Liberals late 19th early 20th century. Liberal theories of the 19th century. One of the consequences of the liberal reforms of Alexander II was the intensive economic development of Russia, which brought the large industrial bourgeoisie and proletariat into the historical arena. New IP

Health

Russian liberals considered the main problem to be the implementation of the idea of individual freedom. In Russia, the individual has always been suppressed by the patriarchal family and the oppressive state. The human personality can only be realized in society, but at the same time, personal freedom is limited by other individuals. Law is created for regulation. That. law is not arbitrary legislation and not a social contract, but the realization of fundamental human rights, while the basis of natural law is the principle of justice, and the basis of positive law is equality, i.e. the state must compensate for inequality. Individual rights are realized through civil and political freedoms.

Related information:

Search on the site:

In the second half of the nineteenth century. Three directions in the social movement finally took shape: conservatives, liberals and radicals.

The social basis of the conservative movement was made up of reactionary nobles, clergy, townspeople, merchants and a significant part of the peasants. Conservatism of the second half of the nineteenth century. remained true to the theory of “official nationality”.

Autocracy was declared the foundation of the state, and Orthodoxy - the basis of the spiritual life of the people. Nationality meant the unity of the king with the people. In this, conservatives saw the uniqueness of Russia's historical path.

In the domestic political sphere, conservatives fought for the inviolability of autocracy and against the liberal reforms of the 60s and 70s. In the economic sphere, they advocated the inviolability of private property, landownership and the community.

In the social field, they called for the unity of the Slavic peoples around Russia.

The ideologists of the conservatives were K.P. Pobedonostsev, D.A. Tolstoy, M.N. Katkov.

Conservatives were statist guardians and had a negative attitude towards any mass social action, advocating order.

The social basis of the liberal trend was made up of bourgeois landowners, part of the bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia.

They defended the idea of a common path of historical development for Russia with Western Europe.

In the domestic political sphere, liberals insisted on introducing constitutional principles and continuing reforms.

Their political ideal was a constitutional monarchy.

In the socio-economic sphere, they welcomed the development of capitalism and freedom of enterprise. They demanded the elimination of class privileges.

Liberals stood for an evolutionary path of development, considering reforms to be the main method of modernizing Russia.

They were ready to cooperate with the autocracy. Therefore, their activity mainly consisted of submitting “addresses” to the tsar - petitions proposing a program of reforms.

The ideologists of the liberals were scientists and publicists: K.D. Kavelin, B.N. Chicherin, V.A. Goltsev et al.

Features of Russian liberalism: its noble character due to the political weakness of the bourgeoisie and its readiness for rapprochement with conservatives.

Representatives of the radical movement sought violent methods of transforming Russia and a radical reorganization of society (the revolutionary path).

The radical movement involved people from different walks of life (raznochintsy), who devoted themselves to serving the people.

In the history of the radical movement of the second half of the 19th century. Three stages are distinguished: 60s. - the formation of revolutionary democratic ideology and the creation of secret raznochinsky circles; 70s - formalization of populism, the special scope of agitation and terrorist activities of revolutionary populists; 80 - 90s — weakening of the popularity of populism and the beginning of the spread of Marxism.

In the 60s There were two centers of radical movement. One is around the editorial office of Kolokol, published by A.I. Herzen in London. He promoted the theory of “communal socialism” and sharply criticized the conditions for the liberation of peasants. The second center arose in Russia around the editorial office of the Sovremennik magazine. Its ideologist was N.G. Chernyshevsky, who was arrested and exiled to Siberia in 1862.

The first major revolutionary democratic organization was “Land and Freedom” (1861), which included several hundred members from different strata: officials, officers, students.

In the 70s There were two trends among the populists: revolutionary and liberal.

The main ideas of the revolutionary populists: capitalism in Russia is being imposed “from above”, the future of the country lies in communal socialism, transformations must be carried out by the revolutionary method by the forces of the peasants.

Three currents emerged in revolutionary populism: rebellious, propaganda and conspiratorial.

Ideologist of the rebellious movement M.A. Bakunin believed that the Russian peasant was by nature a rebel and ready for revolution. Therefore, the task of the intelligentsia is to go to the people and incite an all-Russian revolt. He called for the creation of a federation of self-government of free communities.

P.L. Lavrov, the ideologist of the propaganda movement, did not consider the people ready for revolution. Therefore, he paid most attention to propaganda with the aim of preparing the peasantry.

P.N. Tkachev, the ideologist of the conspiratorial movement, believed that the peasants did not need to be taught socialism. In his opinion, a group of conspirators, having seized power, will quickly draw the people into socialism.

In 1874, based on the ideas of M.A. Bakunin, more than 1,000 young revolutionaries undertook a massive “walk among the people,” hoping to rouse the peasants to revolt. However, the movement was crushed by tsarism.

In 1876, the surviving participants in the “walking among the people” formed the secret organization “Land and Freedom,” headed by G.V. Plekhanov, A.D. Mikhailov and others. The second “going to the people” was carried out - with the aim of long-term agitation among the peasants.

After the split of “Land and Freedom”, two organizations were formed - “Black Redistribution” (G.V. Plekhanov, V.I. Zasulich, etc.) and “People’s Will” (A.I. Zhelyabov, A.D. Mikhailov, S. L. Perovskaya). The Narodnaya Volya considered their goal to kill the Tsar, assuming that this would cause a nationwide uprising.

