The main characteristics of liberalism. Etymology and historical usage. The history of the development of Russian liberalism

(from the Latin liberalis - free) first appeared in literature in the 19th century, although it was formed much earlier as a course of social and political thought. Ideology arose in response to the disenfranchised position of citizens in an absolute monarchy.

The main achievements of classical liberalism are the development of the Theory of Social Contract, as well as the concepts of natural rights of the individual and the theory of separation of powers. The authors of "The theory of social contract" were D. Locke, C. Montesquieu and J.-J. Russo. According to her, the origin of the state, civil society and law is based on an agreement between people. The social contract implies that people partially renounce sovereignty and transfer it to the state in exchange for ensuring their rights and freedoms. The key principle is that a legitimate governing body must be obtained with the consent of the governed and it has only those rights that were delegated to it by citizens.

Based on these signs, the supporters of liberalism did not recognize the absolute monarchy and believed that such power corrupts, because it has no limiting principles. Therefore, the former insisted on the expediency of the separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial. Thus, a system of checks and balances is created and there is no room for arbitrariness. A similar idea is described in detail in the works of Montesquieu.

Ideological liberalism developed the principle of natural inalienable rights of a citizen, including the right to life, freedom and property. Possession of them does not depend on belonging to any class, but is given by nature.

Classical liberalism

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, a form of classical liberalism took shape. Its ideologists include Bentham, Mill, Spencer. The adherents of classical liberalism put at the forefront not public, but individual interests. Moreover, the priority of individualism was defended by them in a radical extreme form. This distinguished classical liberalism from the form in which it originally existed.

Another important principle was anti-paternalism, which implied minimal government interference in private life and the economy. State participation in economic life should be limited to the creation of a free market for goods and labor. Freedom was perceived by liberals as a key value, the main guarantee of which was private property. Accordingly, economic freedom had the highest priority.

Thus, the basic values ​​of classical liberalism were the freedom of the individual, the inviolability of private property and the minimum state participation. However, in practice, such a model did not contribute to the formation of the common good and led to social stratification. This led to the spread of the neoliberal model.

Modern liberalism

In the last third of the 19th century, a new trend began to take shape -. Its formation was due to the crisis of liberal doctrine, which went to the maximum rapprochement with conservative ideology and did not take into account the interests of a widespread stratum - the working class.

Justice and harmony and governed were proclaimed as the leading dignity of the political system. Neoliberalism also sought to reconcile the values ​​of equality and freedom.

Neoliberals no longer insisted that a person should be guided by selfish interests, but should contribute to the formation of the common good. And although individuality is the highest goal, it is possible only with a close relationship with society. Man began to be perceived as a social being.

At the beginning of the 20th century, the need for state participation in the economic sphere for an equitable distribution of benefits also became apparent. In particular, the functions of the state included the need to create an education system, establish a minimum wage and monitor working conditions, provide unemployment or sickness benefits, etc.

They are opposed by libertarians who advocate the preservation of the basic principles of liberalism - free enterprise, as well as the inviolability of natural freedoms.

(fr. libéralisme) - philosophical, political and economic theory, as well as ideology, which proceeds from the position that individual human freedoms are the legal basis of society and economic order.

Basic principles of liberalism

The ideal of liberalism is a society with freedom of action for everyone, free exchange of politically significant information, restriction of the power of the state and the church, the rule of law, private property and freedom of private enterprise. Liberalism rejected many of the assumptions that were the basis of previous theories of the state, such as the divine right of monarchs to power and the role of religion as the sole source of knowledge. The fundamental principles of liberalism include individual rights (to life, personal freedom and property); equal rights and universal equality before the law; free market economy; government elected in fair elections; transparency state power... At the same time, the function of state power is reduced to the minimum necessary to ensure these principles. Modern liberalism also favors an open society based on pluralism and democratic government, while protecting the rights of minorities and individuals.
Some modern liberal currents are more tolerant of government regulation of free markets to ensure equal opportunities for success, universal education and narrowing the income gap. Proponents of such views believe that the political system should contain elements of the welfare state, including state unemployment benefits, homeless shelters and free health care.

According to the views of the liberals, state power exists for the good of the people under its control, and the political leadership of the country should be carried out on the basis of the consent of the majority of those ruled. Today, the political system that is most consonant with the convictions of liberals is liberal democracy.

Overview

Etymology and historical usage

The word "liberal" comes from lat. liber ("free"). Titus Livy, in his History of Rome from the Founding of the City, describes the struggle for freedom between the plebeian and patrician classes. Marcus Aurelius in his “Discourses” writes about the idea “of a state, with a law equal for all, where equality and equal right to speech are recognized; also about autocracy, which most of all respects the freedom of its subjects. " During the Italian Renaissance, this struggle resumed between the supporters of the free city-states and the pope. Niccolo Machiavelli, in his Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livy, outlined the principles of republican government. John Locke in England and the thinkers of the French Enlightenment formulated the struggle for freedom in terms of human rights.

The word "liberalism" came to the Russian language at the end of the 18th century from French (fr. Libéralisme) and meant "freethinking". The negative connotation is still preserved in the meaning of "excessive tolerance, harmful indulgence, connivance" (" New dictionary Russian language "ed. T.F. Efremova). V English language the word liberalism also initially had a negative connotation, but has lost it.

The American War of Independence led to the emergence of the first nation to draw up a constitution based on the idea of ​​a liberal state, in particular the idea that the government runs the state with the consent of the ruled. The French bourgeoisie also tried to create a government based on liberal principles during the French Revolution. The authors of the Spanish Constitution of 1812, who were in opposition to Spanish absolutism, were probably the first to use the word "liberal" to designate the supporters of a political movement. Since the end of the 18th century, liberalism has become one of the leading ideologies in almost all developed countries.

Many initial attempts to implement liberal ideas had only partial success and sometimes even led to opposite results (dictatorships). The slogans of freedom and equality were taken up by adventurers. Sharp conflicts arose between supporters of different interpretations of liberal principles. Wars, revolutions, economic crises and government scandals provoked massive disillusionment with ideals. For these reasons, in different periods different meanings were put into the word "liberalism". Over time, a more systematic understanding of the foundations of this ideology came, which became the foundation for one of the most widespread political systems in the world at the moment - liberal democracy.

Forms of liberalism

Initially, liberalism proceeded from the fact that all rights should be in the hands of physical and legal entities, and the state must exist solely to protect these rights (classical liberalism). Modern liberalism has significantly expanded the framework of the classical interpretation and includes many currents, between which there are deep contradictions and sometimes conflicts arise. These trends are reflected, in particular, in such a key document as the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights". To be specific with terminology, in this article "political liberalism" means a movement for liberal democracy and against absolutism or authoritarianism; "Economic liberalism" - for private property and against government regulation; "Cultural liberalism" - for personal freedom and against restrictions on it for reasons of patriotism or religion; "Social liberalism" - for equality of opportunity and against economic exploitation. Modern liberalism in most developed countries is a mixture of all these forms. In third world countries, "third generation liberalism" often comes to the fore - a movement for a healthy living environment and against colonialism.

