Examination: Political theories of the XIX century: conservatism, liberalism, socialism. The concepts of "socialism", "liberalism", "conservatism"

Conservatism- a set of diverse ideological, political and cultural currents based on the idea of ​​tradition and continuity in social and cultural life. In the course of history, conservatism has acquired various forms, but in general it is characterized by a commitment to existing and established social systems and norms, rejection of revolutions and radical reforms, upholding the evolutionary, original development of society and the state. In the context of social change, conservatism manifests itself in a cautious attitude towards breaking down the old order, restoring lost positions, and recognizing the value of the ideals of the past. During the period of the establishment of capitalism, conservatism in the West opposed liberalism and socialism.

In conservatism, the main value is the preservation of the traditions of society, its institutions and values.

As an ideology, it was formed as a reaction to the "horrors of the French Revolution". Opposes liberalism, which demands economic freedoms, and socialism, which demands social equality.

In Russia, the conservative movement actively developed in the 19th century. As a rule, they were against education in Europe, the “Europeanization” of Russia in general, and also against reforms. Despite the fact that under Alexander II they lost their place at court, after his death (1881) they managed to recover. This was facilitated by the Polish uprising of 1863, "Nechaevshchina", the terror of Narodnaya Volya and the assassination of Alexander II.

Liberalism(from lat. liberalis - free) - a philosophical and socio-political trend that proclaims the inviolability of the rights and individual freedoms of a person, advocating minimization of state intervention in the lives of citizens.

Liberalism proclaims the rights and freedoms of each person as the highest value and establishes them as the legal basis of the social and economic order. At the same time, the possibilities of the state and the church to influence the life of society are limited by the constitution. The most important freedoms in liberalism are the freedom to speak out publicly, the freedom to choose a religion, the freedom to choose one's representatives in fair and free elections. In economic terms, the principles of liberalism are the inviolability of private property, freedom of trade and entrepreneurship. In legal terms, the principles of liberalism are the rule of law over the will of the rulers and the equality of all citizens before the law, regardless of their wealth, position and influence.

In Russia, Western bourgeois liberal ideas appeared in the 18th century and, having fallen on Russian soil, changed significantly during the 19th century.

The beginnings of liberal thought in Russia began to take shape in the 1920s and 1930s. 19th century

The Decembrists were among the first in Russia with liberal demands to endow society with rights and freedoms and enshrine them in the Constitution.

In the 2nd floor. 19th century capitalism in Russia had just begun to develop, so Russian liberalism was formed under the strong influence of Western European liberal thought, but with adjustments for the peculiarities of Russian reality.

European liberalism XIX century, he put forward demands for the free development of man, the supremacy of the individual and his interests over collectivism, state-guaranteed human rights and freedoms, the right to property and free competition, etc.

Russian liberals, having absorbed the ideas of Slavophilism, tried to develop a theory of reforming the state while maintaining purely Russian traditions - the monarchy, the peasant community, etc.

They demanded the elimination of class privileges, the creation of a volost zemstvo, a reduction in redemption payments, a reform of the State Council, the involvement of zemstvos in legislative advisory activities, and so on.

These demands did not affect the foundations of the autocracy and were aimed only at its gradual reformation into a constitutional monarchy, the creation in Russia of civil society and the rule of law.

The bourgeoisie, as the main bearer of liberal ideas in the West, in Russia was still so weak and dependent on the authorities that it itself was afraid of radical reforms, and therefore occupied the right flank of the movement - the so-called liberal conservatism. Therefore, the main carriers of liberal ideas in Russia were the progressive nobility and intelligentsia, which only strengthened the pro-monarchist nuances of this socio-political movement.

A serious impetus to the development of the liberal movement was given by the reforms of Alexander II of 60-70.

The general emancipation of society led to the expansion of the liberal movement at the expense of the Russian intelligentsia, which made changes to the tactics of the movement. Preserving, for the most part, monarchist views, the liberal intelligentsia considered it necessary to increase pressure on the government. They used semi-legal methods: letters addressed to the highest name, propaganda of new ideas in student audiences, support for peaceful political actions (strikes, demonstrations, etc.).

The weakness of the Russian liberal movement was also in the fact that it remained divided, and therefore weak. They were unable not only to unite with the populists, but even to create a united liberal front.

The main significance of Russian liberalism in that, against the background of the activation of radical socialists and the strengthening of conservative reaction, he offered Russian society an evolutionary reformist path of development.

G.S. bisque,

Professor of St. Petersburg State University

LIBERALISM, CONSERVATISM, SOCIALISM

Look around you and you will see conservatives and liberals. Again, like a hundred, two hundred, two thousand years ago. In the crowd at the subway as in the Roman forum. Ideological systems come and go, but these two poles seem to remain.

Conservatism is the oldest, original human ideology. Conservatism is based on common experience and tradition: do as your fathers and grandfathers did. The keywords of a conservative are fatherland, people, history, culture, and especially religion. He associates goodness and prosperity with the constancy of living conditions. A conservative more often has the right to consider himself an altruist. Actually, it is the sacralization of altruism that is the main positive function of religion. A conservative is usually a patriot (nationalist), his affection is limited to his own settlement, ethnic group, at best, country.