In the 80s - 90s. The populist movement is weakening. Former participants of the “Black Redistribution” G.V. Plekhanov, V.I. Zasulich, V.N. Ignatov turned to Marxism. In 1883, the Liberation of Labor group was formed in Geneva.

In 1883 - 1892 In Russia itself, several Marxist circles were formed, which saw their task as studying Marxism and promoting it among workers and students.

In 1895, in St. Petersburg, Marxist circles united into the “Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class.”

Date of publication: 2015-01-26; Read: 392 | Page copyright infringement

studopedia.org - Studopedia.Org - 2014-2018 (0.001 s)…

Moscow Technical University of Communications and Informatics.

Department:

Essay

on Russian history on the topic:"Russian liberalismXIXcentury."

Prepared by: student of group EB0301

Yakusheva Yulia Alekseevna.

I checked :

1. Introduction. 3

1.1 Rationale for choosing a topic.. 3

1.2. The concept of liberalism. 3

2 The birth of liberalism in Russia. 4

3 Liberalism in the era of Alexander I. 5

3.1 The course of reforms of Alexander I. 5

3.2 Reforms of M.M. Speransky. 7

3.3 Problems of reforms of Alexander I. 9

4 The ideological development of liberalism during the reign of Nicholas I. 9

4.1 Currents of social thought under Nicholas I. 9

4.2 Liberal concepts B.N. Chicherina. eleven

5 Reforms of Alexander II. 14

5.1 The state of liberal thought at the beginning of the reign. 14

5.2 Reforms of Alexander II. 15

5.3 Half-hearted reforms of Alexander II and the crisis of Russian liberalism. 17

6 Counter-reforms of Alexander III. 19

7 The latest liberal reforms of the Russian Empire. 20

8 Conclusion. 23

9 List of used literature……….…………………24

1. Introduction.

1.1 Rationale for choosing the topic

The entire history of Russia consists of alternating periods of liberal reforms and subsequent reaction. The debate about whether liberal reforms are necessary, or whether authoritarian rule in the country is better, continues today. In order to understand this, it is necessary to turn to the history of Russian social thought, since liberalism is one of its most important components. Therefore, I believe that the topic of my essay is of interest not only from the point of view of history, but also from the point of view of today. The experience of Russian liberalism in the 19th century. it is difficult to overestimate, because many of the problems that Russia faced still exist today. This is the need for reform of judicial proceedings, the relationship between law enforcement agencies and citizens, the whole range of problems related to ensuring human rights. Separately, it is worth emphasizing the problem of human economic freedoms, the optimal combination of economic interests of the individual and the state.

1.2 The concept of liberalism

Liberalism arose in Europe in the 18th-19th centuries in response to monarchical absolutism. If monarchs claimed a divine right to govern the life of society, liberalism responded that it was best to leave civil society to its own devices - in religion, philosophy, culture and economic life. Sometimes through revolution, and more often through gradual reforms, liberalism has realized a significant part of its program.

Liberalism is associated with such concepts and categories that have become familiar to the modern socio-political lexicon, such as:

— the idea of the individual’s self-worth and his responsibility for his actions;

— the idea of private property as a necessary condition for individual freedom;

— principles of a free market, free competition and free enterprise, equality of opportunity;

— the idea of a rule of law state with the principles of equality of all citizens before the law, tolerance and protection of the rights of minorities;

— guarantee of fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual;

- universal suffrage.

Liberalism is a system of views and concepts regarding the world around us, a type of consciousness and political-ideological orientations and attitudes. It is simultaneously a theory, a doctrine, a program and a political practice.

So, the concept of “liberalism” comes from the Latin word liberalis, which means “free”. Consequently, a liberal is a person who stands for personal freedom - political, economic, spiritual. It is known that liberalism as an ideological movement came to us from the West, but, nevertheless, it is necessary to say a few words about some of the seeds of liberalism that lay in Russian soil and, due to historical reasons, did not develop.

2 The birth of liberalism in Russia.

In the XI-XIII centuries. The number of cities with self-government in the form of veche meetings of citizens quickly increased. This did not allow the princes, who claimed complete power over the cities, to become too strong. But when the Mongol-Tatar invasion began, the cities that were attacked by the conquerors were destroyed or subjected to ruinous tribute. The Mongol rulers, having weakened the freedom-loving Russian cities, strengthened the grand ducal power.

Having defeated the Horde, the Moscow princes, and then the tsars, did not allow the emergence of such a force within the country that could successfully resist their power.

We can roughly say that the history of liberalism in Russia dates back to February 18, 1762, when Emperor Peter III issued a manifesto “On the granting of liberty and freedom to the entire Russian nobility.” The arbitrariness of the imperial power in relation to a person possessing noble dignity was limited, and the nobleman himself could choose whether to serve the monarch in the military or civil service or to take care of the household on his estate. Thus, for the first time in Russia, a class appeared that had civil liberties and private property recognized by the state and protected by law.

At the end of the 18th century. The main features characteristic of Russian liberalism have emerged. Representatives of the nobility preached liberal freedoms. Their ideal was the British constitutional monarchy - a combination of economic and political freedoms (freedom of speech, press, etc.) with the preservation of noble privileges in relation to all other classes.

