American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences ISSN (E): 2832-8019 Volume 42, | November - 2025 P a g e | 29 www.americanjournal.org THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF SOURCES ON THE ESSENCE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF POLITICAL PROCESSES Gulparshin Alimbetova Independent Researcher of the Mirzo Ulugbek National University of Uzbekistan A B S T R A C T K E Y W O R D S The concept of "political process" is used in political science to interpret and explain dynamic changes in the political life of society. The political process, as a universal category of political science, also characterizes political practice. It reflects the variability of politics and reveals the interaction of political institutions and political subjects performing certain functions and "roles." The political process can also be interpreted as the general activity of all subjects of political relations associated with the formation, development, change, and functioning of the political system, mediating state power. Political processes, political ideology, theory of political processes Introduction In our view, in the general social context, the nature of the state governs economic life, and society shapes socio-political life. The most important elements inherent in its structure - the subjects and objects of politics, the specific means and angles of political activity - indicate the direction and methods of implementing political practice. For the analysis of political processes, modern political science uses a number of methodological approaches; however, the following paradigms are the most effective for assessing their dynamics. In the literature on political ideas and ideology, there are several main approaches to studying the essence and content of the political process: First of all, supporters of the institutional approach consider political phenomena associated with the change of political institutions as the main subjects of political processes. In this case, social infrastructure is taken into account partially or indirectly, since it is of secondary importance. Secondly, representatives of the behavioral approach consider individuals or groups of people as subjects of politics. Therefore, in this case, the political process is perceived as the result of the behavior, political will, and interests of these subjects. However, this definition reflects political processes more broadly and structurally incompletely. Thus, chronological units of measurement are also small. They allow studying politics only within the framework of everyday life. Thirdly, the structural-functional approach emphasizes the importance of internal structural and functional elements of the political system in the context of the political process. In this case, the units of analysis are considered not individuals and groups, but the central institutions of the political system (and the system as a whole), as well as their functional structure. American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 42 November - 2025 P a g e | 30 www.americanjournal.org Analysis of the literature on the topic: In our opinion, political processes also differ in their nature and typology. From this point of view, political processes differ in their scope, actions, factors, interaction between them, and other characteristics. A.Solovyev, referring to the typology of political processes, notes that political processes for society can be divided into basic and peripheral types. He emphasized that "the main processes lie in the change in the systemic characteristics of political life (for example, the formation of the state institution by the government). As for peripheral processes, they are based on less significant changes, which in principle cannot have a serious impact on the dominant objects of power"[1]. A. Solovyev also distinguishes such types of the political process as closed and open, stable and transitional. "The closed political process is a monovalent quality within the framework of good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable criteria. As the Russian political scientist Andrey Degtyarev notes, "Modern political science discursively recognizes the significant diversity and dynamics of political processes and confirms this with their typologies. Thus, political processes are divided into the following according to the criteria of the scale of the policy they implement: The macro-level of political processes is manifested in the stages of functioning of political institutions: for example, the state, regime, parties (historical, evolutionary, revolutionary process). Therefore, they are defined as political shifts, a cycle of successive changes in the state of the political system. They are characterized by the participation of "large" participants - political elites, classes, institutions of power, and can be measured only in large time units (formation or disintegration of the empire, modernization, democratic transition); can be measured in large time units (formation or disintegration of the empire, period of modernization, democratic transition); - processes at the micro level can be direct political events, for example, "some resultant set of functions specific to various socio-political subjects." These are everyday processes in politics that occur between'small' participants and are associated with the direct interaction of individual, group, or corporate interests (political interaction in parliament, local government structures) "[2]. Recent research by the main theorists of the theory of political processes has focused