Liberalism begins where it is necessary to move away from all this and look from the outside. Liberalism prioritizes the individual, his rights and freedom of action. The key postulate of the liberal is “people will be born free”. This is precisely the postulate, since in reality people will be born naked, helpless and absolutely dependent. The liberal simply wants to say that he owes nothing to anyone. Yes, I am an egoist - but be an egoist too, says the liberal, and we will do something useful for ourselves, and there others will be able to benefit from it! A liberal is outside of religion, but not an atheist either, atheism for him is also a lack of freedom.

Are these two trends compatible? Yes, they are inherent in man in dialectical unity and eternal contradiction, since they reflect two sides of human nature = two features that are manifested in human populations and are in demand in different situations. Actually, this ensures the stable existence of the population in changing circumstances. War, famine, natural disasters, on the one hand, put forward commanders, leaders, on the other hand, a mass of people capable of self-sacrificingly fulfilling their will in the name of common salvation. But even in a pack of monkeys, ethologists note, liberalism begins where there is enough food. Peaceful and generally prosperous development allows initiative people, even egoists, to turn around. Indeed, what they succeed can serve as an example of success for others.

In other words, altruism - selfishness are a pair of traits-alleles scattered in the population, and selection can act on them both in one direction and in the other. In the human environment, difficult living conditions are better tolerated by groups of altruistic conservatives. Peaceful and prosperous development gives an advantage to groups in which there are more independent individuals and, of course, to people who are able to independently break through to new frontiers in industry, culture, and science.

Therefore, it is not surprising that both tendencies, conservative and liberal, are present in human populations - tribes - societies simultaneously and constantly, and mixing (or rather not completely separating). At the heart of it are innate feelings,

then reasonable arguments are built on them, but even after comparing them, both the conservative and the liberal find themselves with their incorrigible qualities. We can only say that in “ontogeny” we go through evolution from the desire for maximum personal freedom, which is really necessary for young people, since they must respond to the changed conditions of life, to conservatism, which is reinforced by the failures of many of our own and other people’s enterprises.

Liberalism and conservatism have historically always competed, but competition has taken different forms. In the traditional, pre-capitalist way of life, the same ones were endlessly reproduced - conservative ones! - Orders. Entrepreneurial liberals, lovers of freedom, were forced out to the periphery and developed new territories, as young liberal males expelled from the herd by the leader had done before them. In the Russian case, free people (Gumilyov Jr. came up with the idea of ​​calling them passionaries, but it’s not about feelings) moved east and reached Alaska, but on the whole, for the time being, they did not seriously encroach on the foundations public order(it can be noted that just from those who attempted, the Decembrists, Poles, and then the anarchists, well-known researchers of Siberia came out). The transition to free enterprise and a liberal type of state became possible and necessary precisely when these states showed advantages in the speed of development of positive knowledge and technology, not least military, and consequently in the competition of human populations, now molded into real states. It is generally accepted that it is success, triumph market economy created the conditions for the flourishing of the ideology of liberalism and the apology of competition.

Again, in our Russian case, one can trace the long struggle between the liberal and conservative tendencies. "Gentlemen nihilists and Slavophiles have to argue at the edge of the grave..." - the authors of Kozma Prutkov once painted in the scene of the funeral of their hero. Russian traditional-state-monarchical patriotism dealt a sensitive blow first Crimean War, the defeat in which opened the way for the liberals, but it took two more big lost wars of the early twentieth century for the idea of ​​​​accelerated modernization

defeated conservatism. However, here the socialists intervened in the dispute between conservatives and liberals.

The ratio of conservatism-liberalism-socialism is sometimes presented approximately as a triangular diagram, within which, closer to one or another corner, any declared position can be conditionally placed. If so, then the triangle is not very equilateral.

The conservative altruism of the animal-human collective is always within the group and is usually directed against the interests of another collective, so this has nothing to do with socialism yet. Socialism is international, it puts the well-being of mankind at the forefront. The minimum is the preservation of the human race, the maximum is the improvement of its life circumstances, constant improvement on a general and personal level, which creates a feeling of happiness. It would seem that everyone agrees with this, both conservatives and liberals. They just have a different vision of the paths to this happiness: some are looking for harmony lost in the past, others hope for progress, modernity and see an abundance of goods and services as the goal, and freedom for the entrepreneur as a means.

Is it possible to lead socialism from Jesus Christ? Perhaps, the equality of people's duties to God (read, to humanity) proclaimed by Christians still did not go beyond the limits of conservative ideology, and the liberals later, through the reformation, adapted it to their principles quite successfully. New here was one, still unsteadily formulated rule - "there is neither Greek nor Jew." As the evolution of monotheistic religions, quickly dispersed among states, showed, it was still very far from universal humanity, alter-globalism; however, this has not been mentioned before. Religious heretics and then utopian socialists already in modern times proposed and even tried to implement projects of human community, which, however, could not withstand any competition. Conservatism also clearly prevailed in these projects.

As you know, Karl Marx began as a humanist, trying to find a way to return a person to his nature as a social being, through overcoming his alienation associated with the need to work for hire. Then he turned to the study of the contemporary market-competitive system (capitalism) and came to the conclusion that the class of poor workers it generates should destroy this system when the possibilities for its development are exhausted and create a classless society. Movement towards building and improving this society is socialism.