3 Liberalism in the era of Alexander I.

3.1 The course of reforms of Alexander I.

The reign of Alexander I can rightfully be considered the era of the greatest flowering of the ideas of liberalism among the nobility. Alexander's teacher, a citizen of republican Switzerland, Laharpe, managed to convince his student that the era of absolute monarchs was over. La Harpe argued that if Russia wanted to avoid bloody chaos, then the throne needed to take the initiative in carrying out two major reforms - the abolition of serfdom and the introduction of a constitution. The teacher warned Alexander that in carrying out these reforms the monarch should not count on the support of a significant part of the nobles. No, most of them will resist, defending their economic well-being, based on the labor of thousands of serfs. Therefore, there is no need to rush to abandon the autocratic form of government. On the contrary, the full power of royal power must be used to carry out reforms and educate the people in order to prepare them to accept these reforms.

“The days of the Alexandrovs are a wonderful beginning...” - Pushkin’s famous words about the dawn of the reign of Tsar Alexander Pavlovich. This opinion was shared by many contemporaries, which is not at all surprising. Here are a number of the first decrees of the young emperor, which clearly outlined the “course” of his reign.

March 15, 1801 noble elections were restored in the provinces; The ban on the import of a number of goods has been lifted.

On March 22, free entry into and exit from Russia was announced, which was very limited under Paul I.

On March 31, printing houses and the import of any books from abroad are allowed to operate. At that time, this was an unimaginable freedom for many European countries, especially for Napoleonic France.

On April 2, Catherine's letters of grant to the nobility and cities were restored. On the same day, the Secret Expedition (a political investigation institution) was destroyed. The country itself was no longer, though not for long, even the secret police.

True to the behests of Laharpe, Emperor Alexander Pavlovich sought to surround the throne with like-minded people. Beginning in 1801, the highest government posts were occupied by supporters of English constitutionalism: Chancellor A. R. Vorontsov, his brother, S. R. Vorontsov, who served for a long time in London, admirals N. S. Mordvinov and P. V. Chichagov, the famous reformer M. M. Speransky. The worldview of these dignitaries was greatly influenced by the French Revolution. They feared that Russia might experience the same shocks.

Supporters of reforms rejected revolution as a way to renew society, believing that this path leads to anarchy, the death of culture and, ultimately, the emergence of dictatorship. Semyon Romanovich Vorontsov, criticizing the despotic policy of Paul I, wrote: “Who doesn’t want the terrible tyranny of the past reign to be restored in our country? But one cannot immediately make the leap from slavery to freedom, without falling into anarchy, which is worse than slavery.”

In order not to repeat the fate of his father, Alexander I sought to develop projects for many reforms in secret from wide circles of the nobility. He formed something like a “conspiracy headquarters” to prepare changes. It included the tsar’s closest and most trusted friends: A.E. Czartoryski, V.P. Kochubey, N.N. Novosiltsev and P.A. Stroganov. Contemporaries nicknamed this headquarters the Secret Committee. Members of the Secret Committee saw their political ideal in the British constitutional monarchy. But things did not come to serious reforms: the wars with Napoleon, which began in 1805, interfered.

Alexander’s transformative plans were also hampered by the powerful passive resistance of the bureaucrats and conservative groups of the aristocracy, which slowed down any projects in this area.

3.2 Reforms of M.M. Speransky.

M. M. Speransky played a major role in the development of liberalism in Russia. Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky was born into the family of a poor rural priest and at the age of seven he entered the Vladimir Theological Seminary. In the autumn of 1788 he, as one of the best students, was sent to the newly created Alexander Nevsky Seminary in St. Petersburg. He devotes a lot of time to philosophy, studying the works of Descartes, Rousseau, Locke, and Leibniz. In his first philosophical works, he denounces arbitrariness and despotism, calls for respect for human dignity and the civil rights of the Russian people.

(To the list of lectures)

Russian liberalism of the 19th century

1. The emergence and characteristics of Russian liberalism.

(Top)

In parallel with populism and the labor movement in the 2nd half. XIX century. In Russia, the liberal movement is also beginning to gain special strength.

Liberalism (lat. free)) is a doctrine that calls for ensuring individual freedom, civil, political and economic rights and freedoms.

Liberalism is the brainchild of a capitalist society, when a person freed from feudal dependence begins to fight for equal rights and freedoms with the ruling elite.

Therefore, liberals took the position of Westernism, recognizing the pattern of development of capitalism in Russia, and considering the natural need to reform the socio-political system.

The beginnings of liberal thought in Russia began to take shape in the 20-30s. XIX century.

One of the first in Russia with liberal demands for endowing society with rights and freedoms and enshrining them in the Constitution were Decembrists .

During the polemic between Westerners and Slavophiles all R. XIX century. liberal views were expressed by major political and government figures Kavelin And Loris-Melikov .

In the 2nd half. XIX 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 to the peculiarities of Russian reality.

19th century European liberalism 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, they tried to develop a theory of reforming the state while simultaneously preserving purely Russian traditions - the monarchy, the peasant community, etc.

They demanded the elimination of class privileges, the creation of volost zemstvos, the reduction of redemption payments, the reform of the State Council, the involvement of zemstvos in legislative advisory activities, etc.

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

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 conservativism .

Therefore, the main carriers of liberal ideas in Russia were the progressive nobility and intelligentsia, which only strengthened the pro-monarchist shades of this socio-political movement.

After the defeat of the revolutionary Decembrist wing, the Russian nobility abandoned illegal activities, limiting itself to petitions "in the highest name" .

The reforms of Alexander II gave a serious impetus to the development of the liberal movement 60-70s.

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.

While maintaining, for the most part, monarchist views, the liberal intelligentsia considered it necessary to increase pressure on the authorities.

They used semi-legal methods: letters addressed to the highest name, propaganda of new ideas in student audiences, support for peaceful political speeches (strikes, demonstrations, etc.).