Political liberalism

Political liberalism is the belief that individuals are the foundation of law and society, and that social institutions exist to facilitate the empowerment of individuals with real power, without currying favor with elites. This belief in political philosophy and political science is called "methodological individualism". It is based on the idea that each person knows best what is best for him. The English Magna Carta (1215) provides an example of a political document in which some individual rights extend beyond the prerogative of the monarch. The key point is the social contract, according to which laws are issued with the consent of society for its benefit and the protection of social norms, and every citizen obeys these laws. Particular emphasis is placed on the rule of law, in particular, liberalism is based on the fact that the state has sufficient power to ensure it. Contemporary political liberalism also includes the condition of universal suffrage, regardless of gender, race, or property; the most preferred system is considered to be liberal democracy.

Economic liberalism

Economic or classical liberalism advocates individual property rights and freedom of contract. The motto of this form of liberalism is "free private enterprise." Capitalism is favored on the basis of laissez-faire, which means the elimination of government subsidies and legal barriers to trade. Economic liberals believe that the market does not need government regulation. Some of them are willing to allow government oversight of monopolies and cartels, while others argue that market monopolization arises only as a consequence of government action. Economic liberalism argues that the value of goods and services should be determined by the free choice of individuals, that is, by market forces. Some admit the presence of market forces even in areas where the state has traditionally retained a monopoly, such as security or legal proceedings. Economic liberalism views economic inequality that arises from unequal contracting positions as a natural result of competition, provided there is no coercion. Currently, this form is most pronounced in libertarianism, other varieties are minarchism and anarcho-capitalism.

Cultural liberalism

Cultural liberalism focuses on individual rights related to consciousness and lifestyle, including issues such as sexual, religious, academic freedom, protection from state interference in private life. As John Stuart Mill said in his essay On Freedom: “The only purpose that justifies the intervention of some people, individually or collectively, in the activities of others is self-defense. To exercise power over a member of a civilized society against his will is permissible only in order to prevent harm to others. " Cultural liberalism, to one degree or another, opposes government regulation of areas such as literature and art, as well as issues such as the activities of academia, gambling, prostitution, age of free consent for sexual intercourse, abortion, use of contraception, euthanasia, alcohol and other drug use. The Netherlands is probably today the country with the highest level of cultural liberalism, which, however, does not prevent the country from proclaiming a policy of multiculturalism.

Social liberalism

Social liberalism emerged at the end of the 19th century in many developed countries under the influence of utilitarianism. Some liberals embraced, in part or in whole, Marxism and the socialist theory of exploitation, and concluded that the state should use its power to restore social justice. Thinkers such as John Dewey or Mortimer Adler explained that all individuals, as the foundation of society, must have access to basic needs such as education, economic opportunity, protection from harmful large-scale events outside their control in order to realize their abilities. Such positive rights that are provided by society are qualitatively different from the classical negative rights, the provision of which requires non-intervention from others. Proponents of social liberalism argue that without a guarantee of positive rights, the fair implementation of negative rights is impossible, since in practice, the poor sacrifice their rights for the sake of survival, and the courts are more often inclined in favor of the rich. Social liberalism supports the introduction of some restrictions on economic competition. He also expects the government to provide social protection the population (through taxes) to create conditions for the development of all talented people, to prevent social riots and simply "for the common good."

There is a fundamental contradiction between economic and social liberalism. Economic liberals believe that positive rights inevitably violate negative ones and are therefore unacceptable. They see the function of the state as limited mainly to issues of ensuring the rule of law, security and defense. From their point of view, these functions already require a strong centralized state power. On the contrary, social liberals believe that the main task of the state is social protection and ensuring social stability: providing food and housing to those in need, healthcare, school education, retirement benefits, childcare, disabled and elderly care, victim assistance natural Disasters, protecting minorities, preventing crime, supporting science and the arts. This approach makes it impossible to impose large-scale restrictions on the government. Despite the unity of the ultimate goal - personal freedom - economic and social liberalism fundamentally diverge in the means to achieve it. Right-wing and conservative movements often lean in favor of economic liberalism versus cultural liberalism. Left movements tend to emphasize cultural and social liberalism.
Some researchers point out that the opposition of “positive” and “negative” rights is in fact imaginary, since social costs are also required to ensure “negative” rights in practice (for example, the maintenance of courts to protect property).

Third generation liberalism

Third generation liberalism was the result of the post-war struggle of the third world countries against colonialism. Today, he is more associated with certain aspirations than with legal regulations... Its purpose is to fight against the concentration of power, material resources and technologies in a group of developed countries. The activists of this movement emphasize the collective right of society to peace, self-determination, economic development and access to the common humanity (natural resources, scientific knowledge, cultural monuments). These rights belong to the “third generation” and are reflected in article 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Collective international human rights defenders also pay close attention to international environmental issues and humanitarian assistance.

In all of the above forms of liberalism, it is assumed that there must be a balance between the responsibilities of government and individuals, and that the function of the state should be limited to those tasks that cannot be adequately performed by the private sector. All forms of liberalism are aimed at legislative protection of human dignity and personal autonomy, and all argue that the removal of restrictions on individual activity contributes to the improvement of society.

Development of liberal thought

Origins

The desire for personal freedom has been characteristic of representatives of all peoples in all ages. Prominent examples are city-policies from Ancient Greece to European with the principle - "the air of the city makes free", the political system of which included many elements the rule of law and democracy combined with free private enterprise.

Liberalism has its roots in humanism, which during the Renaissance challenged the power of the Catholic Church (which resulted in revolutions: the Dutch bourgeois revolution), the English Glorious Revolution (1688), during which the Whigs asserted their right to choose a king, etc. became the forerunner of the view that the supreme power should belong to the people. Full-fledged liberal movements emerged during the Enlightenment in France, England, and colonial America. Their opponents were absolute monarchy, mercantilism, orthodox religions and clericalism. These liberal movements were also the first to formulate the concept of individual rights based on constitutionalism and self-government through freely chosen representatives.

The idea that free individuals can become the foundation of a stable society was put forward by John Locke. His Two Treatises on Government (1690) formulated two fundamental liberal principles: economic freedom as the right to personal ownership and use of property, and intellectual freedom, including freedom of conscience. The basis of his theory is the idea of ​​natural rights: to life, to personal freedom and to private property, which was the forerunner of modern human rights. When citizens enter society, they enter into a social contract, according to which they relinquish their powers of power in favor of the government, so that it protects their natural rights. In his views, Locke defended the interests of the English bourgeoisie, in particular, he did not extend freedom of conscience to Catholics, but human rights to peasants and servants. Locke also disapproved of democracy. Nevertheless, a number of the provisions of his teachings formed the basis of the ideology of the American and French revolutions.

