In developing countries, as a rule, democracies are imitational in nature, the change in the country's policy is not being decided in elections, and a strange procedure of nationwide unanimous approval of the leader and the ruling elite is taking place. This is due to the fact that societies have not yet reached the legal legitimization of power through a democratic procedure.
They fluctuate between charismatic or revolutionary legitimization and legal, that is why such regimes are quite militant, they need constant explosive mobilization of the population for exploits. But leaders have the property of getting old and decrepit. The less it is possible to organize wars and cataclysms for its population, the more regimes begin to gravitate toward legal legitimation and democratic procedures.
In developed countries, elections can strongly affect the future of society, since they do not have an authoritarian malodorous tumor that distorts the political space.
In fact, the long-term mainstream is broad participation of the population in elections. This greatly affects the politicians and their opportunities.
As a rule, they are divided into two main groups. One I will conditionally call the left, they are in favor of increasing social benefits and other payments, advocating for the expansion of the social state by increasing taxes on business. The second group I will conditionally call the right, they advocate for tax cuts, reduction of social benefits to accelerate economic growth and increase welfare.
It is clear that some of them win, then others.
This is due to the fact that as soon as the growth of social assistance begins at the expense of increasing the tax burden, then immediately the business is curtailed, goes to neighboring countries. Despite the globalization, all countries compete for inflow of investments, they try to create the most favorable conditions for business. The revenues of the treasury are shrinking, and with them the opportunities for social support of the population are melting.
Needless to say, in the next election the people run to vote for the Rights. They cut taxes, the financial herd immediately rushes to a comfortable habitat, the business begins to bloom with greens.
As soon as money appears in the treasury, as soon as the devil from the snuffbox pops out the left with the proposal to take away and divide between themselves.
Since this cycle is sustainable, and politicians have incentives to linger on the political Olympus, the left begins to praise and shorten the appetites of the poor and poor, and the right begin to lay down and support social programs.
The result of the process is the extreme similarity of political ideas, politicians turn into identical twins, little distinguishable from each other.
How in such conditions of absence of differences to create architecture of the pre-election company to be successful?
In fact, elections are several streams, they expand and capture the political space on the principle of all-all-all. The one who started first, at the very second, as announced the results of previous elections has the advantage. That's why a pre-election company should start immediately after the announcement of the results of previous elections.
To create a steady, expanding flow of their supporters, one must take their interests into account. Voters should become recipients of benefits from your victory. Therefore, the most important point is the collection and analysis of citizens' demands. Since they are heterogeneous, as I wrote above, a compromise between wishes is needed, politics is the art of possible compromises.
Once a simple thing is done, wishes are collected and a political course is formed, so immediately begins the seizure of political space. Here the most important thing is to convey your idea to the voters. Tools modern technologies offer a huge variety in countries where there is no total control over the media.
Social networks, many communities, joint actions, ordering of articles, reports and interviews.
When an electoral company is announced to be started, then time is compressed, and past work comes to the surface. Here, the streams begin to open competition among themselves.Those who started earlier, took into account the interests of more people, could convey their ideas to everyone, he begins to dominate and selects pieces of political space from the other.
Conformist transmission in the election process, unlike every voter, makes a blind and implacable choice.
First, many wishes of citizens create a real chaos, everyone sees their own future in their own way. Then people begin to choose one of the streams. The process goes literally from one to the other, spreading like a virus. It is worth it to appear in a humanoid with a few people infected with your idea, as in the shortest time the whole house is hit by its virus.
The same applies to the flow of a stream in a multitude of communities. There is a very important point. Conformist transmission can spread in a free political space. Any distortions in dictatorial and authoritarian regimes drown the streams and the choice is made not by people, but by the scoundrels who seized power.
This always has extremely sad consequences.
Conformist transmission allows us to find the optimal adaptive solution for any life challenge. When the political space wrinkles with authoritarian rulers, then the choice happens under the influence of a curved gravitational field. Which leads to anomalies. As a result, a distorted choice inevitably leads to the degradation of public life.
Therefore, authoritarian regimes are short-lived, unstable and move from one catastrophe to another.
The task of society is to create a political space for free competition, through which a conformist transmission and free choice of life's challenges for the most effective adaptation could be freely spread.