For Marx's socialism, internationality, globality is already an obligatory and emphasized feature. The fact is that capital first becomes global, and global capital is able to resist any attempt to bypass it or exit it individually. He does not even try hard for this, although he generally does not like such attempts. Just your individual efforts to build a local National economy likely not to be cost-effective enough. At least consumption samples will show you. This is the main difficulty, after which comes subversive work, ideological pressure and other circumstances in which conservatives, including those who consider themselves socialists, always - almost always? - are losing. Therefore, even the old Marxists, and then the Trotskyists, spoke only of the world revolution.

The second sign of socialism is the possibility and necessity of planning a common human economy, i.e. what other authors call the creation of the noosphere. This is the same question - how, having explained the world, at the same time to remake it and in the course of perestroika, through restructuring, continue its knowledge.

The logic of Marx made an impression especially on workers and humanistic intellectuals, his teaching was taken as the basis for the activities of many revolutionary organizations and post-revolutionary state regimes.

In the next hundred plus years, a lot of interesting things happened that it makes sense to recall here only in dotted lines. Russian Marxist socialism of the 19th - early 20th centuries was predominantly anti-conservative (and therefore opposed, among other things, revolutionary populism - Social Revolutionaries). After the sharp turn in 1917 and the ensuing severe civil conflict with bourgeois circles, it necessarily became anti-liberal, incorporating populist ideology, which S. Kara-Murza showed just well and with approval. The works of this author, with his apology for the Soviet past, are an excellent example of left-wing conservatism, which differs from socialism most of all in its backwardness.

In advanced Europe and North America, capitalism has evolved towards a system of relatively greater equality and a distinctly liberal orientation, but at the expense of the material opportunities provided by the exploitation of the human and raw material resources of the rest of the world. In parallel, in this rest of the world, countries appeared that set as their goal precisely to build and precisely socialism. The first of these was Russia, which founded a socialist Soviet Union. Further, in short, the following happened. The initially decisive shift in public sentiment in Russia in favor of the world socialist idea, in conditions of isolation from the rest of the world, could not be sustainable, since the country had to be built and modernized at the industrial phase of development, which technologically corresponds to employment and market relations. Under these conditions, to carry out a socialist policy, relying on workers' control in factory conditions, on the free cooperation of the numerically predominant peasantry, and so on. conditions meant walking on a razor's edge. The Bolsheviks achieved surprisingly much - and nothing will turn out if we compare today's result with the goals set at the beginning. Since the 1930s, the national-conservative trend has actually prevailed, and the system that has arisen can rather be described as defensive-industrial social paternalism. On the basis of anti-liberalism, our socialism became very conservative, ossified in defense of what had been achieved, and was overthrown in 1991, having experienced the usual fate of conservative regimes. The return from social paternalism to Russian capitalism (also a special education) at a sharp turn in history turned out to be easy. As a result, for the last 25 years we have seen first the triumph of liberal ideology, which had taken up the banner of freedom and progress, and now we are meeting a rising conservative wave and again, as under Alexander II, we are listening to the bickering of liberals with conservatives.

What's in the future? If we apply the scale of historical time, it turns out that in fact all these ideological turns in public consciousness countries are moving very fast. The current younger generation will see

there is still a lot that seems to be unexpected, and in this sense it is unlikely to differ from the older one. Maybe it will have time to understand that there was no "collapse of communism" and the collapse of "unsustainable socialism", that socialism, as a real movement towards an exit from capitalism, continues in different countries, in different parts world in different ways, with dead ends, returns and detours, and communism as a complete overcoming of wage labor is undoubtedly ahead. What will he be like? How to move from a competitive fight for money to a competition for public recognition of your work? How not to waste, not to harm yourself and others, the greatest, only value of a person - free time? What is the mode of vivendi of man with other inhabitants of the Earth? It seems that the answers to these questions (and many others) are already beginning to shine through somewhere, but in any case, it is clear that either the beginning of the “true history of mankind” is revealed before us, or the evolution of the biosphere will indifferently repeat everything on other biological material.

It would seem that a synthesis of conservatism and liberalism is ahead at a new stage in history. Socialism is a way of overcoming the eternal contradiction between liberal and conservative tendencies, a way that is inherent precisely in the post-industrial, post-market state of the world's productive forces, already the world economy.

However, everything here depends on which aspects of these trends can be synthesized. Fascism (in other words, aggressive, imperial nationalism) did not appear in vain in the 20th century as a shadow, the antithesis of socialism. The axial contradiction is now here. Fascism can grow both from national (social) conservatism and from global liberalism. Its main feature is the denial of the common interests of mankind, the solution of the problems of the nation, the elite, in the end the golden billion at the expense of everyone else.

Everyone… What does the old Marxist formula mean: the free development of everyone as a condition for the free development of all? This is a warning about the dialectical unity of opposing demands. Liberals! Remember that the impasse and collapse of society is also the end of the individual. Socialists! Do not forget that society is an abstraction, but in reality there are individuals who should develop freely.

And of course we will try to be reasonable conservatives and moderately liberals.

appendix. XX century in 12 lines.

Lenin: We will take advantage of the revolutionary struggle of the masses for our immediate interests in order to direct their movement towards socialism, i.e. their long-term interest!

Plekhanov: come to your senses! what kind of socialism? There will be one blood ... first, to establish bourgeois democracy and decent capitalism, and only then ...!

Stalin: however, we will have socialism, and very strong and toothy! Because if it is not built like this, then we will be crushed in no time!

Trotsky: no, this is not socialism, but complete preparation restoration of capitalism! the only way out is a world revolution, then the leaders with the apparatus will no longer be needed!