In continental Europe, Charles Louis Montesquieu was involved in the development of the doctrine of the universal equality of citizens before the law, to which even monarchs must obey. Montesquieu considered the separation of powers and federalism as the main instruments for limiting state power. His followers, the economists Jean-Baptiste Say and Destut de Tracy, were passionate promoters of "market harmony" and the principle of non-interference of the state in the economy. Of the thinkers of the Enlightenment, two figures had the greatest influence on liberal thought: Voltaire, who advocated constitutional monarchy, and Jean Jacques Rousseau, who developed the doctrine of natural freedom. Both philosophers in different forms defended the idea that the natural freedom of the individual can be limited, but its essence cannot be destroyed. Voltaire emphasized the importance of religious tolerance and the inadmissibility of torture and humiliation of human dignity.

In his treatise On the Social Contract (1762), Rousseau gave a new understanding of this concept. He drew attention to the fact that many people turn out to be part of society without having property, that is, the social contract simply secures property rights for its actual owners. For such an agreement to be legitimate, in exchange for his independence, a person must receive the benefits that only society can provide to him. One of these benefits Rousseau considered education, which allows people the best way to realize their abilities, and at the same time makes people law-abiding citizens. Another good is the collective republican freedom, which the individual acquires through identification with the nation and national interests. Thanks to this identification, the educated person himself limits his freedom, since it becomes in his interests. The will of the nation as a whole can be realized only under the condition of self-determination of peoples. Thus, the social contract leads to national harmony, national will and national unity. These ideas became a key element of the National Assembly's declaration during the French Revolution and the views of liberal American thinkers such as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson.

Along with the French enlighteners, David Hume, Immanuel Kant and Adam Smith made important contributions to liberalism. David Hume argued that the fundamental (natural) laws of human behavior dictate moral norms that cannot be limited or suppressed. Influenced by these views, Kant gave an ethical justification for human rights without reference to religion (as was the case before him). According to his teaching, these rights are based on natural science laws and objective truth.

Adam Smith developed the theory that moral life and economic activity are possible without directives from the state and that the most powerful are those nations in which citizens are free to take their own initiative. He called for an end to feudal and mercantile regulation, patents and monopolies that emerged thanks to the patronage of the state. In The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759), he developed the theory of motivation, which brings personal material interest into agreement with an unregulated social order. In his Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776), he argued that under certain conditions a free market is capable of natural self-regulation and is capable of achieving greater productivity than a market with many constraints. He assigned the government the solution of tasks that cannot be linked to the desire for profit, for example, preventing fraud or the illegal use of force. His theory of taxation was that taxes should not harm the economy and that the tax rate should be constant.

Revolutionary liberalism

The idea that ordinary people should go about their business without dictatorship from monarchs, aristocracy or the church remained for the most part theory before the American and French revolutions. All later liberal revolutionaries followed these two examples to varying degrees.

In colonial America, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams convinced their fellow countrymen to rebel in the name of life, personal freedom, and the pursuit of happiness - almost a Locke quote, but with one important amendment: Jefferson replaced Locke's word for "property" with "the pursuit of happiness." Thus, the main goal of the revolution was a republic based on personal freedom and rule with the consent of the governed. James Madison believed that a system of balances and checks was needed to ensure effective self-government and protect the rights of economic minorities. It was reflected in the US Constitution (1787): balance between federal and regional authorities; separation of powers into executive, legislative and judicial branches; bicameral parliament. Civilian control was introduced over the army and measures were taken to return officers to civilian life after serving. Thus, the concentration of power in the hands of one person became practically impossible.

The Great French Revolution deprived the power of the monarch, the aristocracy and catholic church... The turning point was the adoption of a declaration by the representatives of the National Assembly that she has the right to speak on behalf of the entire French people. In the area of ​​liberalism, French revolutionaries went further than Americans by introducing universal suffrage (for men), national citizenship and adopting the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789), similar to the American Bill of Rights.

For the first few years, liberal ideas dominated the country's leadership, but the government was unstable and could not effectively defend itself against the numerous enemies of the revolution. The Jacobins, led by Robespierre, concentrated in their hands almost all power, suspended the due process of law and launched a large-scale terror, which became victims of many liberals, including Robespierre himself. Napoleon I Bonaparte carried out a profound legislative reform that reflected many of the ideas of the revolution, but subsequently abolished the republic and declared himself emperor. A side effect of the Napoleonic military campaigns was the spread of liberalism throughout Europe, and after the occupation of Spain, throughout Latin America.

The revolutions significantly strengthened the position of liberals around the world, who moved from proposals to uncompromising demands. Mainly, they sought to create parliamentary republics in place of existing absolute monarchies. Driving force This political liberalism often had economic motives: the desire to end feudal privileges, guilds and royal monopolies, restrictions on property, and on the freedom to enter into contracts.

Between 1774 and 1848 several revolutionary waves passed, with each subsequent wave placing more and more emphasis on the rights of citizens and self-government. Instead of a simple recognition of the rights of the individual, all state power turned out to be a derivative of natural law: either by virtue of human nature, or as a result of a social contract ("the consent of the ruled"). Family property and the feudal tradition, according to which the obligations of the parties are determined by personal loyalty, have replaced the concept of voluntary consent, commercial contract and individual private property. The idea of ​​the sovereignty of the people and that people are capable of independently adopting all the necessary laws and enforcing them became the basis of national identity and went beyond the teachings of the enlighteners. A similar desire for independence from external domination in the occupied territories or in the colonies became the basis of the national liberation struggle. In some cases (Germany, Italy), this was accompanied by the unification of small states into large ones, in others (Latin America) - the disintegration colonial systems and decentralization. The education system has become one of the most important public institutions. Over time, democracy was added to the list of liberal values.

Discussions within liberalism

Liberalism and Democracy

Initially, the ideas of liberalism and democracy were not only significantly different, but also in contradiction with each other. For liberals, the basis of society was a person who possesses property, seeks to protect it, and for whom the choice between survival and preservation of his civil rights cannot be acute. It was understood that only owners form civil society, participate in a social contract and give the government consent to rule. On the contrary, democracy means the process of forming power on the basis of the majority of the entire people, including the poor. From the point of view of liberals, the dictatorship of the poor posed a threat to private property and guarantees of individual freedom. From the point of view of Democrats, depriving the poor of the right to vote and the opportunity to represent their interests in the legislative process was a form of enslavement.

Many bright liberals (J. Locke, T. Jefferson, etc.) were opponents of democracy, which was reflected in particular in the original edition of the US Constitution, where the right to vote was linked to property qualifications. Many popular leaders, such as Abraham Lincoln, resorted to anti-liberal measures (censorship, taxes, etc.) Liberal fears of democracy increased especially after the French Revolution. In particular, therefore, French liberals generally supported Napoleon Bonaparte, who, although he was opposed to the accountability of power (and even more so to democracy), but contributed to the implementation and popularization of a number of the most important liberal ideas.

A turning point was Alexis de Tocqueville's Democracy in America (1835), in which he showed the possibility of a society where personal freedom and private property coexist with democracy. According to Tocqueville, the key to the success of such a model, dubbed "liberal democracy", is equality of opportunity, and the most serious threat is the sluggish state intervention in the economy and its trampling on civil liberties.