2. Ideology of the liberal intelligentsia

(Top)

a) B.N. Chicherin (Top)

One of the brightest representatives of Russian liberal thought 60s 19th century was a lawyer, historian, philosopher Boris Nikolaevich Chicherin .

Sherwood, Vladimir Osipovich. Portrait of B.N. Chicherin. 1873

The son of a noble landowner, he received an excellent education at home, studied at the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, where he was considered one of the best students of T.N. Granovsky, S.M. Solovyov and K.D. Kavelin, and where he was left to prepare for the professorship.

While in London, Chicherin met with Herzen, but their views sharply diverged.

Herzen took a revolutionary position, while Chicherin believed that in Russia only the autocratic government has sufficient power to bring about changes, and therefore it is necessary to act through the government.

He wrote:

“Rebellion may be the last resort of need; revolutions sometimes express historical turns in people’s life, but this is always violence, not law.”

According to him, an uprising inevitably leads to chaos, so personal freedom can only exist in the state, and within the framework of the law.

In radical views Herzen And Chernyshevsky he saw evidence of the immaturity of Russian society, which once again convinced him of the prematureness of the Constitution for Russia.

Chicherin happily welcomed the reforms of Alexander II, considering the reform path to be the most optimal for Russia.

Since 1861. he began teaching public law at Moscow University.

It was then that his program was finally formed "liberal conservatism" , which was based on the principle "liberal measures and strong government" .

Chicherin's views on the transformation of Russia "above" received the support of many liberal-minded government officials, among whom was Foreign Minister A.M. Gorchakov, who had great influence on Emperor Alexander II.

In 1863. Chicherin was invited to teach a course on state law to the heir to the throne, the Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich , on whom liberals had high hopes.

However, they were not destined to justify themselves - in 1865. Tsarevich Nicholas died, and the Tsarevich became the heir Alexander Alexandrovich (the future Alexander III), not in the mood to continue liberal reforms.

After the assassination of Alexander II March 1, 1881. Chicherin was elected Moscow mayor, but his political career did not work out.

His liberal views clashed with conservatism K.P. Pobedonostseva , who prepared counter-reforms.

The new government perceived Chicherin's speeches as a requirement of the constitution, which led to his resignation.

b) P.N. Milyukov (Top)

In con. XIX century. joined the Russian liberal movement "fresh blood" .

The developing capitalism of post-reform Russia gave birth to a new intelligentsia, "purified" from outdated Slavophilism and absorbed all the new achievements of Western European science.

One of the most prominent figures of this time was Pavel Nikolaevich Milyukov .

Pavel Nikolaevich Milyukov

Born into the family of a professor-architect two years before the Manifesto for the Liberation of the Peasants, Miliukov made a brilliant scientific career.

In 1881. He was expelled from Moscow University and arrested for participating in student protests.

However, the very next year he not only completed his studies, but was also left as a professor V.O.Klyuchevsky at the Department of Russian History.

In 1895. Miliukov for "bad influence on youth" was dismissed from the University and exiled to Ryazan.

In 1899. for participating in a meeting dedicated to the memory of P.L. Lavrov, he was sentenced to 6 months in prison.

Only a petition to Tsar Klyuchevsky made it possible to reduce this period up to 3 months , after which Miliukov emigrated abroad, not for the first time.

During 1903-1905. he traveled and lectured in England, the Balkans and the USA.

In exile, he met with figures of the liberal and social democratic movement (P.A. Kropotkin, E.K. Breshko-Breshkovskaya, V.I. Lenin, etc.).

In 1905. when did it start in Russia First Russian Revolution , Miliukov returned to his homeland and immediately began creating a party Cadets (constitutional democrats) , which became the largest liberal party in Russia.

Political ideal Miliukov was a parliamentary constitutional monarchy of the English type, which should replace the unlimited autocratic regime.

He advocated the convening of a Constituent Assembly, which would develop a constitution and transform Russia into a rule of law state with a parliamentary monarchy, giving citizens broad political rights.

Program constitutional democrats provided for the introduction of universal suffrage and democratic freedoms, the implementation of the demand for cultural self-determination of the nations and nationalities of Russia, an 8-hour working day, and the solution of the agrarian question by transferring to the peasants the monastic, state and state-purchased part of the landowners' lands.

Like the liberal nobles, Miliukov advocated an evolutionary path of social development, but if the government is unable to carry out the necessary reforms in a timely manner, it is permissible political revolution (but not social).

Miliukov avoided any extremes, for which his views were criticized by both radicals and moderates, calling them "cowardly liberalism" .

3. Zemstvo liberalism

(Top)

Zemstvo reform January 1, 1864. led to the creation of zemstvo self-government bodies, in which the majority of landowners and zemstvo intelligentsia (doctors, teachers, agronomists, etc.) were represented.

Zemstvo bodies received economic functions, which led to the revival of local economic life and, at the same time, to the development of the zemstvo social movement.

The goal of the zemstvos was to create a representative institution from local self-government bodies and admit them to public affairs.

In 1862. The Tver provincial nobility sent an appeal to the emperor, which said:

“The convening of electors from the entire land represents the only means for a satisfactory resolution of the issues raised, but not resolved by the provisions of February 19.”

Activation of populism and the development of terrorism con.

70s prompted Zemstvo residents to take action.

The liberal nobility was ready to assist the government in the fight against the rampant leftist forces if the government moved towards rapprochement with them.

Among the government representatives there were supporters of rapprochement with the liberal part of society, proposing the creation of a representative government body.