on a more dynamic analysis of the recurring mechanisms and processes of politics. The theory of political processes is the logical culmination of criticism of the socio-scientific views of that time. Because scientists also put forward scientific views that demonstrators and other participants in social movements are "illogical gangs," which are driven by a collective mentality. In reality, these actions were not motivated by alienation or an unnatural psychological inclination, but rather aimed at achieving political goals and presenting legal complaints, finding solutions to them, and solving problems. Three precursors that made a unique contribution to the theory of political processes in establishing this new analysis are noteworthy. First, "M. Olson's 1965 analysis of gathering behavior changed the old notions of demonstrators' illogicalness and examined the rational choices made by people before joining the movement. Secondly, in an effective analysis of the movement of farm workers, J. McCarthy and M. Zald found that the availability of resources for the movement explains the basis of changes in the level of mobilization, unlike the level of oppression. This perspective on resource mobilization takes into account not only material goods as resources, but also aspects such as organizational strength and the presence of elite allies"[3]. Thirdly, "F. Piven and R. Clovard focused on important aspects of the economic and political system of 1978. Only during periods of major crises on the scale of the entire system, for example, during a period of depression, movements were able to take benefits from the elite." American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 42 November - 2025 P a g e | 31 www.americanjournal.org In our opinion, the combination of the three approaches mentioned above forms the basis of the theory of political processes. In one of the main works on these processes, Ch. Tilly's book "Mobilization from Revolution," the author synthesizes these three approaches with other political views. According to Ch. Tilly (1978), the interaction of three structural elements - interests, organization, and opportunity - in a certain sense explains the level and importance of mobilization and collective action. Here, interests represent the potential outcomes of participation in political processes. Opportunity also indicates the extent of political power, the likelihood of pressure, and the weakness of the goal. His activity indirectly influences the social movement. At the same time, "D. McAdame's further analysis of the Civil Rights Movement became the central program of the theory of political processes. The theory is analyzed more deeply in D. McAdame's "The Political Process and the Development of Black Rebellion," where the author relies on the source, relying on previous criticisms of classical approaches" [5]. "The research conducted by C.Tilli and D.Macadam analyzes the rise and subsequent decline of the US Civil Rights Movement as a direct result of three existing factors based on political opportunities, local organizational strength, and criteria of cognitive freedom. "The fourth concept, often associated with the theory of political processes, is the period of discontent. This refers to historical periods of heightened political confrontation in the United States in 1968 or in Eastern Europe in 1989, when many groups challenged the state's legislation. A new political opportunity usually affects several groups, and since frameworks can often be transmitted across movements, there may also be clearly disconnected movements"[6]. C. Tilly rightly admits that "The limited methods that actors can claim constitute the repertoire of discussions. He identifies the emergence of the modern controversial repertoire, which included strikes, demonstrations, and social movements, in the second half of the 19th century"[7]. In our opinion, it is necessary to partially agree with the author's opinion that this type of complaint arose in the second half of the 19th century, since in this case, it is impossible to ignore the various complaints that arose in previous historical periods. Consequently, the difference between these two cases is that in previous historical periods, complaints to governments were categorically rejected through the use of offensive force, even leading to the physical elimination of the complainants. Thus, all these elements - political opportunities, mobilization structures, formation processes, periods of discontent, and controversial repertoires - form the basis of research on theories of modern political processes. These elements, in addition to explaining the dynamics of the rise or fall of public movements, are also used to understand and interpret the essence of social and political dissatisfaction and its consequences. It should also be noted that in many other types of studying political processes, political opportunities are considered as key elements. Sometimes, the terms "political opportunities" and "political processes" are used as equivalents. From a methodological point of view, different scientific sources offer different definitions of the political process, which may be similar in some of their characteristics. The study of specialized literature shows that the definition of the political process is associated with the methodological tools that researchers pay more attention to when studying political phenomena as an integral part of the political process, for example, in the study of political participation, political behavior, political regimes, systems, etc. The nature of politics as a process allows us