After the revolution of 1848 and the coup d'etat of Napoleon III (in 1851), liberals increasingly began to recognize the need for democracy in order to fully implement liberalism. At the same time, some supporters of democracy continued to deny the possibility of a just society built on private property and a free market, which led to the emergence of the movement for social democracy.

Economic liberalism versus social liberalism

The Industrial Revolution significantly increased the well-being of developed countries, but exacerbated social problems. Advances in medicine have led to an increase in life expectancy and population, resulting in a surplus of labor and falling wages. After workers in many countries received the right to vote in the 19th century, they began to use it to their advantage. The sharp increase in the literacy of the population led to a surge in society's activity. Social liberals demanded legislative measures against the exploitation of children, safe working conditions, minimum wages.

Classical liberals view such laws as unjust taxes on life, liberty, and property that constrain economic development. They believe that society can solve social problems by itself, without government regulation. On the other hand, social liberals favor a government large enough to ensure equality of opportunity and protect citizens from the effects of economic crises and natural disasters.

Wilhelm von Humboldt in his work "Ideas for the Experience of Determining the Limits of State Activities" substantiated the value of freedom by the importance of individual self-development in order to achieve perfection. John Stuart Mill developed the ideas of this liberal ethics in his work On Freedom (1859). He adhered to utilitarianism, emphasizing a pragmatic approach, a practical pursuit of the common good and an improvement in the quality of life. Although Mill remained within the framework of classical liberalism, individual rights in his philosophy receded into the background.

By the end of the 19th century, most liberals had come to the conclusion that freedom required the creation of conditions for the realization of one's abilities, including education and protection from over-exploitation. These conclusions were outlined by Leonard Trelawney Hobhouse in Liberalism, in which he formulated the collective right to equality in transactions (“fair consent”) and recognized the justification for reasonable government intervention in the economy. In parallel, some of the classical liberals, in particular Gustave de Molinari, Herbert Spencer and Oberon Herbert, began to adhere to more radical views, close to anarchism.

War and Peace

Another subject of discussion, starting from the end of the 19th century, was the attitude to wars. Classical liberalism has been a fierce opponent of military intervention and imperialism, advocating neutrality and free trade. Hugo Grotius's treatise On the Law of War and Peace (1625), in which he expounded the theory of just war as a means of self-defense, was a liberal's handbook. In the United States, isolationism was official until the end of World War I. foreign policy as Thomas Jefferson said: “Free trade with everyone; military alliances with anyone. " However, President Woodrow Wilson instead put forward the concept collective security: confronting aggressor countries with the help of a military alliance and preventive resolution of conflicts in the League of Nations. The idea initially did not find support in Congress, which did not allow the United States to join the League of Nations, but was revived in the form of the UN. Today, most liberals are opposed to unilateral declaration of war by one state to another, with the exception of self-defense, but many support multilateral wars within the UN or even NATO, for example, in order to prevent genocide.

The Great Depression

The Great Depression of the 1930s shook the American public's faith in classical liberalism, and many concluded that unregulated markets could not provide prosperity and prevent poverty. John Dewey, John Maynard Keynes, and President Franklin Roosevelt advocated a more sophisticated state apparatus that would continue to be a bulwark of personal freedom while protecting the population from the costs of capitalism.

John Maynard Keynes, Ludwig-Joseph Brentano, Leonard Trelawney Hobhouse, Thomas Hill Green, Bertil Olin, and John Dewey have described how the state should regulate the capitalist economy to defend freedom while avoiding socialism. Thus, they made a leading contribution to the theory of social liberalism, which had a significant impact on liberals around the world, in particular, on the "Liberal International", which arose in 1947. They were opposed by the supporters of neoliberalism, according to which the Great Depression was not the result of state interference in the economy, but on the contrary, excessive government regulation of the market. Economists of the Austrian and Chicago schools (Friedrich August von Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Milton Friedman, etc.) indicate that the Great Depression was preceded by a large-scale monetary expansion and artificial lowering of interest rates, which distorted the structure of investment in the economy. In Capitalism and Freedom (1962), Friedman cites fixed pegging of the dollar to gold, regulation of the banking system, tax increases, and the printing of money to pay government debt as the main causes of the Great Depression.

In 2008, due to the economic crisis, the discussion between supporters of neoliberalism and social liberalism intensified again. Calls began to sound for a return to a socially oriented policy of income redistribution, protectionism and the implementation of Keynesian measures.

Liberalism versus totalitarianism

The 20th century was marked by the emergence of ideologies that directly opposed themselves to liberalism. In the USSR, the Bolsheviks began to eliminate the remnants of capitalism and the personal freedom of citizens, while in Italy fascism appeared, which, according to the leader of this movement, Benito Mussolini, was a "third way" that denies both liberalism and communism. In the USSR, private ownership of the means of production was prohibited for the sake of achieving social and economic justice. Governments in Italy and especially in Germany denied equality of rights for people. In Germany, this was expressed in the propaganda of the racial superiority of the so-called. "Aryan race", which meant the Germans and some other Germanic peoples, over other peoples and races. In Italy, Mussolini relied on the idea of ​​the Italian people as a "state-corporation." Both communism and fascism sought state control over the economy and centralized regulation of all aspects of society. Both regimes also asserted the priority of public interests over private interests and suppressed personal freedom. From the point of view of liberalism, these common features united communism, fascism and Nazism into a single category - totalitarianism. In turn, liberalism began to define itself as the enemy of totalitarianism and to view the latter as the most serious threat to liberal democracy.

Totalitarianism and collectivism

The aforementioned parallel between various totalitarian systems raises sharp objections from opponents of liberalism, who point to significant differences between fascist, Nazi and communist ideologies. However, F. von Hayek, A. Rand and other liberal thinkers insisted on the fundamental similarity of all three systems, namely: they are all based on state support some collective interests to the detriment of the interests, goals and freedoms of the individual citizen. These can be the interests of the nation - Nazism, the state-corporations - fascism, or the interests of the "working masses" - communism. In other words, from the point of view of modern liberalism, both fascism and Nazism and communism are only extreme forms of collectivism.

Historical reasons for totalitarianism

Many liberals attribute the rise of totalitarianism to the fact that during a period of decline, people seek a solution in a dictatorship. Therefore, the duty of the state should be to protect the economic well-being of citizens, to balance the economy. As Isaiah Berlin said, "Freedom for wolves means death for sheep." Neoliberals take the opposite point of view. In his work "The Road to Slavery" (1944) F. von Hayek argued that excessive government regulation of the economy can lead to the loss of political and civil freedoms. In the 1930s and 1940s, when the governments of the United States and Great Britain, following the advice of the prominent British economist J. Keynes, took a course towards government regulation, Hayek warned about the dangers of this course and argued that economic freedom was a necessary condition for maintaining liberal democracy. On the basis of the teachings of Hayek and other representatives of the "Austrian School of Economics," a libertarian movement arose, which sees any government intervention in the economy as a threat to freedom.