Resident: yes, and there will be no one to envy ...

Let's start over.

Ideology is a system of views and ideas that seeks to give a holistic explanation of the phenomena of social life in the interests of certain social groups.

The roots of liberalism can also be found in the political teachings of the ancient period, but as an integral system of views, it was formed during the 17th-18th centuries. (D. Locke, C.-L. Montesquieu, A. Smith, A. de Tocqueville; in Russia A.N. Radishchev, M.M. Speransky, Struve, etc.)

Liberalism is a political doctrine that aims to eliminate or mitigate various forms of state and social coercion in relation to the individual. (From lat. liberalis - relating to freedom, inherent in a free person).

There are several fundamental ideas and principles of classical liberalism. First of all, it concerns the assessment of human nature. Liberalism claims that people are by nature generally rational and strive for the good. Each individual is able to independently arrange life. For this, every citizen must be endowed with inalienable rights and freedoms. The basic freedom is economic freedom, freedom of entrepreneurship. The guarantee of this freedom is low taxes and non-interference of the state in economic life (the role of the "night watchman" for the state). The basis of economic and political development society, progress is competition, including in the spiritual sphere. Social justice, from the point of view of liberalism, in society consists in creating a system of equal conditions for the start of life of people. Liberalism therefore advocates equal access to education and culture. In the future, everyone should live according to their abilities, diligence, and enterprise. Assistance is provided only to those who are not able to independently equip their lives.

The main function of the state is to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens. In order for the state to be unable to suppress rights and freedoms, it is necessary to weaken state power. To do this, it is necessary to divide it into three independent branches: legislative, executive and judicial. At the same time, the judiciary should be outside of politics. Modern liberalism rejects any radical reforms in society and especially revolutions. Changes in society should occur gradually. Any radical changes, especially a revolution, affect the interests of people, and for liberalism, the main thing is the rights and freedoms of citizens.

Conservatism (from the Latin words conservare - to preserve, protect, take care of preservation) is a political doctrine advocating the preservation of traditional foundations of life. Founded in late XVIII in. as a reaction to the French Revolution. The greatest contribution to the development of the ideas of conservatism was made by E. Burke, W. Woddsworth, S. Coleridge, J. de Maistre, F. Lamennet, and others. In Russia, N. Karamzin, K.P. Pobedonostsev, I. Solonevich, I. Ilyin, I. Tikhomirov and others. All major European reformers were guided by the ideology of conservatism (Richelieu, Mazarin, Coltaire, Disraeli, Bismarck, Stolypin). The main ideas and values ​​of conservatism are opposed to liberal ideas. The ideologists of conservatism argue that the human mind is imperfect, limited, man is by nature prone to fall. Therefore, a firm universal order must exist in society. Conservatism advocates primarily for the observance of the rule of law (by definition, purely prohibitive). Order must be maintained with the help of positive moral values ​​formulated in the form of universally valid imperatives, primarily in religion. Religion is needed for an imperfect person. A believing person, even committing a crime, realizes that this is a crime, for there is a commandment "Thou shalt not kill." Without faith, he may be deprived of this moral restraint. The main driving force of progress, from the point of view of conservatism, is not competition, but tradition. The experience of past generations is concentrated in traditions. Only relying on it, you can successfully develop. Tradition is what lies between instinct and reason, so it successfully resists impulsive behavior on the one hand, and rational calculation on the other.

Unlike liberalism, which considers the republic to be the universal form of state government, conservatism does not attach any fundamental importance to this. The main thing is that the form of government should correspond to the traditions, values ​​of spiritual culture and ensure social and political stability. But separation state power necessary, because man is by nature imperfect, so the concentration of power in one hand is dangerous. The dispersal of power helps to avoid errors in the decision-making process.

The development of society should be gradual, evolutionary. It is impossible to senselessly impose any schemes on the political system. The political system is not a combination of some different elements, it is a living organism that is created and created by traditions, habits, tastes, culture, worldly wisdom of many generations. Reason plays a secondary role here. The most successful development is development based on traditional norms. These norms are formed by the efforts of many generations, so there can be no quick revolutionary transition from one tradition to another. Any reforms and experiments should be carried out on a limited scale, within the framework of the existing political system and not lead to its destruction. The scale of reforms is increasing as positive experience accumulates.

The main values ​​of society, according to the ideology of conservatism, are "family", "order", "spiritual culture", "people", "Motherland" (state). The political philosophy of conservatism sees the achievement of freedom in the preservation of fundamental spiritual values, religion, morality, culture, traditions, patriotism. The preservation of these values ​​allows you to feel like a free person, to distinguish yourself from the animal world. In their programs, conservative political parties always stand for the strengthening of the state, because the state, from their point of view, is the organizer of people's life. Activities against the state are declared non-political.

Socialism is understood as a socially organized, socially protected society, which is endlessly improved on the values ​​of solidarity, social security, and justice. The process of endless improvement of society on these values ​​- this is socialism. Socialism cannot be built. Socialism, in the interpretation of the ideology of social reformism, is a process of endless movement. (E. Bernstein: “Movement is everything, the ultimate goal is nothing”). The movement towards socialism becomes possible only with a certain level of material prerequisites. Such a basis is the achievement by capitalism of a level of development at which the economy is dominated not by private capital, but by associated capital. On this basis, the functions of ownership and disposal of capital are separated. Capital is transformed into a social force. Everyone has the opportunity to purchase shares and become a co-owner of the property. In the presence of such conditions, it becomes possible to improve society on the values ​​of solidarity, social justice, and social security. The movement towards socialism occurs gradually, evolutionarily. The general population is integrated into existing system economic relations Therefore, any radical reforms in society undermine the solidarity and social security of citizens, that is, the basic values ​​of socialism. Revolutions are incompatible with socialism, because a revolution is the dictatorship of one part of the population over another, it is a departure from democracy, and socialism and democracy are inseparable.

