a society in the first, i.e. their depth and scale is accented, and in the given sense they are opposed to reforms: it «unexpected, radical changes in political, economic and social structures of a society». Definitions in which the emphasis becomes on violence, struggle and speed of changes, i.e. «are included In the second group Technics »realisation of revolutions, so, they противополагаются evolutions as« the fundamental sociopolitical changes which have been carried out quickly and a violent way ». The third group combines approaches of first two that, according to Shtompki, it is most useful: revolution is« fast, base transformations of social and class structures of societies by revolutions from below ».

Revolution is characterised by researchers as the most intensive, violent and realised process of all social movements. In it see limiting expression of free will and deep feelings, display of uncommon organizational abilities and advanced ideology of the social protest. Special value is given to the utopian or emancipating ideal based on symbolics of equality, progress, freedom and on belief that revolutions create a new and best social order. To the above-stated explanations of concept of revolution it is necessary to add some more which were underlined by the French political scientist Jean-Lui Kermonn:

1. Revolution is always directed against an existing mode to replace it for the sake of opposite legitimacy; it can pour out in uncontrollable process of stage-by-stage planting of astable modes while one of them will not manage to establish new political balance in a society.

2. Revolution actuates crowd which identifies itself with all people.

3. If the revolutionary initiative belonged to minority it declares that operates on behalf of the majority of citizens or oppressed, but a majority class.

Life has shown demand for the new, interdisciplinary theory which would interpret multi-variant approach of process of political changes. There was objectively a scientific necessity for working out of the generalised paradigm of development. There were the researches based on empirical indicators where it is considered as increase in adaptive possibilities of political system, its ability to keep plasticity in the conditions of quickly changing reality. Such approach assumes the description of processes, instead of their results that expands possibilities of knowledge of a phenomenon of political development.

III. Political modernisation.For the characteristic of political process changes of type of development which are connected with definition of a qualitative orientation of evolution of political system, its progress or recourse have special value. Many of ideas expressing about it and concepts are anyhow reflected in theory of the modernisation representing set of various schemes and models of the analysis which allow to describe and open dynamics of overcoming of backwardness of the traditional states. It arises in communication by necessity of scientific judgement of ways of transformation received clearing in 50-60th years ХХ century from colonial domination of the countries. The term "modernisation" in such context began to mean simultaneously and a stage (condition) of public transformations, and process of transition of the released states to a condition of modern societies. As front lines in such cases the western countries in this connection the westernisation, that is copying of the western samples of development in all areas of life became a core of numerous theories of modernisation in essence were represented. Thus for modernisation the unique form of progress - “catching up development” admitted lawful. However by 80th years ХХ century of model of modernisation such have actually failed, to a limit having complicated life of many afro-Asian states.

It is remarkable that for some decades of attempts of research of a problematics of political development with use of positions of the theory of modernisation various authors and have not come to any one point of view. It is natural, as scientists analyzed the most interesting and clear it fragments of a difficult and inconsistent reality. So, for one, inheriting Max Vebera'sideas,modernisation was represented first of all in the form of rationalisation political society spheres as a whole. For others it meant mainly deepening of differentiation of social and political structures (Tolkotta Parsons'sthought).However anyway in a basis of different treatments of political development as modernisations the uniform theoretical scheme has initially been put: the history and political process were understood as the movement predetermined by objective socio-economic factors from a so-called traditionalsociety to a society transitive,and then - to modern. One of the first the American researcher Uolter Rostou which theoretical workings out and are used today by consideration almost all problems of the present connected with development has addressed to this problematics. In the general opinion the scientists traditional and modern societies essentially differ on the base social paradigms. Modernisation and, as consequence, formation of bases of a modern societyleant against following objective preconditions:

1. Reduction to uniformity of codes of intranational dialogue, consolidation of the territorial, ethnic and language space, creating favorable conditions for formation of the nation-state and political system of modern type.

2. Realization of the industrialisation conducting to qualitative shifts in social structure which, in turn, serve as the incentive reason осовременивания political sphere.

3. Formation national воспроизводственного a complex functioning in a mode of self-supported growth, supported with incorporated transport and information infrastructures.

Urbanization (i.e. transformation of a society from mainly rural incity) which promotes occurrence of city culture as way of life and the style of behaviour defining an orientation of development of a society.

Increase of social and territorial mobility of the population owing to the statement of industrial forms of economic activities and, as consequence, washing out of rigid public and institutional communications of traditional type.

6. Transformation, under influence вышеобозначенных structural shifts, a policy in one of spheres of self-realisation of the person, and the individual - in the independent, independently conceiving and operating subject of political process, henceforth free from restrictions of the closed groups (communities).

7. The Statement of the new political institutes, beginning to function in a mode of representation of all variety of interests present at a society.

At the same time, including from initiators of working out of the theory of modernisation, there was a criticism of its separate most vulnerable positions:

- First, «культуроцентризма» the installation setting western sociopolitical and other reference points as criteria of an estimation of an orientation and a rhythm of political changes in not western societies;

- Secondly, representations about linearities of the development, which legitimacy has been called into question by experience of modernisation of some societies, revealed impossibility to explain within the limits of the given theory original character of political changes in many not western regions of the world, and also a reality of a nonlinear way of development, including recurrence, returns, recourse.