Open Society Concept

One of the most influential critics of totalitarianism was Karl Popper, who in his 1945 work Open Society and Its Enemies defended liberal democracy and an "open society" where the political elite could be removed from power without bloodshed. Popper argued that since the accumulation of human knowledge is unpredictable, the theory of the ideal government controlled does not exist in principle, therefore, the political system must be flexible enough for the government to smoothly change its policy. In particular, society should be open to multiple points of view (pluralism) and subcultures (multiculturalism).

Welfare and education

The fusion of modernism with liberalism in the postwar years led to the spread of social liberalism, which claims that the best defense against totalitarianism is an economically prosperous and educated population with broad civil rights. Representatives of this trend, such as J.K. Galbraith, J. Rawls and R. Dahrendorf, believed that in order to increase the level of personal freedoms, it is necessary to teach them enlightened use, and the path to self-realization lies through the development of new technologies.

Personal freedom and society

In the postwar years, a significant part of theoretical developments in the field of liberalism was devoted to questions of public choice and market mechanisms to achieve a "liberal society". One of the central places in this discussion is occupied by Arrow's theorem. It states that there is no such procedure for ordering social preferences that is defined for any combination of preferences, does not depend on individual preferences on extraneous issues, is free from the imposition of one person's choice on the whole of society, and satisfies the Pareto principle (i.e., the fact that optimal for each individual, should be the most preferable for the whole society). The corollary of this theorem is the liberal paradox that it is impossible to devise a universal and fair democratic procedure that is compatible with unlimited freedom of personal choice. This conclusion means that in pure form neither a market economy nor a welfare economy is sufficient to achieve an optimal society. Moreover, it is not at all clear what an "optimal society" is, and all attempts to build such a society ended in disaster (USSR, Third Reich). Another side of this paradox is the question of what is more important: strict adherence to procedures or equality in rights for all participants.

Personal freedom and government regulation

One of the key concepts of the classical theory of freedom is property. According to this theory, a free market economy is not only a guarantee of economic freedom, but also a necessary condition for everyone's personal freedom.

Freedom advocates do not deny planning in general, but only such government regulation that replaces free competition between owners. In the history of the 20th century, there were a number of vivid examples when the rejection of the principle of inviolability of private property and the replacement of free competition with state regulation in the name of social security and stability led to significant restrictions on the personal freedom of citizens (Stalinist USSR, Maoist China, North Korea, Cuba, and others countries of "victorious socialism"). Having lost the right to private property, citizens very soon lost other important rights: the right to freely choose their place of residence (registration), place of work (collective farms) and were forced to work for a state-appointed (usually low) salary. This was accompanied by the emergence of repressive law enforcement agencies (NKVD, the Ministry of State Security of the GDR, etc.). A significant proportion of the population was forced to work free of charge under conditions of imprisonment.

It should be noted that there are objections to the above arguments. The relatively low level of wages under socialism is explained by the fact that the state took the main care of housing, medicine, education and social security. The need for repressive security agencies is justified by the protection of the state from external and internal enemies. There are significant economic, military and scientific achievements in the countries during the described period. Finally, the fact that some of the goals were not achieved in the end, corruption, etc., is associated with deviations from the chosen course, as a rule, after the death of one or another leader of the country. These objections seek to show that restrictions on personal freedom were justified and balanced by other values. However, they do not refute the main conclusion of the classical theory of freedom, namely, that without the right of legitimate private property, supported by the entire force of state power, personal freedom of citizens is impossible.

Modern liberalism

Short review

Today liberalism is one of the leading ideologies in the world. The concepts of personal freedom, self-esteem, freedom of speech, universal human rights, religious tolerance, privacy, private property, free market, equality, rule of law, government transparency, restrictions on state power, supreme power of the people, self-determination of a nation, enlightened and reasonable public policy- received the widest distribution. Liberal-democratic political systems include countries that differ in culture and level of economic well-being, such as Finland, Spain, Estonia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Canada, Uruguay or Taiwan. In all these countries, liberal values ​​play a key role in shaping the new goals of society, even though the gap between ideals and reality.

The following list of contemporary political trends within the framework of liberalism is by no means exhaustive. The most important principles that are most often mentioned in party documents (for example, in the 1997 Liberal Manifesto) have been listed above.

Due to the fact that in Western Europe and North America most political trends express solidarity with the ideals of political liberalism, a need arose for a narrower classification. Right-wing liberals emphasize classical liberalism, but at the same time object to a number of provisions of social liberalism. They are joined by conservatives who share political liberal values ​​that have become traditional in these countries, but often condemn certain manifestations of cultural liberalism as contrary to moral norms. It should be noted that historically conservatism was the ideological antagonist of liberalism, but after the end of World War II and the discrediting of authoritarianism, moderate currents (liberal conservatism, Christian democracy) began to play a leading role in Western conservatism. In the second half of the 20th century, conservatives were the most active defenders of private property and supporters of privatization.

Actually "liberals" in the United States are called socialists and the left in general, while in Western Europe this term refers to libertarians, and left liberals are called social liberals.

Libertarians believe that the state should not interfere with private life or business activities, except to protect the freedom and property of some from the encroachments of others. They support economic and cultural liberalism and oppose social liberalism. Some libertarians believe that the state must have sufficient power to implement the rule of law, while others argue that the rule of law must be carried out by public and private organizations. In foreign policy, libertarians are generally opposed to any military aggression.

Within the framework of economic liberalism, the ideological current of neoliberalism has become isolated. This trend is often viewed as a purely economic theory, outside the context of political liberalism. Neoliberals strive for non-interference of the state in the country's economy and for a free market. The state is assigned the function of moderate monetary regulation and an instrument for gaining access to external markets in cases where other countries create obstacles to free trade. One of the defining manifestations of neoliberal economic policy is privatization, a striking example of which was the reforms carried out in Great Britain by the cabinet of Margaret Thatcher.

Modern social liberals tend to identify themselves as centrists or social democrats. The latter have gained significant influence, especially in Scandinavia, where a series of protracted economic recessions have exacerbated issues of social protection (unemployment, pensions, inflation). To solve these problems, the Social Democrats constantly increased taxes and the public sector in the economy. However, for many decades stubborn struggle for power between right- and left-liberal forces have led to effective laws and transparent governments that reliably protect the civil rights of people and the property of entrepreneurs. Attempts to take the country too far towards socialism led to the loss of power for the Social Democrats and subsequent liberalization. Therefore, today in the Scandinavian countries prices are not regulated (even at state-owned enterprises, with the exception of monopolies), banks are private, and there are no obstacles to trade, including international. This combination of liberal and social policies led to the implementation of a liberal democratic political system with a high level of social protection. Similar processes occur in others. European countries ah, where the Social Democrats, even after coming to power, are pursuing a fairly liberal policy.

Liberal parties most often consider the main goals of their policy to be the strengthening of liberal democracy and the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary; control over the transparency of government work; protection of civil rights and free competition. At the same time, the presence of the word "liberal" in the name of a party does not in itself allow determining whether its supporters are right-wing liberals, social liberals or libertarians.