Date: 09/28/2015

Lesson: story

Class: 8

Topic:"Liberals, Conservatives, and Socialists: What Should Society and State Be Like?"

Goals: to acquaint students with the main ideological methods for implementing the ideas of liberals, conservatives, socialists, Marxists; find out the interests of which strata of society reflected these teachings; develop the ability to analyze, compare, draw a conclusion, work with a historical source;

Equipment: computer, presentation, materials for checking homework

Download:

Preview:

Date: 09/28/2015

Lesson: history

Grade: 8

Topic: "Liberals, Conservatives, and Socialists: What Should Society and State Be Like?"

Goals: to acquaint students with the main ideological methods for implementing the ideas of liberals, conservatives, socialists, Marxists; find out the interests of which strata of society reflected these teachings; develop the ability to analyze, compare, draw a conclusion, work with a historical source;

Equipment: computer, presentation, materials for checking homework

Application:

In the course of explaining the new material, the following table should be obtained:

Attachment 1

Liberals, Conservatives, Socialists

1. The radical direction of liberalism.

After graduation Congress of Vienna the map of Europe has taken on a new look. The territories of many states were divided into separate regions, principalities and kingdoms, which were then divided among themselves by large and influential powers. In most European countries, the monarchy was restored. Holy Union made every effort to maintain order and eradicate any revolutionary movement. However, contrary to the wishes of politicians in Europe, capitalist relations continued to develop, which came into conflict with the laws of the old political structure. At the same time, in addition to the problems caused by economic development, there were added difficulties associated with the infringement of national interests in various states. All this led to the appearance in the 19th century. in Europe, new political directions, organizations and movements, as well as to numerous revolutionary speeches. In the 1830s, the national liberation and revolutionary movement swept France and England, Belgium and Ireland, Italy and Poland.

In the first half of the 19th century In Europe, two main socio-political currents were formed: conservatism and liberalism. The word liberalism comes from the Latin “Liberum” (liberum), i.e. pertaining to freedom. The ideas of liberalism were expressed as early as the 18th century. during the Age of Enlightenment by Locke, Montesquieu, Voltaire. However, this term became widespread in the second decade of the 19th century, although its meaning at that time was extremely vague. Liberalism began to take shape in France during the Restoration into a complete system of political views.

Proponents of liberalism believed that mankind would be able to move along the path of progress and achieve social harmony only if the principle of private property was put at the heart of society. The common good, in their opinion, consists of the successful achievement by citizens of their personal goals. Therefore, it is necessary to provide people with freedom of action both in the economic sphere and in other spheres of activity with the help of laws. The boundaries of this freedom, as it was indicated in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, must also be determined by laws. Those. the motto of the liberals was the later famous phrase: "everything that is not prohibited by law is allowed." At the same time, liberals believed that only the person who is able to answer for his actions can be free. They referred only educated owners to the category of people who are able to be responsible for their actions. The actions of the state must also be limited by laws. Liberals believed that the power in the state should be divided into legislative, executive and judicial.

AT economic area liberalism advocated a free market and free competition between entrepreneurs. At the same time, in their opinion, the state did not have the right to interfere in market relations, but was obliged to play the role of a “guardian” of private property. Only in the last third of the 19th century. the so-called "new liberals" began to say that the state should also support the poor, restrain the growth of interclass contradictions and achieve general welfare.

Liberals have always been convinced that transformations in the state should be carried out with the help of reforms, but by no means in the course of revolutions. Unlike many other currents, liberalism assumed that there is a place in the state for those who do not support the existing government, who think and speak differently than the majority of citizens, and even differently than the liberals themselves. Those. supporters of liberal views were convinced that the opposition had the right to legal existence and even to express their views. She was categorically forbidden only one thing: revolutionary actions aimed at changing the form of government.

In the 19th century liberalism has become the ideology of many political parties, uniting supporters of the parliamentary system, bourgeois freedoms and freedom of capitalist enterprise. At the same time, there were various forms of liberalism. Moderate liberals considered a constitutional monarchy to be the ideal state system. A different opinion was held by radical liberals who sought to establish a republic.

2. Conservatives.

The liberals were opposed by the conservatives. The name "conservatism" comes from the Latin word "conservatio" (conservation), which means "to protect" or "preserve". The more liberal and revolutionary ideas spread in society, the stronger became the need to preserve traditional values: religion, monarchy, national culture, family and order. The conservatives sought to create a state that, on the one hand, would recognize the sacred right to property, and on the other hand, would be able to protect the usual values. At the same time, according to conservatives, the authorities have the right to intervene in the economy and regulate its development, and citizens must obey the instructions of state power. Conservatives did not believe in the possibility of universal equality. They said: "All people have equal rights, but not the same benefits." They saw the freedom of the individual in the ability to preserve and maintain traditions. The conservatives regarded social reforms as a last resort in the face of revolutionary danger. However, with the development of the popularity of liberalism and the emergence of the threat of losing votes in parliamentary elections, the conservatives had to gradually recognize the need for social transformation, as well as accept the principle of non-intervention of the state in the economy. Therefore, as a result, almost all social legislation in the 19th century. was adopted by the Conservatives.