Among these are the Chairman of the Supreme Administrative Commission Loris-Melikova , who developed the project to create Big commission from representatives of zemstvo self-government bodies.

However, the regicide March 1, 1881. buried this project, and Alexander III, who ascended the throne, refused any rapprochement with the liberals.

Any opposition was considered by him as a manifestation of revolutionism.

4. Liberal populism

(Top)

Liberal populism represents a special trend in the liberal movement.

These views were formed under the influence of Slavophile ideology and liberalism.

The main theorist of this trend was a native of the nobility, a publicist and one of the editors of magazines "Domestic Notes" And “Russian Word” - Nikolai Konstantinovich Mikhailovsky .

Nikolai Konstantinovich Mikhailovsky. Photo from Niva magazine for 1904

Mikhailovsky’s views largely echoed the ideas of the populist propagandists.

Like Lavrov , he considered the main value to be the individual, who must be protected from an unjust society, and placed his main hopes on the activities of a progressive-minded minority - the intelligentsia, which should express the interests of all workers.

But, unlike Lavrov, Mikhailovsky did not believe in the revolutionary potential of the peasantry and opposed any revolution.

In one of his letters he wrote to Lavrov:

“I’m not a revolutionary, to each his own.”

Mikhailovsky did not deny the significance of revolutions in the history of mankind, but saw in them a danger both for the accumulated wealth of civilization and for the integrity of the individual.

He recognized as acceptable methods political struggle , staying on legal reformist positions .

Through magazines, he advocated the destruction of the remnants of serfdom and landownership, considering the way out of the deplorable situation of the peasants by allocating them with land and creating "working peasant economy" , which must follow a non-capitalist path of development.

In the 80s. played a major role in the study of post-reform Russia liberal populist economists - Danielson And Vorontsov .

In their works they revealed the predatory nature of the reform for the peasants 1861. , proving that the village became a source of funds and labor for the development of capitalism in Russia.

Capitalism destroyed the basis of the community, splitting its population into two hostile groups - ruined peasants and wealthy wealthy kulaks.

They considered capitalism itself "bastard child of nature" , which was artificially grown by the government and was maintained only due to government orders, supplies and tax-farm transactions, and not due to the needs of the domestic market.

In their opinion, capitalism, which has no natural basis, can be easily curtailed, for which the government must take two important measures :

Create state enterprises;
buy out landowners' lands;

after which all means of production should be transferred to the producers themselves, but not into ownership, but into the collective use of peasant communities and worker artels.

At the same time, peasant communities must change radically, accepting and applying in practice all the latest achievements of science and technology.

According to Danielson , it is the intelligentsia that must take responsibility for educating the peasants, using economic arguments to induce the government to change the path of development.

5. The meaning of liberalism

(Top)

The liberal democratic movement developed in Russia both during the period of reforms of Alexander II and during the counter-reforms of Alexander III.

Despite the differences in the views of various liberal trends, they were all united by the idea of the supremacy of individual interests, broad rights and freedoms, and a parliamentary and constitutional system.

The widespread dissemination of liberal ideas among the upper strata of the population testified to the political crisis of the ruling elite.

However, the fear of a repetition of European revolutions in Russia, bringing chaos and danger to the individual, society and state, turned Russian liberals away from revolutionary methods.

This fear gave rise to the so-called liberal conservativism .

The weakness of the Russian liberal movement was that it remained disunited 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 is that against the backdrop of the activation of radical socialists and the strengthening of conservative reaction, it offered Russian society an evolutionary reformist path of development.

At that moment, how Russia would develop depended on society and government.

(Top)

Liberalism was the leading ideological movement in the 19th century, the social base of which was made up of representatives of the middle bourgeois class. It had a supra-party character, since liberal ideas were shared by representatives of not only liberal, but also conservative parties.

There are two liberal traditions. The first, Anglo-Saxon, was common in Great Britain and the USA; it was distinguished by its practical orientation and international character. The second, continental European, has found its greatest application in France, Italy, and Germany; it was more speculative (theoretical), had fewer outlets in the practical sphere as a result of the dominance of feudal-absolutist regimes in the political life of these countries.

The term “liberalism” is broad, it includes not only a certain set of ideas, but also the movement for freedom, government policies, and the way of life of individuals in society. Unlike conservatism and socialism, other leading ideological movements of the 19th century, liberalism was a product of the Age of Enlightenment, when the main provisions of its political theory were formulated; they remained virtually unchanged in the 19th century, which separated the economic and ethical sides of liberal teaching. Thinkers from a number of countries contributed to the formation of the liberal tradition: G. Spencer, D. S. Mill, I. Bentham in Great Britain, B. Constant, A. Tocqueville, F. Guizot in France, B. Humboldt in Germany...

Despite the differences in national traditions of conservatism and the original theories of individual liberal thinkers, the main provisions of the classical liberal doctrine boil down to the following basic ideas:

1. The principle of individualism; individuals constitute the value of any society, individuals are self-sufficient, their basic rights are the right to freedom and private property. They were the main criteria for progress, which liberals understood as the maximum increase in private property and the accumulation of wealth by the nation.

2. Freedom, interpreted broadly, had several varieties, among which the most significant were economic freedoms (trade, exchange, competition).

3. The state is a supra-social element; it must have a minimum of functions, which boil down to protecting the borders of the state from external danger, maintaining social order within the country, and protecting private property.

4. Among political ideas, liberals defended the idea of separation of powers into 3 branches (legislative, executive and judicial), the development of parliamentarism and the process of democratization.