to see strict boundaries between the relations of subjects from the point of view of state power. "Tolcott Parsons considers the political process from the point of view of its activity both as a whole and as separate components of the political system of society, and considers the phenomenon of power as a priority task. Nevertheless, Parsons considers the political process a unique integrator, allowing the transformation of the political system American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 42 November - 2025 P a g e | 32 www.americanjournal.org from one state to another. The most important thing for him is the transformation into power in the political process, which is a function of self-sustaining power. In this case, power is perceived as a circulating mediator in the political system. Social systems were defined by T. Parsons as systems formed between subjects acting through social interaction" [8]. T. Parsons, explaining the social structure, distinguishes four independent variables: values, norms, communities, and roles. Thus, as one of the authors of the "structural-functional approach," he closely connects the concepts of political process, political system, and political power. In this case, it is important to refer to Parsons's concept of society, since the functional approach to the political process is based on its definition as a social system. He states, "We define society as a holistic system that has the highest level of self-sufficiency in its environment and includes other social factors"[9]. Regarding Ralf Dahrendorf's conflict approach to the study of political processes, "the author proposes to consider the political process as an open or covert struggle, conflict, as well as consensus, cooperation for specific material resources and social status" [10]. At the same time, although it is impossible to explain the structural causes of all social conflicts, the researcher believes that the process of resolving conflicts with its specific structural states can be applied, possibly, to all its various forms. Social conflicts arise from the formation of societies prone to constantly crystallizing clashes between organized parties. Analysis and Results Summarizing the results of the study of political processes, it is necessary to consider the political process as a dynamic and nonlinear political phenomenon that can change over time. Because the change in political processes is mainly due to the influence of direct or indirect factors and situations related to the content of political speech and the type of its manifestation. Both conceptual, typological, and methodological approaches should constantly supplement political processes with new theoretical and methodological foundations. A comparative analysis of the theoretical and methodological approaches to political processes has shown that any individual approach can be effective only under the conditions of the corresponding society or political regime. Applying the same approach to the study and analysis of the political process in other situations and conditions may not be effective. If the institutional approach is effective in an institutionalized political system, then other models of state- political organization cannot have the same effectiveness in other systems dominated by developed political institutions. Conclusions and Proposals No matter how similar and compatible political processes may be, these processes also differ in their specific characteristics. Moreover, the study of any political process requires the application of a specific approach or a combination of some approaches. In this case, only the speech approach can be considered relatively universal, since all political processes, regardless of the type of political regime or other political factors, have their own speeches reflecting the specific features of the political process due to the model of political culture prevailing in this society. Such speeches create conditions for the emergence of various political ideas and political ideologies in society. References 1. Соловьев А.И. Политология: Политическая теория, политические технологии. М.Аспект Пресс, 2006. – С.559. American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 42 November - 2025 P a g e | 33 www.americanjournal.org 2. Дегтярев А.А. Основы политической теории. М.:1998. – С.147. 3. Mc Carthy, J., & Zald, M. (1977). Resource Mobilisation and Social Movements: A Partial Theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82. – P.1212. 4. Mc Carthy, J., & Zald, M. (1977). Resource Mobilisation and Social Movements: A Partial Theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82. – P.1241. 5. Tilly, C. Contentious Repertories in Great Britain, 1758-1834. In M. Traugott (Ed.), Repertoires and Cycles of Collective Action (pp. 15-42). Durham: Duke University Press. 2020 6. Mc Adam, D., Mc Carthy, J., & Zald, M. Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1996. 7. Tilly, C. (1995). Contentious Repertories in Great Britain, 1758-1834. In M. Traugott (Ed.), Repertoires and Cycles of Collective Action (pp. 15-42). Durham: Duke University Press 8. Parsons, T. On the Notion of “Political Power”, in Russian. In G.Semigin (Ed.), Anthology of World Political Thought. Foreign Political Thought of 20th Century Moscow: “Misl” 1997. – P.479. 9. Parsons, T. On the Notion of “Political Power”, in Russian. In G.Semigin (Ed.), Anthology of World Political Thought. Foreign Political Thought of 20th Century Moscow: “Misl” 1997. – P.486. 10. Dahrendorf, R. From Social State to Civilised Community, in Russian. Polis journal, 1993. №5. – PP.31-35.