3. Socialism.

In addition to conservatism and liberalism in the 19th century. the ideas of socialism are widely spread. This term comes from the Latin word “socialis” (socialis), i.e. "public". Socialist thinkers saw the hardship of the life of ruined artisans, workers in manufactories and factory workers. They dreamed of a society in which poverty and enmity between citizens would disappear forever, and the life of every person would be protected and inviolable. main problem the representatives of this trend saw their contemporary society in private property. The socialist Count Henri Saint-Simon believed that all citizens of the state are divided into "industrials" engaged in useful creative work and "owners" who appropriate the income of other people's labor. However, he did not consider it necessary to deprive the latter of private property. He hoped that, by appealing to Christian morality, it would be possible to convince the owners to voluntarily share their income with their "younger brothers" - the workers. Another supporter of socialist views, François Fourier, also believed that classes, private property and unearned income should be preserved in an ideal state. All problems must be solved by increasing the productivity of labor to such a level that wealth will be ensured for all citizens. The revenues of the state will have to be distributed among the inhabitants of the country, depending on the contribution made by each of them. The English thinker Robert Owen had a different opinion on the issue of private property. He thought that only public property should exist in the state, and money should be abolished altogether. According to Owen, with the help of machines, a society can produce a sufficient amount of material goods, it is only necessary to distribute them fairly among all its members. Both Saint-Simon, and Fourier, and Owen were convinced that an ideal society awaits humanity in the future. At the same time, the path to it should be exclusively peaceful. Socialists relied on persuading, developing and educating people.

The ideas of the socialists were further developed in the works of the German philosopher Karl Marx and his friend and colleague Friedrich Engels. They created a new doctrine called "Marxism". Unlike their predecessors, Marx and Engels believed that in an ideal society there is no place for private property. Such a society began to be called communist. The revolution must lead mankind to a new system. In their opinion, this should happen in the following way. With the development of capitalism, the impoverishment of the masses of the people will increase, and the wealth of the bourgeoisie will increase. The class struggle will then become more widespread. It will be headed by the Social Democratic parties. The result of the struggle will be a revolution, during which the power of the workers or the dictatorship of the proletariat will be established, private property will be abolished, and the resistance of the bourgeoisie will be finally broken. In the new society, political freedoms and equality of all citizens in rights will not only be established, but also observed. The workers will take an active part in the management of enterprises, and the state will have to control the economy and regulate the processes taking place in it in the interests of all citizens. At the same time, each person will receive all the opportunities for comprehensive and harmonious development. However, later Marx and Engels came to the conclusion that the socialist revolution is not the only way to resolve social and political contradictions.

4. Revisionism.

In the 90s. 19th century there have been great changes in the life of states, peoples, political and social movements. The world has entered a new period of development - the era of imperialism. This required theoretical reflection. Students are already aware of changes in the economic life of society and its social structure. Revolutions were a thing of the past, socialist thought was in deep crisis, and the socialist movement was in a split.

The German Social Democrat E. Bernstein criticized classical Marxism. The essence of E. Bernstein's theory can be reduced to the following provisions:

1. He proved that the growing concentration of production does not lead to a decrease in the number of owners, that the development of the joint-stock form of ownership increases their number, that along with monopolistic associations, medium and small enterprises remain.

2. He pointed out that the class structure of society is becoming more complex: the middle strata of the population appeared - employees and officials, whose number in percentage terms is growing faster than the number of wage workers.

3. He showed the growing heterogeneity of the working class, the existence in it of highly paid sections of skilled workers and unskilled workers, whose labor was paid extremely low.

4. He wrote that at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. workers did not yet make up the majority of the population and were not ready to take on the independent management of society. From this he concluded that the conditions for a socialist revolution were not yet ripe.

All of the above shook E. Bernstein's confidence that the development of society can only take a revolutionary path. It became obvious that the reorganization of society could be achieved through economic and social reforms carried out through popularly and democratically elected authorities. Socialism can win not as a result of a revolution, but under the conditions of expanding voting rights. E. Bernstein and his supporters believed that the main thing was not a revolution, but the struggle for democracy and the adoption of laws that ensure the rights of workers. This is how the doctrine of reformist socialism arose.

Bernstein did not consider development towards socialism as the only possible one. Whether development takes this path depends on whether the majority of the people want it and on whether the socialists can lead people to the desired goal.

5. Anarchism.

Criticism of Marxism was also published from the other side. Anarchists opposed him. They were followers of anarchism (from the Greek. anarchia - anarchy) - a political movement that proclaimed its goal the destruction of the state. The ideas of anarchism were developed in modern times by the English writer W. Godwin, who in his book A Study on Political Justice (1793) proclaimed the slogan "Society without a State!" Anarchist included a variety of teachings - both "left" and "right", a variety of performances - from rebellious and terrorist to the movement of cooperators. But all the numerous teachings and speeches of the anarchists had one common feature- denial of the need for the state.

M. A. Bakunin set before his followers only the task of destruction, "clearing the ground for future construction." For the sake of this "cleansing" he called on the masses of the people to protest and terrorist acts against representatives of the class of oppressors. Bakunin did not know what the future anarchist society would look like and did not work on this problem, believing that the “deed of creation” belongs to the future. In the meantime, a revolution was needed, after the victory of which, first of all, the state should be destroyed. Bakunin also did not recognize the participation of workers in parliamentary elections, in the work of any representative organizations.

In the last third of the XIX century. the development of the theory of anarchism is associated with the name of the most prominent theoretician of this political doctrine, Pyotr Aleksandrovich Kropotkin (1842-1921). In 1876, he fled from Russia abroad and began to publish the journal La Revolte in Geneva, which became the main printed organ of anarchism. Kropotkin's teaching is called "communist" anarchism. He sought to prove that anarchism is historically inevitable and is an obligatory step in the development of society. Kropotkin believed that state laws interfere with the development of natural human rights, mutual support and equality, and therefore give rise to all sorts of abuses. He formulated the so-called "biosociological law of mutual assistance", which supposedly determines the desire of people to cooperate, and not to fight with each other. He considered the federation to be the ideal organization of society: a federation of clans and tribes, a federation of free cities, villages and communities in the Middle Ages, modern state federations. What should cement a society in which there is no state mechanism? It was here that Kropotkin applied his "law of mutual assistance", pointing out that the role of a unifying force will be played by mutual assistance, justice and morality, feelings inherent in human nature.

Kropotkin explained the creation of the state by the emergence of land ownership. Therefore, in his opinion, it was possible to pass to the federation of free communes only through the revolutionary destruction of what separates people - state power and private property.

Kropotkin considered a person to be a kind and perfect being, and meanwhile anarchists increasingly used terrorist methods, explosions thundered in Europe and the USA, people died.

Questions and tasks:

1. Fill in the table: "The main ideas of the socio-political doctrines of the 19th century."

1. How did representatives of liberalism see the path of development of society? What provisions of their teaching seem to you relevant for modern society?
2. How did representatives of conservatism see the path of development of society? Do you think their teaching is still relevant today?
3. What caused the emergence of socialist doctrines? Are there conditions for the development of socialist doctrine in the 21st century?
4. On the basis of the teachings known to you, try to create your own project of possible ways for the development of society in our time. What role do you agree to assign to the state? What do you see as ways to solve social problems? How do you imagine the limits of individual human freedom?

Liberalism:

the role of the state in economic life: the activity of the state is limited by law. There are three branches of government. The economy has a free market and free competition. The state interferes little in the economy position on the social issue and ways to solve problems: the individual is free. The way of transformation of society through reforms. New liberals came to the conclusion about the need for social reforms

limits of individual freedom: complete freedom of the individual: "Everything that is not prohibited by law is allowed." But individual freedom is granted to those who are responsible for their self-decisions.

Conservatism:

the role of the state in economic life: the power of the state is practically unlimited and is aimed at preserving the old traditional values. In the economy: the state can regulate the economy, but without encroaching on private property

position on the social issue and ways to solve problems: fought for the preservation of the old order. They denied the possibility of equality and brotherhood. But the new conservatives were forced to accept some democratization of society.

limits of individual freedom: the state subjugates the individual. The freedom of the individual is expressed in the observance of traditions.

Socialism (Marxism):

the role of the state in economic life: the unlimited activity of the state in the form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. In the economy: the destruction of private property, the free market and competition. The state fully regulates the economy.

position on the social issue and ways of solving problems: everyone should have equal rights and equal benefits. Solving a social problem through a social revolution

limits of individual freedom: the state itself decides all social issues. The freedom of the individual is limited by the state dictatorship of the proletariat. Labor is required. Private enterprise and private property are prohibited.

World practice has developed many different ideological systems. We will consider only the largest of them: liberalism, conservatism, socialism and fascism.

All these ideological currents are undoubtedly connected with the activities of certain political parties and state structures. But none of them in a rigid form, can not be directly attributed to a particular party or the course of the government. The formation and approval of each of these ideological currents took place in different socio-historical and socio-cultural conditions. Therefore, in their content there are many different shades and even contradictions.

Liberalism. One of the most widespread ideological currents is liberalism. What are its fundamental principles? Liberalism was formed at the end of the XVII-XVIII centuries. as the ideology of the rising class of the bourgeoisie based on the ideas of the Enlightenment. Its origins are the works of Sh.L. Montesquieu, D. Locke, T. Hobbes, A. Smith, T. Jefferson, J.S. Mill and others. The foundation of liberalism is the principle of individual freedom, its inherent value in relation to all social institutions, the responsibility of the individual both to himself and to society, recognition of the right to self-realization of all people. Therefore, liberalism in all its varieties has invariably defended the demand for individual freedom, the dignity of the human person and tolerance for the views and beliefs of other people.

Under the influence of the development of social processes, the internal evolution of liberalism took place. Not being able to trace all the vicissitudes of this evolution, let us dwell on the characteristics of the current stage in the development of liberalism - neoliberalism.

The ideology of neoliberalism was formed in the 30s of the XX century. Researchers associate the beginning of neoliberalism with the "New Deal" of the American President, representative of the Democratic Party F.D. Roosevelt. Neoliberalism corrected a number of important political and economic principles of its ideology. This adjustment is associated with a rethinking of the economic and social role of the state. Neo-liberals recognize the need for a certain participation of the state in the regulation of economic relations, the conduct of an active social policy. They are in favor of limiting the power of monopolies, redistributing material wealth through the system of taxes and state social programs in favor of the lower strata of society. Under the flag of the ideology of liberalism, the so-called model of the "positive state" was created, which they called the state of "welfare". Neoliberalism remains the ideological and theoretical basis of the activities of the US Democratic Party.