Social liberal movements are also very diverse. Some movements support sexual freedom, the free sale of weapons or drugs, and the expansion of the functions of private security structures and the transfer of some of the functions of the police to them. Economic liberals often advocate a flat income tax rate, or even the replacement of income tax per capita, for the privatization of education, health care and the state pension system, for the transfer of science to self-sustaining funding. In many countries, liberals advocate the abolition of the death penalty, disarmament, the abandonment of nuclear technology, protection environment.

Recently, discussions about multiculturalism have intensified. While all parties agree that ethnic minorities should share the fundamental values ​​of society, some believe that the majority's function should be limited to the protection of rights in ethnic communities, while others are in favor of the early integration of minorities in the name of preserving the integrity of the nation.

Since 1947, the Mont Pelerin Society has been operating, uniting economists, philosophers, journalists, entrepreneurs who support the principles and ideas of classical liberalism.

Contemporary criticism of liberalism

The supporters of collectivism do not absolutize the meaning of individual freedom or the right to private property, instead focusing on the collective or society. At the same time, the state is sometimes viewed as higher form the collective and the spokesman for his will.

Left-wing supporters of strict state regulation prefer socialism as a political system, believing that only state supervision over income distribution can provide universal material well-being... In particular, from the point of view of Marxism, the main disadvantage of liberalism is the uneven distribution of material wealth. Marxists argue that in a liberal society, real power is concentrated in the hands of a very small group of people who control financial flows. In conditions of economic inequality, equality before the law and equality of opportunity, according to Marxists, remain a utopia, and the true goal is to legitimize economic exploitation. From the point of view of liberals, strict state regulation requires restrictions on the amount of wages, in the choice of profession and place of residence, and ultimately leads to the destruction of personal freedom and totalitarianism.

In addition, Marxism is also critical of the liberal theory of the social contract in connection with the fact that it views the state as a subject separate from society. Marxism reduces the confrontation between society and the state to the confrontation between classes, based on the relationship to the means of production.

Right-wing statists believe that outside the economic sphere, civil liberties lead to indifference, selfishness and immorality. The most categorical are the fascists, who argue that rational progress does not lead to a more humane future, as liberals believe, but, on the contrary, to the moral, cultural and physical degeneration of mankind. Fascism denies that man is the highest value and instead calls for the construction of a society in which people are deprived of the desire for individual self-expression and completely subordinate their interests to the tasks of the nation. From the point of view of the fascists, political pluralism, the declaration of equality and the limitation of state power are dangerous because they open up opportunities for the spread of sympathies for Marxism.

Communitarianism (Amitai Etzioni, Mary Ann Glendon, etc.) is engaged in a softer criticism of liberalism, which recognizes individual rights, but rigidly links them with responsibilities towards society and allows them to be limited if they are implemented at public expense.

Modern authoritarian regimes, relying on a popular leader among the people, often carry out propaganda in order to discredit liberalism among the population. Liberal regimes are accused of being undemocratic due to the fact that voters make a choice among political elites, and do not choose representatives from the people (i.e., their own kind). The political elites are presented as puppets in the hands of the only behind-the-scenes group that at the same time holds control over the economy. Abuses of rights and freedoms (demonstrations by radical organizations, publication of offensive materials, groundless lawsuits, etc.) are presented as systematic and planned hostile actions. Liberal regimes are accused of hypocrisy: that they advocate limiting state intervention in the life of their country, but at the same time interfere in the internal affairs of other countries (as a rule, they mean criticism for violations of human rights). The ideas of liberalism are declared a utopia that is fundamentally impossible to implement, unfavorable and far-fetched rules of the game, which Western countries (primarily the United States) are trying to impose on the whole world (for example, in Iraq or Serbia). In response, liberals argue that it is precisely the feasibility of liberal democracy and the availability of its ideas for the most different nations are the main causes of concern for dictators.

On the opposite side of the statist political spectrum, anarchism denies the legitimacy of the state for any purpose. (The overwhelming majority of liberals recognize that the state is necessary to ensure the protection of rights).

Left-wing opponents of economic liberalism object to the establishment of market mechanisms in areas where they did not exist before. They believe that the existence of the losers and the emergence of inequality as a result of competition causes significant harm to the whole society. In particular, inequality arises between regions within the country. The left also points out that historically political regimes based on pure classical liberalism have been unstable. From their point of view, a planned economy can protect against poverty, unemployment, and ethnic and class differences in health and education.

Democratic socialism as an ideology seeks to achieve some minimum equality at the level of the final result, and not just equality of opportunity. Socialists support the ideas of a large public sector, the nationalization of all monopolies (including the housing and utilities sector and the extraction of the most important natural resources) and social justice. They are supporters of government funding for all democratic institutions, including the media and political parties... From their point of view, liberal economic and social policies create preconditions for economic crises.

This distinguishes demosocialists from adherents of social liberalism, who prefer significantly less intervention from the state, for example, through regulation of the economy or subsidies. Liberals also object to equalization of results, in the name of meritocracy. Historically, the platforms of social liberals and demosocialists have closely adjoined each other and even partially overlapped. Due to the decline in the popularity of socialism in the 1990s, modern "social democracy" began to shift more and more from democratic socialism towards social liberalism.

Right-wing opponents of cultural liberalism see it as a danger to the moral health of the nation, traditional values ​​and political stability. They consider it permissible that the state and the church regulate the private life of people, protect them from immoral acts, and instill in them a love of shrines and the fatherland.

One of the critics of liberalism is the Russian Orthodox Church. In particular, Patriarch Kirill, in his speech at the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra on July 29, 2009, drew parallels between liberalism and the blurring of the concepts of good and evil. The latter is fraught with the fact that people will believe the Antichrist, and then the apocalypse will come.

In matters of international politics, the problem of human rights comes into conflict with the principle of non-interference in the sovereign questions of other countries. In this regard, the world's federalists reject the doctrine of the sovereignty of nation states in the name of protection from genocide and large-scale violations of human rights. A similar ideology is adhered to by the American neoconservatives, who call for an aggressive and uncompromising spread of liberalism in the world, even at the cost of a quarrel with the authoritarian allies of the United States. This movement actively supports the use of military force for its own purposes against countries hostile to the United States and justifies the violations of the principles associated with this. international law... The neo-conservatives are approaching the statists because they are supporters of a strong state and high taxes to cover military expenses.

Internationally, liberals in power in developed countries are criticized for keeping their countries and supranational organizations (like the EU) closed to people from other regions, restricting immigration, and for making it difficult for Third World countries to break into Western markets. Globalization, accompanied by liberal rhetoric, is accused of deteriorating workers' rights, growing gaps between rich and poor countries and between classes, loss of cultural identity, and insufficient accountability of large transnational corporations. She is also suspected of contributing to the overthrow of local elites and the seizure of power by Western countries over the entire planet. From the point of view of liberals, subject to certain social and economic standards, a free and fair global market can only benefit all its participants. This includes improving production efficiency, free circulation of capital, people and information. Negative side effects, in their opinion, can be eliminated through some regulation.

Criticism of liberalism in literature

V early XXI century, with the growth of globalism and transnational corporations, anti-utopias against liberalism began to appear in the literature. One such example is the satire by Australian writer Max Barry, Jennifer's Government, which pushes corporate power to the point of absurdity.

Liberalism in Russia

There have been several liberal uprisings in the history of Russia that have had a significant impact on the country.
The uprising of the Decembrists in 1825 was the first radical attempt to introduce constitutional and legal restrictions on state power.

The February Revolution of 1917 put an end to the absolute monarchy.

Restructuring 1987-1991 and subsequent economic reforms launched the country's transition to a market economy.

These events led to both important positive shifts and serious negative consequences, as a result of which, at the moment, the majority of the Russian population is ambivalent about liberal values.

V modern Russia there are a number of parties that declare their liberal orientation (but are not necessarily such):

The Liberal Democratic Party;
"Just Cause";
Libertarian Party of the Russian Federation;
"Apple";
Democratic Union.

Liberalism

In its origin and development, liberalism went through two stages:

1_17-19th century: classical liberalism

2_ from the beginning of the 20th century to the present day: neoliberalism or social liberalism

The founding fathers of liberal ideology are John Locke, Jean Jacques Rousseau ("On the Social Contract"), John Stuart Mill ("On Freedom"), Thomas Payne ("Human Rights", " Common sense"). The ideology of liberalism is the ideology of the new time, when the Middle Ages and feudalism are fading into the past and capitalism develops. The main ideas of classical liberalism:

1_Recognition of a person as the highest value. Liberalism is the ideology of individualism.

2_Recognition of the equality of all people and the recognition for a person of natural, acquired by virtue of the birth of inalienable rights (basic: the right to life, property, freedom).

3_Recognition of freedom as the highest of the values ​​that a person possesses. At the same time, a person is responsible for his actions. The unity of freedom and responsibility is one of the cornerstones of liberalist ideology.

4_Rule of law. Only the law can restrict a person's freedom.

5_Antietatism is the most minimized state possible.

6_Moral and religious tolerance.

7_The relationship between society and the state is of the nature of a contract.

8_Belief in social progress.

9_Recognition of free competition, free private enterprise and the market as natural regulators of economic and social relations.

Etatism this is an active state intervention in the economic and political life country.

Liberals faced a number of problems: equality of people, free enterprise and the market can regulate a lot, but not everything; other regulators are required, the consequence of which has become an increase in the state and its role.

Neoliberalism

Over time, a number of the provisions of classical liberalism have undergone revision and neoliberal ideas were mainly formulated after the Second World War.

In 1947, the Liberal International was created, which united more than 20 parties. Now all the countries of Europe are present in it.

The theorists of neoliberalism are: Hayek, Bell, Toffler, Aron.

The main ideas of neoliberalism:

1_Increasing the efficiency of production based on high technologies

2_The main tool is the promotion of freedom of private property and entrepreneurship.

3_The state must reduce its direct participation in the economy.

4_Own social functions the state should limit its concern for those employed in postindustrial production, that is, it should only care about the well-being of two-thirds of society, which create the country's wealth.

5_Internationalization of the economy, development and implementation of programs for regional and global integration.

6_Care for a favorable natural environment, development of environmental programs, solution of global problems.

The essence of the basic ideas of social democracy

The main ideas of democratic socialism, they are set out in the Declaration of Principles of the Socialist International (1989)

The interdependence of society and personality

Political democracy:

Parliamentarism

Multiparty

Recognition of the opposition

The right to dissent

Orientation towards nonviolent evolutionary development

Economic democracy, mixed economy

Social and political organizations and movements, their typology and functions

Social and political organizations and movements are voluntary formations that arose as a result of the free expression of the will of citizens united on the basis of common interests and goals.

The parties are also included in this group, but they stand out a lot. Only they set a clear goal of achieving power, using power. Only parties have a rigid structure and a clear scheme for achieving power. Other public organizations less politicized.

Unlike parties, these movements and organizations do not put the goal is to master state power... The number of social and political organizations and movements greatly exceeds the number of parties.

Typology of social and political organizations and movements

By field of activity:

1_RSPP - Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs

2_trade unions

3_sporting unions

4_creative unions and associations

5_human rights organizations

6_ecological movements, etc.

By the degree and form of organization:

1_spontaneous

2_weakly organized

3_with a high degree of organization

By the time of existence:

1_ short-term

2_long-term

Polish sociologist and political scientist Yevhen Vyatr believes that practically all social and political organizations and movements go through a number of stages in their development:

1_Creating prerequisites for movement. Real problems and contradictions become the basis for discussion and the emergence of active personalities who propose solutions to these problems. A common vision of the problem is developed.

2_ Development of ideological and organizational foundations. The movement forms a clear position, creates a program, holds organizational congresses or speeches by leaders of the movement in the press or television.

3_Stage of agitation. For any organization, mass character is the key to success.

4_Stage of expanded political activity. The work of the party itself begins. This stage depends on the goals set. If the goals are achievable, the stage may not last long, if the goals are unattainable or difficult to achieve, the stage may stretch for a very long time.

5_ Stage of motion fading. A movement or organization can cease to exist when the set goal is fulfilled or turns out to be false / unattainable; under pressure from the authorities; when there is no means to continue the struggle, etc.

Recently (20-30 years) in many countries of the world the so-called alternative movements (AD) have become the most widespread. These are new social movements striving to find original solutions to global and some other urgent problems: distribution nuclear weapons, resources, ecology, war and peace, quality of life. The activists of these movements claim that the old political structures are ineffective and incapable of solving global problems.

These movements are unpopular in Russia and popular in Europe. Alternative movements involve people who, as a rule, do not have economic difficulties. Age - from 18 to 35 years old, townspeople, representatives of the middle class, schoolchildren and students. The level of education is high.

The most active and organized alternative movements:

1_Ecological (Greenpeace, WWF, etc.).

2_Anti-war and anti-nuclear.

3_The Civil Rights Movement.

4_Organizations of supporters of alternative lifestyles.

5_Feminist.

6_Movement of pensioners.

7_Consumer.

Subsidiary movements can be extremist, for example, environmental - Peta.

Party systems

In their functioning within the political system, depending on the nature and number of parties, all parties in a given country are formed into the so-called party system.

It is customary to highlight:

1) One-party systems

2) Bipartisan

3) Multi-party

1e are considered anachronistic and less common than others (China, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam). The merging of the party and state bodies is taking place. First of all - the party and the executive branch.

Much depends on the requirements for a party to be considered a party on a social scale. One of the most stringent requirements is in the Russian Federation.

The party must meet the following requirements:

1) Composition - at least 50,000 people

2) Must have regional offices in more than half of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation

3) More than half of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation must have regional offices with at least 500 people

2nd. Operates in countries where there are several parties (about 20). However, only 2 games have a real opportunity to win on parliamentary elections and come to power.

The two most influential parties replace each other in power (in the classical form it is represented in the USA - Democrats and Republicans). Some countries have a modified 2-party system (2 + 1, 2.5) - such a system developed in Germany - XDC | XCC, SPD. The Free Democratic Party is a pendulum. Roughly the same system exists in the UK.

Analysts point out that such a system has clear advantages:

1) Convenience of choice for voters

2) The system contributes to the gradual softening of ideological conflicts between parties and their transition to more moderate positions

3) Allows you to get closer to the ideal of "responsible government": one is in power, the other is in opposition.

If voters are unhappy with the government's performance, they vote for the opposition party in parliamentary elections.

3rd. A multi-party system operates, where there are several fairly large and influential parties in the country, each of which gains a significant number of votes in parliamentary elections. (Italy, Finland, Greece).

With such a system, there can be up to 10 parties in parliament. There would be even more of them if the so-called "electoral threshold / barrier" was not established. As a rule, it is 5%. In the Russian Federation before the 2007 elections. Was 5% - now - 7%

In a multi-party system, electoral parties are often combined into electoral blocs. In the Russian Federation, such blocks could be created until 2007. This is prohibited under the new law.

Liberalism is an ideology that puts human freedom at the forefront of the development of society. State, society, groups, classes are secondary. The task of their existence is only in providing a person with free development. Liberalism proceeds from the fact that, firstly, man is a rational being, and secondly, the desire for happiness, success, comfort, joy is inherent in man's very nature. Realizing these aspirations, a person will not do evil, because, as a rational one, he understands that it will return to him. This means that, leading his life along the path of reason, a person will strive to improve it not at the expense of other people, but in all other available ways. Only he should not be disturbed in that. And then, building his own destiny on the principles of reason, conscience, a person will achieve the harmony of the whole society.

"Every person, if he does not violate the laws of justice, is free to pursue his own interests as he wishes, and to compete in his activities and the use of capital with other people or classes."(Adam Smith "The Wealth of Nations").

The idea of ​​liberalism is built on the Old Testament commandment: "Do not do to another what you do not feel sorry for yourself."

The history of liberalism

Liberalism was born in Western Europe during the era bourgeois revolutions XVII-XVIII centuries in the Netherlands and England. The principles of liberalism were put forward in the essay "Two Treatises on Government" by the British educator and philosopher John Locke, in continental Europe his ideas were supported and developed by such thinkers as Charles Louis Montesquieu, Jean-Baptiste Say, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Voltaire, figures of the American and Great French Revolutions.

The essence of liberalism

• Economic freedom
• Freedom of conscience
• Political freedoms
• Human right to life
• For private property
• To protect the state
• Equality of all before the law

"Liberals ... represent the interests of the bourgeoisie, which needs progress and a somewhat ordered legal system, observance of the rule of law, the constitution, ensuring some political freedom"(V. I. Lenin)

Crisis of Liberalism

- Liberalism, as a system of relations between people and states, like communism, can exist only on a worldwide scale. It is impossible to build a liberal (as well as a socialist) society in one single country. For liberalism is a social system of peaceful, respectable citizens who, without coercion, are aware of their rights and obligations to the state and society. But peaceful, respectable citizens always lose in a clash with aggressive and shameless ones. Consequently, they must either try by all means to build a universal liberal world (which the United States is trying to do today) or abandon most of their liberal views in order to preserve their own little world intact. Both are no longer liberalism.
- The crisis of the principles of liberalism also lies in the fact that people, by their nature, cannot stop in time, at reasonable boundaries. And the freedom of the individual, this alpha and omega of liberal ideology, turns into human permissiveness.

Liberalism in Russia

Liberal ideas came to Russia with the works of French philosophers and enlighteners of the late 18th century. But the authorities, frightened by the Great French Revolution, began an active struggle with them, which lasted until February revolution 1917 of the year. The ideas of liberalism were the main topic of disagreement between the Westernizers and the Slavophiles, the conflict between which, either calming down or intensifying, continued for more than a century and a half, until the end of the twentieth century. Westerners were guided by the liberal ideas of the West and called them to Russia, the Slavophiles rejected liberal principles, arguing that Russia has a special, separate, historical road that is not similar to the path of European countries. In the 90s of the twentieth century, it seemed that the Westernizers prevailed, but with the entry of mankind into the information age, when the life of Western democracies ceased to be a secret, a source of myths and a subject for imitation among Russians, the Slavophiles took revenge. So now liberal ideas in Russia are clearly not in trend and are unlikely to regain their positions in the near future.

In 2012, through the efforts of the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM), a survey was conducted, during which Russians were asked to explain who a liberal is. More than half of the participants in this test (more precisely, 56%) found it difficult to disclose this term. It is unlikely that this situation has radically changed in several years, and therefore let's consider what principles liberalism professes and what this socio-political and philosophical trend actually consists of.

Who is a liberal?

In the most general outline we can say that a person who is an adherent of this trend welcomes and approves of the idea of ​​limited intervention of state bodies in the basis of this system is based on a private business economy, which, in turn, is organized on market principles.

Answering the question of who a liberal is, many experts argue that he is the one who considers political, personal and economic freedom the highest priority in the life of the state and society. For the supporters of this ideology, freedom and the rights of each person are a kind of legal basis on which, in their opinion, the economic and social order should be built. Now let's look at who a liberal democrat is. This is a person who, while defending freedom, is an opponent of authoritarianism. in the opinion of Western political scientists, this is the ideal that many developed countries aspire to. However, this term can be talked about not only from the point of view of politics. In its original meaning, this word was used to refer to all free-thinkers and free-thinkers. Sometimes they included those who in society were inclined to excessive indulgence.

Modern liberals

As an independent worldview, the considered ideological trend emerged at the end of the 17th century. The basis for its development was the works of such famous authors as J. Locke, A. Smith and J. Mill. At the time, it was believed that free enterprise and government privacy would inevitably lead to prosperity and improved social welfare. However, as it turned out later, the classical model of liberalism did not justify itself. Free competition, uncontrolled by the state, led to the emergence of monopolies that inflated prices. Interest groups of lobbyists have appeared in politics. All this made legal equality impossible and significantly narrowed the opportunities for everyone who wanted to do business. In the 80-90s. In the 19th century, the ideas of liberalism began to experience a serious crisis. As a result of long theoretical searches at the beginning of the 20th century, a new concept was developed, called neoliberalism or social liberalism. Its supporters advocate protecting the individual from negative consequences and abuse in the market system. In classical liberalism, the state was something of a "night watchman". Modern liberals recognized that this was a mistake, and included in their program ideas such as:

Russian liberals

In the political discussions of the modern Russian Federation, this trend causes a lot of controversy. For some, liberals are conformists who play along with the West, while for others, they are a panacea that can save the country from the undivided power of the state. This inconsistency is largely due to the fact that several varieties of this ideology operate simultaneously on the territory of Russia. The most notable of them are liberal fundamentalism (represented by Alexei Venediktov, editor-in-chief of the Echo Moscow station), neoliberalism (represented by social liberalism (Yabloko party) and legal liberalism ( Republican Party and the party PARNAS).