In the last third of the 19th century, a new doctrine took shape, which became known as social liberalism. Its creators were primarily the English thinkers T. H. Green, J. Hobson, L. Hobhouse, as well as philosophers from France, the USA, and Germany. She tried to overcome the narrow social base of classical liberalism, which emerged in the last decades of the 19th century, and to attract the working class to its side. The main difference of the new teaching was the revision of the role of the individual and the state in society.

Social liberals believed that the freedom of individuals should not be unlimited; individuals should coordinate their actions with other members of society and their actions should not harm them. The functions of the state in society expanded, which was supposed to take care of its citizens, provide them with equal rights to receive education and medical care. Progress began to be associated not so much with the maximum accumulation of wealth, but with its equal distribution among members of the collective; social liberal thinkers moved away from the absolutization of private property; Since the whole of society participates in its production, property also has a social side. The idea of the right to private property as leading for individuals was also revised and it was recognized that for some categories of the population the right to work and a living wage are more important.

Both liberal doctrines were humanistic and reformist; liberals denied the revolutionary path of transforming society; were supporters of gradual progressive reforms. A number of liberal ideas were borrowed by conservatives and socialists. Unlike liberal parties, which are experiencing certain difficulties in modern history, liberal teaching is an important component of modern political culture.

Russian liberalism in the 2nd half of the 19th century

Russian liberalism as a socio-political movement was formed in 30-4Or 19 during the discussion between Westerners and Slavophiles. A compromise was reached based on Chicherin's theory. He believed that the mutual greatness of the system and peoples is a universal law of historical development. There are no backward or advanced countries. Every nation makes its own contribution to the development of humanity. As Russian society develops, certain elements of European development will be perceived and adapted to Russian society. In general, post-liberalism took shape by the 50s of the 19th century.

The nobility becomes the social support of Russian liberalism. They attributed the implementation of liberalism to a distant future.

Russian liberals considered the main problem to be the implementation of the idea of individual freedom.

In Russia, the individual has always been suppressed by the patriarchal family and the oppressive state. The human personality can only be realized in society, but at the same time, personal freedom is limited by other individuals. Law is created for regulation. That. law is not arbitrary legislation and not a social contract, but the realization of fundamental human rights, while the basis of natural law is the principle of justice, and the basis of positive law is equality, i.e. the state must compensate for inequality. Individual rights are realized through civil and political freedoms.

The second problem is relations in society. Society and the state are phenomena of a different order. Society is a collection of private aspirations, and the state gives them form, realizing the idea of social compromise. Necessary elements of the rule of law are strong government, the rule of law and guarantees of individual freedom. The state is a power above society. Its main task is to achieve public consent. At the same time, liberals did not idealize any form of government. They believed that for each stage of historical development and for each people any form can be optimal. Being supporters of a constitutional monarchy, Russian liberals believed that reform in Russia was possible only under the control of the state and excluded any violent or illegal methods, that is, they assumed the long-term preservation of an absolute monarchy.

The third problem is that they considered the social support of reforms and the future liberal state to be the middle class, that is, the class that would be created as a result of the merger of the advanced layers of the nobility and the emerging Russian bourgeoisie. Only a compromise between the bourgeoisie and the nobility will preserve social stability, but the nobility must get used to the market economy, and the bourgeoisie will learn to govern the country.

The essence of liberalism remains unchanged throughout the history of its existence. Liberalism is an affirmation of the value of the human person, its rights and freedoms. From the ideology of the Enlightenment, liberalism borrowed the idea of natural human rights, therefore, among the inalienable rights of the individual, liberals included and include the right to life, liberty, happiness and property, with the greatest attention paid to private property and freedom, since it is believed that property ensures freedom, which in its turn turn is a prerequisite for success in the life of an individual, the prosperity of society and the state.

The first historical type of worldview containing the above-mentioned set of ideas was classical liberalism (late 18th - 70-80s of the 19th century). It can be seen as a direct continuation of the political philosophy of the Enlightenment. It is not for nothing that John Locke is called the “father of liberalism,” and the creators of classical liberalism, Jeremy Bentham and Adam Smith, are considered the largest representatives of the late Enlightenment in England. Throughout the 19th century, liberal ideas were developed by John Stuart Mill (England), Benjamin Constant and Alexis de Tocqueville (France), Wilhelm von Humboldt and Lorenz Stein (Germany).

Classical liberalism differs from the ideology of the Enlightenment, first of all, in the lack of connection with revolutionary processes, as well as a negative attitude towards revolutions in general and the Great French Revolution in particular. Liberals accept and justify the social reality that has developed in Europe after the French Revolution, and actively strive to improve it, believing in limitless social progress and the power of the human mind.

Classical liberalism includes a number of principles and concepts. Its philosophical basis is the nominalistic postulate about the priority of the individual over the general. Accordingly, the principle of individualism is central: the interests of the individual are higher than the interests of society and the state. Therefore, the state cannot trample on human rights and freedoms, and the individual has the right to defend them against attacks by other individuals, organizations, society and the state.

The theory of social self-regulation has never fully corresponded to reality. Crises of overproduction occurred periodically in all developed capitalist countries and became an integral part of industrial society. Social harmony was also not observed. The struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie began in the 20s of the 19th century in England. Industrial society already in the first half of the 19th century showed itself to be deeply conflict-ridden and economically unstable.

The contradictions between objective reality and liberal theory became obvious at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, when the capitalist mode of production moved into the monopoly stage. Free competition gave way to the dictates of monopolies, prices were determined not by the market, but by large firms that subjugated competitors, crises of overproduction became longer and more destructive, affecting a number of countries at the same time.

The struggle of the working class for a decent life became increasingly organized and effective. Beginning in the 60s of the 19th century, this struggle was led by social democratic parties, which initially declared their goal to establish the dictatorship of the proletariat and the elimination of private ownership of the means of production.

The need for state regulation of the economy and social conflicts became increasingly obvious. Under these conditions, the initiative for social reform began to gradually move to social democracy, which managed to develop in the 90s of the 19th century a fundamentally new program for improving bourgeois society, involving the rejection of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the elimination of private property.

Another reason for the crisis of liberal ideology was, paradoxically, the success of liberal parties in realizing their political demands. At the end of the 19th and first decades of the 20th century, all the provisions of the political programs of these parties were implemented and ultimately accepted by all major political forces and parties. Therefore, we can say that the undoubted merits of liberalism and liberal parties in establishing the basic principles and institutions of the modern democratic system contributed to the refusal of support for liberal parties from society: liberals had nothing to offer voters.

Under these conditions, liberalism changed significantly and the second stage of its development began, associated with the emergence of social liberalism as a new historical type of liberal ideology. Social liberalism (late 19 - 70s of the 20th centuries) absorbed some social democratic ideas, and, as a result, there was a rejection of some of the postulates of classical liberalism. The creators of social liberalism were such political thinkers as J. Hobbson, T. Green, L. Hobhouse (England), W. Repke, W. Eucken (Germany), B. Croce (Italy), L. Ward, J. Crowley, J. Dewey (USA).

First of all, social liberalism included in the liberal doctrine the social democratic idea of state regulation of the economy (the economic concept of state regulation was developed by J.M. Keynes and is not socialist, although it was also used by social democrats), since under the dominance of monopolies the demand for unlimited freedom competition was adopted by monopolists and acquired the function of protecting the interests of privileged segments of the population. Already at the end of the 19th century, liberal governments of European countries, one after another, began to pass antitrust laws prohibiting excessive concentration of ownership.

Department :

Essay

on Russian history on the topic: "Russian liberalism XIX century."

Prepared : student of group EB0301

Yakusheva Yulia Alekseevna.

I checked :

1. Introduction. 3

1.1 Rationale for choosing a topic.. 3

1.2. The concept of liberalism. 3

2 The birth of liberalism in Russia. 4

3 Liberalism in the era of Alexander I. 5

3.1 The course of reforms of Alexander I. 5

3.2 Reforms of M.M. Speransky. 7

3.3 Problems of reforms of Alexander I. 9

4 The ideological development of liberalism during the reign of Nicholas I. 9

4.1 Currents of social thought under Nicholas I. 9

4.2 Liberal concepts B.N. Chicherina. eleven

5 Reforms of Alexander II. 14

5.1 The state of liberal thought at the beginning of the reign. 14

5.2 Reforms of Alexander II. 15

5.3 Half-hearted reforms of Alexander II and the crisis of Russian liberalism. 17

6 Counter-reforms of Alexander III. 19

7 The latest liberal reforms of the Russian Empire. 20

8 Conclusion. 23

9 List of used literature……….…………………24

Liberalism is associated with such concepts and categories that have become familiar to the modern socio-political lexicon, such as:

The idea of the individual’s self-worth and his responsibility for his actions;

The idea of private property as a necessary condition for individual freedom;

Principles of free market, free competition and free enterprise, equality of opportunity;

The idea of a rule of law state with the principles of equality of all citizens before the law, tolerance and protection of the rights of minorities;

Guarantee of fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual;

Universal suffrage.

“The days of the Alexandrovs are a wonderful beginning...” - Pushkin’s famous words about the dawn of the reign of Emperor Alexander Pavlovich. This opinion was shared by many contemporaries, which is not at all surprising. Here are a number of the first decrees of the young emperor, which clearly outlined the “course” of his reign.

March 15, 1801 noble elections were restored in the provinces; The ban on the import of a number of goods has been lifted.

On March 22, free entry into and exit from Russia was announced, which was very limited under Paul I.

The concept of “liberalism” appeared at the beginning of the 19th century. Initially, liberals were the name given to a group of nationalist deputies in the Cortes, the Spanish parliament. Then this concept entered all European languages, but with a slightly different meaning. The essence of liberalism remains unchanged throughout the history of its existence. Liberalism is an affirmation of the value of the human person, its rights and freedoms. From the ideology of the Enlightenment, liberalism borrowed the idea of natural human rights, therefore, among the inalienable rights of the individual, liberals included and include the right to life, liberty, happiness and property, with the greatest attention paid to private property and freedom, since it is believed that property ensures freedom, which in its turn turn is a prerequisite for success in the life of an individual, the prosperity of society and the state.

Freedom is inseparable from responsibility and ends where the freedom of another person begins. The “rules of the game” in society are fixed in laws adopted by a democratic state, which proclaims political freedoms (of conscience, speech, meetings, associations, etc.). The first historical type of worldview containing the above-mentioned set of ideas was classical liberalism (late 18 - 70-80s of the 19th century). It can be seen as a direct continuation of the political philosophy of the Enlightenment. It is not for nothing that John Locke is called the “father of liberalism,” and the creators of classical liberalism, Jeremy Bentham and Adam Smith, are considered the largest representatives of the late liberalism.

Enlightenment in England. Throughout the 19th century, liberal ideas were developed by John Stuart Mill (England), Benjamin Constant and Alexis de Tocqueville (France), Wilhelm von Humboldt and Lorenz Stein (Germany). Classical liberalism includes a number of principles and concepts. Its philosophical basis is the nominalistic postulate about the priority of the individual over the general. Accordingly, the principle of individualism is central: the interests of the individual are higher than the interests of society and the state. Therefore, the state cannot trample on human rights and freedoms, and the individual has the right to defend them against attacks by other individuals, organizations, society and the state. If we consider the principle of individualism from the point of view of its correspondence to the actual state of affairs, it should be stated that it is false. In no state can the interests of an individual be higher than public and state interests. The reverse situation would mean the death of the state. It is curious that this was first noticed by one of the founders of classical liberalism, I. Bentham. He wrote that "natural, inalienable and sacred rights never existed" since they were incompatible with the state; “...citizens, demanding them, would ask only for anarchy...”. However, the principle of individualism has played a highly progressive role in the development of Western civilization. And in our time, it still gives individuals the legal right to defend their interests in the face of the state. The principle of utilitarianism is a further development and concretization of the principle of individualism. I. Bentham, who formulated it, believed that society is a fictitious body consisting of individuals. The common good is also a fiction. The real interest of society is nothing more than the sum of the interests of its constituent individuals. Therefore, any actions of politicians and any institutions should be assessed solely from the point of view of the extent to which they contribute to reducing suffering and increasing the happiness of individual people. Constructing a model of an ideal society, according to I. Bentham, is an unnecessary and dangerous activity from the point of view of possible consequences. Nevertheless, based on the principles of individualism and utilitarianism, classical liberalism proposed a very specific model of society and state as optimal. The core of this model is the concept of social self-regulation developed by A. Smith. According to A. Smith, in a market economy based on private property and competition, individuals pursue their selfish interests, and as a result of their collision and interaction, social harmony is formed, which presupposes the effective economic development of the country. The state should not interfere in socio-economic relations: it is more likely to disrupt harmony than to contribute to its establishment. The concept of the rule of law corresponds to the concept of public self-regulation in the sphere of politics. The goal of such a state is formal equality of opportunity for citizens, the means is the adoption of relevant laws and ensuring their strict implementation by everyone, including government officials. At the same time, the material well-being of each individual person is considered his personal matter, and not the sphere of concern of the state.

Alleviation of the extremes of poverty is expected through private charity. The essence of the rule of law is briefly expressed by the formula: “the law is above all.” Classical liberalism advocated the separation of church and state. Supporters of this ideology considered religion to be a private matter of the individual. We can say that any liberalism, including classical, is generally indifferent to religion, which is not considered either a positive or a negative value. Liberal party programs usually included the following demands: separation of powers; approval of the principle of parliamentarism, that is, the transition to such forms of state organization in which the government is formed by parliament; proclamation and implementation of democratic rights and freedoms; separation of church and state.

From the end of the 18th century to the first two decades of the 20th century, the initiative for social reform in the countries of Western civilization belonged to liberals. However, already at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, a crisis of liberalism began. The theory of social self-regulation has never fully corresponded to reality. The first crisis of overproduction occurred in England in 1825, that is, immediately after the completion of the industrial revolution. Since then, crises of this type have occurred periodically in all developed capitalist countries and have become an integral part of industrial society. Social harmony was also not observed. The rejection of the concept of public self-regulation inevitably led to a revision of ideas about the role of the state in society. The concept of the rule of law has been transformed into the concept of a social state, which assumes that the state not only obeys existing laws and creates formally equal opportunities for all citizens, but also assumes social obligations: ensuring a decent standard of living for the population and its steady growth. The emergence of social liberalism did not mean overcoming the crisis of liberal ideology and liberal parties. Liberalism only adapted to new conditions. The popularity of liberal parties in Europe invariably fell throughout the 20th century, and after the Second World War, the initiative for social reform passed to the Social Democrats not only ideologically, but also in fact: the Social Democratic program for improving bourgeois society began to be implemented by Social Democratic or coalition governments. In the United States, liberals have not lost their position. There, the corresponding program was carried out by the Democratic (Liberal) Party. In the 70s of the 20th century, the model of society, which involved state regulation of a market economy based on private property, found itself in a state of crisis. Since the development of the basic principles of this model and its implementation were associated with the activities of social democrats and liberals, the ideology of social democracy and liberalism turned out to be responsible for the decline in economic growth, inflation and unemployment, and the initiative for social reform passed to the neoconservatives, who were able to propose a new social model . As a result, liberal ideology changed again, this time under the influence of neoconservatism. Modern liberalism emerged (from the late 70s of the 20th century to the present day), represented by social liberalism, which adopted a number of neoconservative ideas, and neoliberalism, which can be defined as the resurrection of the basic principles of classical liberalism in the conditions of the late 20th century. The ideological basis of modern liberalism is the concept of social self-regulation developed by the founders of classical liberalism and adopted by neoconservatives. The leading direction of liberalism at present is modern social liberalism, the most famous representative of which is the German sociologist and political scientist R. Dahrendorf. Similar ideas are developed in their works by the German liberals F. Schiller and F. Naumann. This ideological and political construction generally occupies a middle position between social democracy and neoconservatism. There remains a commitment to such important postulates of social liberalism as state regulation of the economy and state programs of social assistance to the poorest segments of the population. Moreover, many representatives of this current of modern liberal thought believe that only state intervention in the economic and social spheres can smooth out social, class and ethnic conflicts and protect society of the late 20th and early 21st centuries from revolutionary upheavals.