Conservatism. Conservatism has been the opponent of liberalism for a long period of history. Liberalism was the banner of the bourgeois revolutions that shook the countries of Europe in the 18th and early 19th centuries. Conservatism arose as an anti-revolutionary feudal-clerical ideology, defending the idea of ​​the inviolability of the orders established by God. The creators of the ideology of conservatism are the English thinker and politician E. Burke, French public figures J. de Maistre and L. Bonald.

As noted above, historically conservatism is associated with feudal social structure and is the spokesman for the interests of secular and church feudal lords. But the social base of conservatism is much broader. As a rule, conservatism expresses the ideas and attitudes of those classes and social groups whose position is threatened by objective trends in socio-historical and socio-political development. Often, conservatism is a refuge for various sections of society that are afraid of the future due to its uncertainty and unpredictability. The residents of the village, small entrepreneurs are most affected by it.

The ideology of conservatism is based on the recognition of the inviolability of the natural order of things. Therefore, conservatism is based on traditionalism - the idea of ​​preserving traditional values ​​associated with family, religion, class divisions. Proceeding from this attitude, the conservatives affirm the priority in the social development of continuity over innovations. one

Socialism. The third influential trend in the modern world is socialist ideology. The ideas of socialism arose in ancient times. In accordance with these ideas, the life of the early Christian communities was built. But it received its theoretical and ideological formulation only in the New Age in the works of the classics of utopian socialism T. More, T. Campanella, R. Owen, C. Fourier, A. Saint-Simon. A certain contribution to the development of these ideas was made by the French enlighteners, and above all by J.J. Rousseau.

In the middle of the 19th century, the German thinkers K. Marx and F. Engels made an attempt to give a scientific justification for the ideology of socialism. On the basis of the teachings of K. Marx and F. Engels, a large ideological trend, Marxism, was formed, which proclaimed itself the ideology of the proletariat. For a long time, Marxism has been associated with the labor movement.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Marxism split into two opposing branches: Leninism (Bolshevism) and Social Democracy. Thus, within the framework of socialist ideology, two new ideological currents were formed. These currents are connected by common genetic roots and a number of values: the idea of ​​equality and brotherhood of all people, social justice based on equality, the priority of public over personal, recognition of the need for vigorous state intervention in the regulation of social relations.

However, in the specific socio-political and economic programs between Leninism and Social Democracy lies a deep chasm.

Leninism. Leninism is the teaching of V.I. Lenin and his supporters - was formed in Russia. Having abandoned the fundamental principle of Marxism about the simultaneous transition to socialism, the most developed countries peace, V.I. Lenin put forward the idea of ​​a "weak link" in the chain of capitalist countries - Russia - and demanded an immediate violent seizure of power, the destruction of the bourgeois state machine, the expropriation of private property and its transformation into public (state) property. The ideology of Leninism became the ideological basis of the Great October Socialist Revolution and the building of socialism in the USSR and other countries of the socialist community. On the basis of this ideology, the socialization of production, the collectivization of the countryside took place, and a powerful totalitarian system was formed. However, this system proved to be ineffective and ceased to exist in the early 1990s.

Fundamentally different socio-political attitudes adhere to the social democrats. The founders of social democracy are German thinkers and public figures K. Kautsky and E. Bernstein. The social democratic ideology is formed on the basis of rethinking the teachings of Marxism in line with the rejection of its revolutionary-violent attitudes and the assertion of the values ​​of humanism and democracy. Social democracy is based on the doctrine of "democratic socialism", or socialism "with a human face". From the point of view of social democrats, socialism is not a specific social system, but a process of introducing social justice into public life. This process has no specific economic and political constraints and lasts forever. This understanding of socialism is based on the formula of E. Bernstein "movement is everything, the goal is nothing."

The Social Democrats affirm the priority of peaceful, evolutionary means of achieving equality and social justice. The idea of ​​a gradual reform of bourgeois society is inextricably linked in this ideological trend with the rejection of violent forms of class struggle and the promotion of the concept of social partnership, smoothing out socio-economic contradictions. They associate the implementation of these guidelines with active state intervention in the economic life of society, the redistribution of income in favor of the poor, the development of the public sector of the economy and numerous state social programs.

Various "models of socialism" were formed on the basis of social democratic ideology. The most famous were the Swedish and German models. As a result of the practical implementation of the political and economic principles of social democracy during the rule of social democratic parties in West Germany and Sweden, a relatively high level and quality of life were achieved. However, in the 1980s and 1990s, negative trends emerged in the economies of these countries associated with state monopolism and bureaucracy, and a decrease in incentives for private entrepreneurship. These trends have led to a slowdown in the development of these countries. As a result, the Social Democrats lost the support of the majority of voters and were forced to transfer power to representatives of the conservative ideology.

Fascism. In the 1920s and 1930s of this century, the National Socialist ideology, or fascism, was formed. The founders of fascism are former leader left wing of the Italian Social Democrats B. Mussolini and the German political figure A. Hitler (A. Schicklgruber). The theoretical basis of the National Socialist ideology are the ideas of racism and elitism. Fascism put forward the theory of the superiority of certain peoples over others. one