In 80-90th years of the XX-th century communication the modernisation theory in a political science has been reconsidered. Concepts of the transients have been entered, which steels to be interpreted as a certain independent stage of development. Having generalised lessons of modernisation of the various countries and the modes, many scientific steels to draw on necessity of certain sequence of transformations, observance of certain rules at their realisation. So, U.Mur and A.Ekstajn believed what to begin reforming it is necessary from society industrialisation, K.Griffin - from reforms in agriculture. M.Levi insisted on the intensive help of the developed countries, S.Ejzenshtadt - on development of institutes which could consider social changes. U.Shramm considered that the leading role in the given processes is played by the political communications broadcasting the general values, and B.Higgins asserted that the main link of modernisation - an urbanization.

- At a priority of a competition of elite over participation of ordinary citizens there are the optimal preconditions for consecutive democratisation of a society and realisation of reforms;

- In the conditions of increase of a role of a competition of elite, but at low activity of the basic part of the population preconditions for an establishment of authoritative modes of board and braking of transformations are formed;

- Domination of political participation of the population over competition of free elite when activity of the operated advances professional activity of managing directors, promotes increase охлократических tendencies that can provoke toughening of the forms of government and delay of transformations;

- Simultaneous minimisation соревновательности elite and political participation of weights conducts to chaos, decomposition of society and political system that also can provoke coming to power of the third force and a dictatorship establishment.

According to theorists of conservative orientation, the main source of modernisation is the conflict between population "mobilisation" (joining in political life as a result of occurrence of contradictions) and “институциализацией” (presence of structures and the mechanisms intended for an articulation and aggregation of interests of citizens). Thereupon, as notices S.Hantington, modernisation causes “not political development, and political decline”. For a policy the main indicator of development is stability, therefore the strong political mode is necessary for the modernised states with the legitimate party in power, capable to constrain a tendency to разбалансированию for the power, that is, unlike the liberals, conceiving of strengthening of integration of a society on the basis of culture, formations, to religion, conservatives do an emphasis on organisation, an order, authoritative methods of board. Owing to that authoritative modes are non-uniform, conservatives also specify in presence of alternative variants of modernisation. H.Lind allocates, in particular, полусостязательный authoritarianism as an advancement step to democracy. Further he writes that authoritative modes can carry out the partial liberalisation connected with certain redistribution of the power in favour of opposition or owing to valuable priorities of ruling elite, etc.

Extensive experience of transformations in the countries of "the third world” has given the chance to allocate some steady tendencies and stages in evolution of transitive societies. So, S.Blek allocated stages of "comprehension of the purposes”, “consolidation of modernised elite”, “substantial transformation” and “society integration on a new basis”. S.Ejzenshtadt wrote about the periods “the limited modernisation” and “distribution of transformations” on all society. But the most develop этапизация transitive transformations belongs О’Доннелу, F.Shmitteru, A.Pshevorsky, etc., proved three following stages:

- A stage of liberalisation which is characterised by an aggravation of contradictions in authoritative and totalitarian modes and the beginning of washing out of their political bases. As a result of initial struggle “the dosed out democracy”, легализующая supporters of transformations in political space is established;

- The democratisation stage, different institutional changes in power sphere. Cardinal value at this stage has a question on consent achievement between ruling circles and democratic counterelite. As a whole for successful reforming it is necessary to reach three basic consensuses between these two groups: concerning last development of a society; concerning an establishment of the paramount purposes of social development; by definition of rules of "game of politics" of a ruling mode;

- A stage of consolidation of democracy when the actions providing irreversibility of democratic transformations in the country are carried out. It is expressed in maintenance of loyalty of the basic actors in relation to the democratic purposes and values in the course of decentralisation of the power, realisation of reforms of local government. As the English political scientist M.Garreton considers, criteria of irreversibility of democracy are:

Transformation of the state into the guarantor of democratic updating and its democratisation;

Autonomy of social movements and transformation of party system;

Fast economic growth, increase of a standard of living of the population; growth of political activity of citizens, adherence to the democracy purposes.

Political modernisation in the theoretical literature is considered as the change of political system characterised by increase of participation in the politician of various groups of the population (through political parties and groups of interests) and formation of new political institutes (division of the authorities, political elections, multi-party system, local government). Usually the concept of political modernisation is used with reference to the bodies which are carrying out transition to an industrial society and a democratic political system. In this case it is underlined that political modernisation is an importation by traditional societies of new social roles and the political institutes generated within the limits of the western democracies. Having arisen in the late fifties ХХ century As a theoretical substantiation of a policy of the West in relation to developing countries, the concept of political modernisation finally has turned to a substantiation of a certain general model of the global process, which essence - in the description of characteristic features and directions of transition from traditional to a modern rational society in the conditions of scientific and technical progress, socially-structural changes, transformation of standard and valuable systems.

With a certain share of convention it is possible to speak about existence of two stages in development of the concept of political modernisation. At the initial stage of development of this theory political modernisation was perceived as: