What are liberal ideas. Who is a liberal

For the first time the term "liberalism" (from Latin liberalis - free) was used in Spain in 1811 in Spain. In the future, this term entered all European languages. The ideas of liberalism were actively developed and defended by such thinkers as J. Locke, T. Hobbes, A. Smith, S. Montesquieu, I. Kant, T. Jefferson, B. Constant, A. De Tocqueville, I. Bentham, J. St. Mill and others. As an ideological and political phenomenon, liberalism was born on the basis of the ideas of the Enlightenment at the end of the XYII - beginning of the XYIII centuries. In the early stages of its development, it was the most important means of struggle led by the bourgeoisie of the "third estate" against the existing absolutist order. Therefore, its content was directly related to the needs and interests of the emerging bourgeoisie. From the very beginning, the principles of individual freedom, its high intrinsic value and the right to self-realization, as well as the recognition of its responsibility to society, were laid in the foundation of liberalism. Freedom was understood by liberals as freedom from state, church and other forms of social control. On the basis of these prerequisites, the economic and political attitudes of liberalism were formed. In the field of economics, the idea of ​​individual freedom was interpreted by liberals as the freedom of private enterprise and the market. They consistently advocated the release of economic activity from state regulation, for the maximum scope for private initiative. Economic freedom, according to liberals, is the basis of civil and political freedoms. The principle of freedom in the political sphere was interpreted by liberals as freedom from state restrictions. On the basis of such an attitude, the idea of ​​a “night watchman state” was formulated, the essence of which was that the state should be endowed with only the most minimal and necessary functions to ensure the protection of order, the rule of law and the protection of the country from external danger. It was noted that civil society should have priority over the state, which can be achieved on the basis of the principles of constitutionalism and parliamentarism. Liberals defended the ideas of the rule of law as a means of limiting the state and the separation of powers as a tool for society's control over the state. Opposing class privileges, they emphasized the idea of ​​equality of citizens before the laws, which should be more of the nature of prohibitions, rather than prescriptions. Similar ideas of liberalism have created a theoretical basis for the formation of the rule of law. By the beginning of the 20th century, liberalism found itself in a rather difficult position in Western countries. The development of the free market and entrepreneurship has turned from an idea into a reality. But it was then that it became clear that the unrestricted play of market forces in the conditions of the social vulnerability of the working people did not bring prosperity or freedom to the majority of society. In such an environment, trust in traditional liberal values ​​fell sharply and a revision of the most important provisions of classical liberalism began. Under the influence of the current situation, as well as the development of the labor and social democratic movement, the ideas of social justice, state support for the poor, elimination of extremes of property inequality, etc. appeared in the arsenal of liberals. As a result, liberalism evolved into "social liberalism (neoliberalism)" The socialist revolution in Russia and the global economic crisis of the early 1930s played a role in establishing neoliberalism as one of the most important reformist ideologies of the 20th century, which raised the question of the need to rethink such postulates of classical liberalism as unlimited individual freedom and freedom of competition. Of particular importance were the ideas of the English economist J. Keynes (1881–1946), widely popular in those years, who developed a model of state regulation aimed at a sharp expansion of state intervention in the economy and a significant limitation of its market principles. The Keynesian model also provided for a significant expansion of the consumer demand of the population based on a significant increase in government spending, the creation of social guarantees for the poor in the field of medicine, education, employment, pensions, etc. In practice, the ideas of neoliberalism were first implemented in the "new course" President F. Roosevelt, elected in 1932. His government began to actively pursue a policy of demonopolization of the economy and carry out its state regulation. Unemployment benefits were introduced, the activities of trade unions were legalized, and collective agreements between workers and entrepreneurs began to be concluded. In the future, similar processes covered almost all industrialized countries. The main difference between neoliberalism and classical liberalism is the recognition of the active role of the state in regulating the economy and pursuing social policy. The idea of ​​its detachment from economic and social processes was replaced by the understanding that the state should in every possible way contribute to ending social conflicts and smoothing out excessive social inequality by supporting the poorest and most vulnerable sections of society. It was recognized that such a policy could be carried out by the state only on the basis of its active influence on economic processes. Under these conditions, liberals, like the Social Democrats, began to defend the ideas of affordable medical care for all citizens, free school and higher education, expansion of the social security system, etc. They were also adherents of the idea of ​​progressive taxation, believing that large owners should bear their share of responsibility for the social stability of society. As a result of the implementation of such a policy in the West, a new model of the state was created, called the "welfare state." However, in the 1970s, it began to lose its influence and liberal ideology, which, while remaining faithful to the basic principles of freedom and market entrepreneurship, absorbed a number of previously unusual ideas (emphasis on the social equality of citizens, recognition of the need for state intervention in the economy and social life of society, etc.), which gave rise to a violation of its internal integrity and consistency. The crisis phenomena of the economy of the 1970s, accompanied by the crisis of the "welfare state", were largely the result of the policy pursued by neoliberal parties. As a result of their decline in popularity, they were forced to cede state power to parties pursuing neo-conservative policies. However, in the future, liberalism again embarked on the path of rethinking its leading principles. In particular, the need was recognized to return to the principles of stimulating market mechanisms while reducing the regulatory role of the state.

Having inherited a number of ideas of the ancient Greek thinkers Lucretius and Democritus, liberalism as an independent ideological trend was formed on the basis of the political philosophy of the English enlighteners D. Locke, T. Hobbes, A. Smith at the end of the 17th-18th centuries. Linking the freedom of the individual with respect for fundamental human rights, as well as with the system of private property, liberalism based its concept on the ideals of free competition, the market, and entrepreneurship.

Liberalism- this is an ideology that proclaims the recognition of the political and economic rights of the individual within the framework of laws, which are a generalization of the natural needs and inalienable rights of people to life, freedom, property, security, order. Liberalism provides for such a structure of society and power mechanisms, when free competition and the market limit the role of the state in the life of society.

The main, backbone principles of liberalism are the following:

1) the natural equality of people;

2) the existence and guarantee of the inalienability of such human rights as the right to life, liberty, property;

3) the rule of law, its binding on all;

4) the contractual nature of relations between the state and citizens, providing for their mutual responsibility;

5) a democratic political regime that provides all citizens with equal rights to vote and be elected;

6) the presence of a developed civil society and guarantees of non-interference in private life;

7) constitutionalism, which provides for the restriction of legislative and executive power through, first of all, the system of separation of powers, the mechanism of checks and balances, the establishment of limits and "clear" procedures for the activities of legislators.

The main problems of liberal ideology have always been the definition of the permissible degree and nature of state interference in the private life of an individual, the combination of democracy and freedom, loyalty to a particular Fatherland and universal human rights.

Attempts to resolve these issues have led to the emergence of numerous internal currents in liberalism. So, in the XX century. along with traditional liberalism, directions were formed that tried to combine its core values ​​with a total reliance on the state, or with socially oriented ideas that asserted a greater responsibility of society for the welfare of all people than an individual, or with ideas that denied the social orientation of the state's activities ("conservative liberalism"). ") etc.

The strengthening of the elements of the state ideology and social goals, which adapted the traditional values ​​of liberalism to the economic and political realities of the second half of the 20th century, forced us to talk about its historically renewed form - neoliberalism. Justice was proclaimed the most important advantage of the political system, and governments - orientation to moral principles and values. The political program of the neo-liberals was based on the ideas of consensus between the rulers and the ruled, the need for the participation of the masses in the political process, and the democratization of the procedure for making managerial decisions.

In contrast to the previous tendency to mechanically determine the democratic nature of political life by the majority, pluralistic forms of organization and exercise of state power began to be preferred. Moreover, R. Dahl, C. Lindblum and other neo-pluralists believe that the weaker the rule of the majority, the more it corresponds to the principles of liberalism. True, representatives of right-wing liberal movements (F. Hayek, D. Escher, G. Olson) believe that under pluralism mechanisms of expropriation of the wealthy minority by the majority can be formed, and this can threaten the fundamental principles of liberalism.

At the same time, the orientation preserved in neoliberalism is predominantly towards public types of human activity (political activity, enterprise, freedom from prejudices, etc.), the traditional attitude to morality as a private matter of a person (which contributes to the strengthening of not all ties and relations in society, and at times carries the danger of atomization of society) limit the electoral base of these ideas in modern conditions.

On the other hand, it was precisely the core values ​​of liberalism that led to a radical change in mass political views in many countries of the world, and formed the basis of many national ideologies, guidelines for neoconservatism and Christian democratic ideology. Various theories of political participation, democratic elitism, and so on have developed on a liberal basis.

Liberalism - a school in international studies that is fundamentally opposed to realism. The origins of this trend are in the works of J. Locke, I. Kant, A. Smith, J. S. Mill. The founder of this school is Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924), the 28th President of the United States, one of the founders of the League of Nations. Representatives of this school are also called idealists, and the school itself is idealistic. Idealism was especially widespread in 1919-1939 and represented an attempt through international institutions, primarily the League of Nations, to ensure peace and cooperation between states.

The idealistic approach is distinguished from other approaches by a pronounced ethical position. It proceeds from an optimistic view of human nature as a rational being, capable of moral improvement, peaceful coexistence, ready to abandon the policy of force and the desire for domination for the sake of the common good. Idealists sought to create a harmonious model of international relations devoid of military conflicts. They put international cooperation, the legal resolution of conflicts, the regulation of relations between peoples with the help of international organizations, and the discussion of controversial issues in negotiations in the foreground. The power factor in politics was not evaluated as highly as by the realists; economic and legal levers were considered more effective means of influence. The liberals proceeded from the fact that the interaction of states on the world stage in order to maintain peace and economic prosperity must necessarily be regulated by intergovernmental organizations and international regimes (rules, norms, procedures jointly developed by members of the world community in a specific area of ​​international relations, for example, in trade, financial policy and etc.). States with a liberal approach, although they are recognized as the main participants in international relations, are not the only ones. It is emphasized that along with them intergovernmental (UN, OSCE, etc.) and non-governmental organizations (human rights, environmental, humanitarian, transnational corporations, etc.) operate.

School founded in the 1980s neoliberalism A(or structural liberalism) which continues classical liberalism, but takes into account the new realities of the world political process: complex interdependence, developing interstate cooperation, integration, and the creation of a global community. Neoliberalism pays special attention to the relationship between politics and economics. Due to the interdependence of states, the opportunities for their cooperation through international organizations should increase, and the influence of anarchy on the international environment should weaken.

As part of neoliberalism but several directions, concepts have arisen, which are sometimes considered as independent conceptual schools. These include primarily the concept complex interdependence. Its representatives are American political scientists Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye. In this concept, international politics is analyzed from the point of view of the participation of many political actors in it - not only states, but also non-governmental organizations (there are over 10,000 of them in the world today), including influential transnational corporations. Parties, churches, trade unions and other organizations actively joined political life. The state has ceased to be the only actor on the world stage; moreover, it is losing its role as the main subject of international politics in favor of international organizations. Recognition of the diversity of actors, types and channels of interaction between them has led to the fact that in the study of world politics now, instead of the concept of international (and, in fact, interstate) relations, the concept has been used transnational relations. The model of transnational relations, which emphasizes the role of non-state actors, was formulated by R. Keohane together with J. Nye, and the concept of complex interdependence is often referred to as transnationalist or globalist school.

According to the theory of interdependence, all political actors, to a greater or lesser extent, influence international politics. They are interested not only in economic cooperation, but also in joining efforts to solve common, global problems, for example, environmental protection, arms limitation, non-proliferation nuclear weapons etc. The position of any country depends on its relations with other states and on international system generally. Due to the growing interdependence of various countries, the distinction between the domestic and foreign policies of the state is becoming more and more relative: not only does foreign policy depend on domestic policy, but also domestic policy on foreign policy, and in all more. The multilateral dependence of states makes it unprofitable to resolve conflicts by force, while cooperation and cooperation create conditions for peace and prosperity, transnationalists argue.

LIBERALISM - general designation various forms socio-political thought and practice of modern and modern times.

Rise-walking in their gen-ne-zi-se to rise-nick-shek in the 17th-18th centuries of the ra-cio-on-leaf and enlightenment cri-ti-ke of the Western -ropeian co-words-no-th community-st-va, ab-so-lu-tiz-ma and cle-ri-ka-liz-ma. The term “Liberalism” arose in the Spanish cor-te-s in 1810, denoting the faction of an-ti-ab-so-lu-ti-st-ori-en-ta-tion , and after this, would-st-ro ras-pro-country-nil-Xia on Ev-ro-pe.

For-mi-ro-va-nie ideo-logii li-be-ra-liz-ma.

Since the 17th century, the philosophical foundations of Liberalism include the ideas of ve-ro-ter-pi-mo-sti (that-le- rant-no-sti), in-di-vi-du-al-noy freedom, in-nya-that pre-zh-de everything as a protection of human-lo-ve -ka from the political pro-from-in-la, ver-ho-ven-st-va ra-tsio-nal-but justify-no-van-no-go right-va, right-le-niya with co-gla-this on-ro-da (in the theo-ri-yah general-st-ven-no-go-to-go-vo-ra - uch-re-zh-den-no-go-on- ro-house), the right to a part-st-own own-st-ven-nost, is-to-l-ko-van-nuyu at that time rather temper-st-ven-but and in-whether -ti-che-ski than yuri-di-che-ski and eco-no-mi-che-ski. These ideas, in a different way, are ak-tsen-ti-ro-van-nye, raz-vi-va-lis such-ki-mi thoughts-whether-te-la-mi, like T. Hobbes, J Locke, B. Spin-no-za, S. Pu-fen-dorf, P. Bayle, etc.

In the 18th century, Liberalism became ideological-lo-gi-che-sky and, in a certain sense, in a lytic way, partly op-re-de-lyaya so-fight co-der-zha-nie in-nya-tia Enlightenment. The efforts of the French physio-crats (F. Ke-ne, P. Mercier de la Riviere, A.R. J. Tur-go) and the Scottish pro-sve-ti-te -lei (D. Hume, A. Smith, J. Millar, A. Fer-gu-son) creates-da-et-xia political eco-no-miya, C. Mont-tes-kyo and its after-to-va-te-whether times-ra-ba-you-va-yut con-cep-tion times-de-le-niya authorities - one of the most important -lytic ideas of Liberalism. In the same tradition, as well as outside it, - U. Blacks-to-nom, I. Ben-ta-mom, from-tsa-mi-os-no-va-te-la-mi USA ( T. Jeff-fer-so-nom, J. Me-di-so-nom, A. Ga-mil-to-nom) - for-mi-ru-et-sya modern con-sti-tu-tsio-na -ism (based on the ideas of J. Locke and the historical experience of the English Revolution, in particular the Bill of Rights of 1689). Ch. Bek-ka-ria for-mu-li-ru-et the idea of ​​\u200b\u200b"gu-ma-ni-sti-che-sko-go" right, in the works of I. Kan-ta and I. Ben- ta-ma warehouses-dy-va-yut-sya-influencing to the present time theories of mo-ra-li - these are debt-ha (de-on-to-logia) and uti-li-ta-rism. The general appearance of Liberalism - under the influence, first of all, Vol-ter-ra and en-cyclo-lo-pe-di-stov (D. Di-d-ro, J.L d'Alembert, P. Gol-ba-ha, etc.) - pri-ni-ma-et more and more secular character, and in some of their manifestations-le-ni -yah Liberalism becomes-but-vit-xia atei-sti-che-skim.

Liberalism was the first those-th-no-things, in some way about-su-zh-da-lied and fore-was-hi-ha-ha-rak-ter-nye pro-ble-we of the modern society, at that time only for-mi-ro-vav-she-go-sya. In the 18th century, up to the French revolution of the 18th century, Liberalism pro-ti-in-standing-whether only different versions of tra-di-cio-na-lis-ma. Only later, in the course of this re-in-lu-tion and after it, and in the quality of re-actions on political victories and developments of early Liberalism, two other key currents of modern thought are formed - con-ser-vatism and socialism. So for-mi-ru-et-sya is the modulus of the modern world-ro-po-ni-ma-nia, many-times-but re-re-stray-vav-shy-sya in the 19th and 20th centuries, but not-from-me-but-storing-my-main components-po-nen-you.

The development of Liberalism in the 18th century in ro-di-lo and a lot of its forms. So, in the Scottish Enlightenment, it would-la from-reject-well-that idea of ​​\u200b\u200bgen-of-st-ven-no-go-to-go-in-ra, and es-te-st-ven- noe pra-in sve-de-but according to su-shche-st-vu to p-zi-tiv-no-mu pra-vu. Ve-ra in all-mo-gu-shche-st-vo and sa-mo-stand-tel-ness ra-zu-ma would-la kri-ti-che-ski pe-re-os-cape-le- on Scottish fi-lo-so-fa-mi, while the Liberalism of the Kantov-sko-go-th-for-mi-ro-val-sya in a direct-my-le-mi-ke with no- mi (before everything with D. Hume). “Not-from-foreign-well-give-we-rights” che-lo-ve-ka, who have become not only the cornerstone of some-some versions of Liberalism , but also its lytic sign (in the American and French re-in-lu-qi-yah), would it be with pre-zr-n-e-y-y-y-y-y. Ben-ta-mom "che-pu-hoi on ho-du-lyah." Ori-en-ta-tion on enlightened ab-co-lu-tism as the most-bo-lea-to-vat-ny, or yes, one-st-ven-but-possible -ny, in-st-ru-ment of real-li-for-tion of re-for-ma-tor-pro-programs about-ti-in-standing-whether the perception of go-su-dar-st -va as “not-ho-di-my-evil” and striving, if possible, “mi-ni-mi-zi-ro-vat” him (for example, by T. Pey-n and K. V. von Humboldt).

The main te-che-tions and pro-ble-we are co-time-men-no-go-whether-be-ra-liz-ma.

In conflicts within many different versions of Liberalism and between it and others, there are many -niya-mi (con-ser-va-tiz-mom, so-cia-liz-mom, na-cio-na-liz-mom, fun-da-men-ta-liz-mom, etc.) pro-is-ho-di-lo development of various forms of Liberalism, not-rarely with-holding-zh-tel-but changing-shih-sya so much that they lose -whether there is a similarity between me-f-du-fight and our own “great-ro-di-te-la-mi” from the era of Enlightenment. At the same time, there is a sim-bio-zy of some versions of Liberalism and other ideo-logical theories, for example, liberal socialism in the spirit of K. Ros-sel-li or L. Hob-how-sa, as well as posthumously pub- lished "Chapters on social cyan- lis-me" J.S. Mill-la, modern non-oli-be-ra-lism (L. von Mises, M. Fried-man, A. Schwartz, etc.) - according to su-sche-st-vu, only ra-di-kal -naya version of the ka-pi-ta-listic con-ser-va-tiz-ma, "li-be-ral-ny-tsio-na-lizm", rising to the idea -yam J. Mad-zi-ni about “mor-st-ven-noy to-tal-no-sti of the nation”, you-build-vae-mine in co-ot-vet-st-vie with uni- ver-sal-ny-mi price-no-stya-mi rights che-lo-ve-ka.

In general, you can de-pour five main the-che-li-be-ral-noy thoughts, which were created in the 20th century: 1) teachings, re-creation -from-in-dia-theories of general-st-ven-no-go-to-go-in-ra and es-the-st-ven-ny rights (J. Rawls, various versions of dis -kus-siv-noy eti-ki - Yu. Ha-ber-mas, etc.); 2) the concept of spon-tan-no-go in a row, continuing the traditions of the Scottish Enlightenment (F.A. von Hayek, W. Buck-li the Younger and others); 3) modern uti-li-ta-rism in its various versions (P. Singer, K. Er-row, G. Becker, F. Knight); 4) Ge-gel-yan-sky versions of Liberalism (B. Cro-che, R. Kollin-gwood, etc.); 5) prag-matism and non-op-rag-matism (J. Dewey, R. Ror-ty and others). You can also talk about the growing ec-lec-tic-ness of modern concepts of Liberalism, which, in the opinion of its critics (Ch.R Mills and others), is one of the reasons for his ba-on-li-za-tion. The political reason for this trend is seen by the cri-ti-ki in the fact that modern Liberalism is turning into a “prag-ma-ti-che- and so-cio-lo-gi-che-skoe "description of the me-ha-niz-mov func-tsio-ni-ro-va-nia of the western society, someone swarm we are no longer able to evaluate these mechanisms from the point of view of growth or decrease in freedom (J. Dunn).

The internal d-na-mi-ka of modern Liberalism is op-re-de-la-et-xia discussion-kus-siya-mi on the following key-tops. The first topic: should Liberalism, as its main goal, strive to og-ra-no-che-niyu with-well-well-give- of the power of any pra-vi-tel-st-va (F.A. von Hay-ek) or is it a second-degree-pen-question, decided in -ve-si-mo-sti from how Liberalism copes with its most important for-yes-whose - under viy, without some-ry not-possibility-to-free-real-li-for-the-tion of a person of his own abilities (T.H. Green )? In the center of these discussions - from-no-she-nie of the state-su-dar-stva and society, functions and to-let-ti-my scales action-tel-no-sti first-of-the-go ra-di obes-pe-che-niya free-bo-dy development in-di-vi-da and co-general-st-va lu -day. The second theme: should Liberalism be “value-but-st-but-neutral”, serve its kind of “pure” technical-no-what -you are in-di-vi-du-al-noy of freedom without-from-no-si-tel-but to those values ​​​​that are attached to free man-of-age (J. Rawls, B. Ak-ker-man), or he embodies op-re-de-lyon values ​​(gu-man-no- sti, co-gift-no-sti, right-wed-whether-in-sti, etc.), forget-ve-ing someone-ryh-va-for-not-tho-mo-go pa-lips-us-mi after-st-via-mi (W. Gal-ston, M. Wal-zer)? With the second sub-ho-de, neither “price-but-st-neu-trality”, nor moral re-la-ti-vism for Liberalism is accepted. The axis of these discussions is the normative content of Liberalism and its embodiment in the institutes of modern society. The third topic: how are we connected with lytic freedom and private property, go-in-rya shi-re - ka-pi- talism? Here, pro-ti-in-sto-yat Liberalism is eco-but-mi-che-sky and temper-st-ven-but-po-li-ti-che-sky. The essence of the first one can be re-given in the form of von Miese Liberalism: “Pro-gram-ma-li-be-ra-liz-ma, if you to break it down in one word, it would be read like this: property, i.e. private ownership of the means of pro-from-water-st -va ... All the other tre-bo-va-nia li-be-ra-liz-ma you-te-ka-yut from this fun-da-men-tal-no-go tre -bo-va-nia ”(Mi-ses L. von. Li-be-ra-lizm. M., 2001. P. 24). The essence of the morals-of-veins-but-is-it-che-th-th-th Liberalism consists in the fact that the connection of freedom and part of sti is not one-but-meaning-on and is not-la-is-not-from-me-no in different historical circumstances. According to B. Cro-che, freedom “should have the courage to accept the means of so-qi-al-no-go pro-gres-sa, someone rye ... are-la-yut-sya different-but-about-raz-us-mi and about-ty-in-re-chi-you-mi, ”and ras-smat-ri-vat free- the ny market is only as “one of the possible types of eco-no-mi-che-go in a row” (Croce B. My Philosophy and other essays on the moral and political problems of our time. L., 1949. P. 108).

Kha-rak-ter-naya for Liberalism is convinced-zh-den-ness in the possibility of co-op-shen-st-in-va-niya of any public institutions-tu-tu-tov in-lu-cha-et its incarnation only in a specific so-qi-al-noy practice-ti-ke, vector-to-swarm for-wee-sit from in -whether and or-ga-ni-for-tion of people. According to R.G. Da-ren-dor-fa, “there is no such state of being, in which li-be-ra-lism would be real-li-zo-van full-stu. Lie-be-ra-lism is always a process ... in the middle of someone-ro-go-go-to-follow-du-yut-sya new opportunities for pain -she-th number of people. Every time this process needs new impulses to give it energy” (Dahrendorf R. The future tasks of libera-lism: a political agenda. L., 1988. P. 29).

Li-be-ra-lism in so-qi-al-no-po-li-ti-che-practice-ti-ke.

The practical implementation of the ideas of Liberalism, at least since the end of the 18th century, has been pro-is-ho-di-lo on several levels: a) mass in the first place; b) political ideology and party programs; c) po-ly-tic in-sti-tu-tov - first of all, par-ties, na-zy-vav-shih and / or considered-shih-be-be-ral- us-mi, etc. li-be-ral-no-go-su-dar-st-va. At these levels, the fate of Liberalism is different.

In the 18th century, Liberalism was rather aware of the “front-di-ruyu-schey” of the a-hundred-kra-ti-her and the faces of free professions on -ras-tav-she-go kri-zi-sa "old-ro-go in a row" than the class-co-howl of the ideo-lo-gi-her bourgeois-joie-zi. Yes, the British ly-tic eco-no-mia, from-ra-zhav-shay spirit of for-mi-ruyu-sche-go-sya com-mer-che-so-go-s-s-s-va , all-ma restrained-zhan-but from-no-si-las to the middle classes. A. Smith in “Bo-gat-st-ve-na-ro-dov” (chapter 11) called for the community to vigilance in from-no-she-nii “merchants and pro-mysh-len-ni-kov”, always prone to “ob-ma-ny-vat and ug-not-thief”. At the European con-ti-nen-te, Liberalism is from-whether-from-the-covered dis-affection to “just-sto-lu-di-us” and complete non-ve -we-em in the ability to-ro-yes manage a co-battle or at least, how you-ra-pity-sya Sh. Mon-tes-kyo, ob-su-g-give po-ly-tic de la. From-no-she-nie to de-mo-kra-tii would-lo-is-key-chi-tel-but not-ga-tiv-nym, and yes, for example, from-tsy-os-no- va-te-whether of the American Republic-pub-li-ki, uch-re-g-give-shi pre-sta-vi-tel-noe right-le-tion, vi-de-whether its main thing is to-sto-in -s-in that it can “create a force that doesn’t depend on the pain-shin-st-va, i.e. from the self- sch-st-va ”(Ma-di-son J., Ga-mil-ton A. To the na-ro-du of the state of New York. No. 51 // Fe-de-ra-list. M., 1994, p. 349). In these conditions, it’s not necessary to talk about the presence of Liberalism at the level of mass co-creation, ho- he already and you-stepped into the ka-che-st-ve of lytic ideology.

Si-tua-tion me-nya-et-sya in the 19th century - ad-re-sa-ta-mi of Liberalism become-but-vyat-sya under-no-may-schayu-sya-bourgeois-az-ny environments -nie classes, in-tel-li-gen-tion, enlightened part of chi-new-no-che-st-va and new (small and medium) earth- le-vla-del-tsy, adapt-ti-ro-vav-shie-sya to the ry-night conditions of the ho-zyay-st-in-va-nia. The “golden age” of classical liberal parties is coming, an example of some can be considered the English Lie-be- ral party under the leadership of U.Yu. Glad-hundred-on, and par-la-men-ta-riz-ma as or-ha-on me-niy and in-whether on-ro-yes, putting-len-no-go in the center of the state mouth -roy-st-va. As Voltaire wrote, "pa-la-ta communities are the real-lin-na-tion ...".

However, in these conditions, even in these conditions, Liberalism remains ideo-lo-gi-it less-shin-st-va, and its re-al-noe pro-nick-but -ve-nie in not-with-vi-le-gi-ro-van-nye layers would be nothing. “Na-qi-ey”, presenting in par-la-men-te, it would be names, but it’s less-shin-st-together with less-shin-st, represented by con-ser-va-tiv-ny-mi par-tia-mi (all-general-of-bi-rater right - for persons older than 21 years old - yes - lo vve-de-no in We-li-ko-bri-ta-nii, this “ko-ly-be-li mi-ro-vo-go-li-be-ra-liz-ma”, only in 1928!). At the same time, the most re-shi-tel-naya op-po-zi-tion of the ras-shi-re-niyu from the bi-rational right-wa is-ho-di-la then precisely from li-be-ra-lov "man-che-ster-sko-go-tal-ka" (Man-che-ster became at that time the "hundred-face-tsey" of the ka-pi-ta-listic in -du-st-ri-al-noy re-vo-lu-tion): they feared that their own-st-ve-ness might be under threat from hundred-ro-we-not-haves, better-better through races-shi-re-nie from bi-racial right, influence on the activities of the state-su-dar -st-va. From-no-she-niya between Liberalism and de-mo-kra-ti-her os-ta-va-lis-stretch-wives-us-mi on the pro-ty-the-same-nii of everything XIX century. The modern “de-mo-kra-ti-che-ka-pi-ta-lism” is the product of a hard and long political struggle, in a swarm and li-be-ra-liz-mu, and de-mo-kra-tii had to go to serious mutual concessions.

In the 20th century, especially after the 2nd world war, there was an obvious decline in liberal parties, despite the fact that the ideas of Liberalism - the value of the market, the rights of a person-lo-ve-ka, “pro-tse-bad-noy de-mo-kra-tii”, etc. in-lu-chi-li uni-ver- sal-noe recognition. In Li-be-ral-nom in-ter-na-tsio-na-le (os-no-van in 1947), the parties of 46 countries were represented, but only one of them - Canadian Li-be-ral-naya par-tia - per-rio-di-che-ski hundred-but-vit-sya-great-ve-sche. Parties in Japan and Av-st-ra-lii, naming themselves-be-be-ral-us-mi and in a hundred-yang-but (like the first) whether -bo time from time-me-ni (like a second-paradise) to-ho-dy-shchi-sya in power, fak-ti-che-ski yav-la-yut-sya con-ser-va -tiv-ny-mi. Other liberal parties have practically no chance of coming to power. Modeling for the 19th century the English Li-be-ral-naya par-tia pre-kra-ti-la su-sche-st-vo-va-nie in 1988, merging with so-qi -al-de-mo-kra-ta-mi (against-against-no-ki merging "re-sta-no-vi-li" her in 1989, but her ly-tic weight co-ver -shen-but nothing-women). At the same time, almost all influential parties Western countries did it become-whether-be-ral-us-mi and it’s hard-but if-whether-we-we are in the program from-no-she-nii. Serious ideological and strategic differences, but some of them, even before the 2nd World War, were saved -zh-du so-tsi-al-de-mo-kra-ta-mi and liberals, came to naught. Ra-di-kal-op-po-zi-tion from the left and right-va prak-ti-che-ski is-chez-la, in any case at the par-la-ment level -sko-th pre-sta-vi-tel-st-va. Do-ti-ka-re-re-sta-la be a “argument about ideas” and turn into ad-mi-ni-st-ri-ro-va-nie, an hour something like “cri-sis-ny me-nej-ment”. All this is from-ra-zha-et layer-living-sya in mass co-creation-on-ni con-sen-sus from-no-si-tel-but basic-li-be-ral- nyh values, vos-pri-no-may-my as a sa-mo-obvious fact and have become their own sort of ba-nal-no-stya-mi.

Li-be-ra-lism in eco-no-mi-ke.

Theo-re-ti-ki of classical Liberalism ut-ver-zhda-whether unconditional priori-ori-tet in-di-vi-du-al-ny rights to property and svo-bo-du you-bo-ra eco-no-mic in-ve-de-niya. According to A. Smith, moral life and economic activity should be based on directives from a hundred we are go-su-dar-st-va, and the free market is in the process of natural sa-mo-re-gu-li-ro-va-nia spo-so-ben dos -tych more pro-of-di-tel-no-sti than a market with a lot of og-ra-no-che-ny: “Each-to-mu-lo -ve-ku, as long as he doesn’t on-ru-sha-et for-to-new-right-whether-in-sti, pre-before-becoming-la-et-sya co-ver-shen-but free-bod-but pre-follow-to-vat, according to one’s own-ve-no-mu-ra-zu-me-tion, one’s in-te-re-sy and con-ku-ri-ro-vat with one’s own labor house and ka-pi-ta-lom with labor and ka-pi-ta-lom of another person and the whole class ”(Smith A. Is-sle-do-va -nie about the nature and the cause of the rich-gat-st-va on-ro-dov. M., 2007. P. 647). From-flock-vae-my pre-hundred-vi-te-la-mi of Liberalism (laissez-faire) includes in itself from-day-st-vie of state sub-si-diy and various bar-e-ditch for trading; the cost of that-va-ditch and services-meadow should-on-op-re-de-lyat-xia is-key-chi-tel-but ry-night-ny-mi-si-la-mi.

Os-no-howl eco-no-mi-ki is a “free private enterprise”. The main task of-yes-whose go-su-dar-st-va is considered to provide-ne-che-nie stable right-for-forks of the game - to follow co-blu-de -no-eat for-con-no-sti, pre-du-pre-g-give the possibility of-on-strength, support-to-hold-to-to-chi-vost de-neg- noy sis-te-we and provide-ne-chi-vat svo-bo-du markets; pre-la-ha-et-sya, that between-f-from-vet-st-ven-no-stu pra-vi-tel-st-va and in-di-vid-dov should be balance and go-su-dar-st-vo should only decide those problems-yes-chi, someone-rye cannot be you-half-not-we over-le-zha- shchy ob-ra-zom part-st-ny sec-to-rum.

The principles of the state re-gu-li-ro-va-nia of the ka-pi-ta-list-istic eco-no-mi-ki opi-sa-ny in the works of J.M. Kane-sa, L. Bren-ta-no, L. Hob-how-sa, T.H. Green, B. Olin and J. Dewey, who played a prominent role in spreading the ideas of Liberalism throughout the world.

Li-be-ra-lism in Russia.

Liberalism as an ideological tech-tion in Russia with the formation of mi-ro-val-sya in the 1830-1840s. In its foundations, first of all, the ideas of the theo-re-ti-kov of French Liberalism (F. Guizot, B.A. Kon-sta-na de Re-beck, A. de To-to-vi-la) and G.V.F. Ge-ge-la, what-whether-lo-re-re-os-think-to-pour the experience of philo-so-fii Enlightenment in application to Russia and propose to live a project of mod-der-ni-za-tion of the country, pre-la-gav-shi significant pre-ob-ra-zo-va-niya so-tsi-al -but-po-lytic sys-te-we. First of all, at first, Liberalism got the most-big-neck races-pro-countries in the university environment. Subsequently, he increased his influence along with the development of public institutions-tu-tov (circle-kov, volume-e-di -not-niy, n-chat-nyh from-yes-nyy, or-ga-nov me-st-no-go sa-mo-management, etc.).

In its history, Russian Liberalism has gone through a definite evolution. According to the opinion of Russian li-be-ra-lovs of the 1830-1890s (K.D. Ka-ve-lin, B.N. Chi-che-rin, S.M. So-lov-yov, A .D. Gra-dov-sky and others), the key force in the historical process in Russia was go-su-dar-st-vo; it is able to develop a common va-tel-no, and the emergence of a civil society is possible only with the active participation of the government authorities. In the power of this-whether-be-ra-ly, you-stu-pa-whether against revolutionary shocks, someone-rye, under-ry-vaya state mustache -toi, on-ru-sha-whether the natural course of development and could plunge Russia into anarchy. Theo-re-ti-ki of Russian Liberalism from-stai-wa-whether the evo-lu-qi-on-ny path of pre-ob-ra-zo-va-niy, someone would call on -step-pen-but expand the right-in-guarantements of political and civil liberties ka-zh-to-go-lo-ve-ka and with time - it’s ras-cal-you-vat on the must-ta-nov-le-nie con-sti-tu-qi-on-nyh rows in Russia. At the same time, Ka-ve-lin and Chi-che-rin considered-ta-whether-be-real-values-not-with-together-we-mi with a de-mo-cratic principle -qi-pom borderless ge-ge-mo-nii pain-shin-st-va, because the key-howl for-yes-whose right-in-go-su -dar-st-va in-la-ga-li from-flock-va-nie in-te-re-owls in-di-vi-da. These ideas were also characteristic for “li-be-ral-ny bureau-ro-kra-ts” (A.A. Aba-zy, A.V. Go-lov-ni-na , D.A. and N.A. Mi-lu-ti-nykh, etc.) in the years of pro-ve-de-niya of the so-called. Ve-li-kih reforms of the 1860-1870s. They from-la-ga-were influence-tel-us-periodic from-da-niya-mi (for example, zhur-na-la-mi “Vestnik Ev-ro-py”, “Rus -skaya thought ”, etc.), public associations-e-di-non-niya-mi (legal general-st-va-mi, general-st-va-mi gram-mot- no-sti, Literary Fund-house, etc.), zem-ski-mi so-b-ra-niya-mi and or-ga-na-mi of the city self-management-le-tion.

At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries, the ideas of Liberalism changed as a result of the mod-der-ni-za-tion of the Russian society. New theo-re-ti-ki of Liberalism (V.M. Ges-sen, F.F. Ko-kosh-kin, P.N. Mi-lyu-kov, P.I. Nov-go-rod- tsev, etc.) is-ho-di-whether from mutually-ob-words-len-no-sti-li-be-ral-nyh and de-mo-cratic values-no-stey, which is required bo-va-lo ras-shi-re-niya trans-rech-nya ga-ran-ti-ro-van-nyh gra-y-yes-no-well free-bod, go-vo-ri-li oh right -ve-lo-ve-ka for a “decent life” (i.e., about the right to education, medical support, culture -ny do-sug, etc.), about the so-qi-al-noy function of self-st-ven-no-sti, someone-paradise must serve not only about it -la-da-te-lu, but also to all-to-mu-sche-st-vu. Such a conception is still pre-la-ha-la the active role of state power as re-gu-la-to-ra right-in-from- but-she-ny, and go-su-dar-st-vo, pre-ten-blowing-shche on you-ra-same-nie in-te-re-owls of pain-shin-st-va, must-but it would be de-mo-kra-ti-zi-ro-vat-sya and ga-ran-ti-ro-vat ly-tic rights to all their gra-zh-da-us. These ideas do-mi-ni-ro-va-li in the central organ-ga-nah of the periodical pe-cha-ti: ga-ze-tah “Russian Ve-do-mo-sti”, “ Bir-ve-ve-do-mo-sti”, “Right”, “Speech”, “Word”, “Morning of Russia”, “Vo-los Mo-sk-you” and etc., journal-on-lah "Vest-nick of Ev-ro-py", "Mo-s-kov-sky hedgehog-not-del-nick", etc.

Li-be-ral-ny ha-rak-ter but-si-lo Zem-stvo movement, some way-s-s-s-in-va-lo formalize - party-ty-nyh ob-e-di-non-ny: circle "Be-se-da" (1899-1905), So-yu-for os-bo-zh-de-ny ( 1903-1905), Soyu-for zem-tsev-con-sti-tu-tsio-na-listov (1903-1905). There was a pro-ve-de-na “Ban-ket-naya camp-pa-niya” of 1904 with the goal of bu-dit the Russian pra-vi-tel-st-vo to new re-for -mum - to the introduction of con-sti-tu-tion and political freedoms. In rezul-ta-te de-tel-no-sti of li-be-ral-nyh or-ga-ni-za-tsy managed to make connections between various circles ga-mi of the Russian society-of-st-ven-no-sti, you-ra-bo-tat ideo-logical-us-ta-nov-ki, someone-rye in the next-st-vie- whether in the OS-no-woo program-nyh do-ku-men-tov a number of political parties. Sa-mi parties on-cha-whether warehouse-dy-vat-sya after the publication of Ma-ni-fe-sta on October 17, 1905 (pro- gla-forces civil freedoms and the creation of a people's representative office in the form of the State Duma) in connection with not-about-ho-dimo-stu pro-ve-de-niya from a bi-racial campaign in Du-mu. In October 1905, the rise-nick-la Kon-sti-tu-tsi-on-no-de-mo-kra-ti-che-skaya par-tiya (par-tiya ka-de-tov; leader - P .N. Mi-lyu-kov), ob-e-di-nyav-shay side-ron-ni-kov of the left wing of Russian Liberalism: pre-hundred-vi-te-lei pro-professional su-ry (V.I. Ver-nad-sky, A.A. Ki-ze-wet-ter, L.I. Pet-ra-zhits-kiy, P.I. Nov-go-rod-tsev, M.Ya. Ost-ro-gorsky, V.D. Na-bo-kov and others), hell-in-ka-tu-ry (V.A. Mak-la-kov, M.L. Man-del-shtam, N.V. Tes-len-ko and others), Zem-sky dei-te-lei (brothers Pa-vel D. and Peter D. Dol-go-ru-ko-you , A. I. Shin-ga-rev, I. I. Pet-run-ke-vich, F. I. Ro-di-chev, Prince D. I. Sha-khovskoy, etc.). They are you-stu-pa-whether for the us-ta-nov-le-nie of the constitutional monarchy with the answer-st-ven-ny before the State Du-my pra-vi-tel -st-vom, pro-ve-de-nie shi-ro-kih so-qi-al-nyh pre-ob-ra-zo-va-niy, ras-calculate-you-wa-whether on account-re- di-tel-nye functions of the people's pre-sta-vi-tel-st-va, someone with the support of public opinion could go to the card-di-nal -nye-ly-tic re-forms, even without the sanction of them-pe-ra-to-ra. The most-bo-more half-but such a relationship to the evil-bo-day-about-the Russian political-li-ti-ki and the revolutionary movement from-ra-zi-moose in the collections Ve-khi (1909) and In-tel-li-gen-tion in Russia (1910). In November 1905, about-ra-zo-va-na party “So-yuz 17 October-rya” (leader - A.I. Guch-kov), representing right wing of Russian Liberalism. Ok-tyab-ri-sty (M.M. Alek-se-en-ko, V.M. Pet-ro-vo-So-lo-vo-vo, M.V. Rod-zyan-ko, N. A. Kho-myakov, S.I. Shid-lov-sky and others) you-stu-pa-whether for the introduction of a constitutional monarchy in Russia with the preservation of significant gender -but-my-im-pe-ra-to-ra, hoped for the possibility of a dialogue-lo-ha with the current authorities, party-ner-sky from -but-she-niya with someone could-could-let-pour-re-sewing a hundred-yav-shie before Ros-si-her pro-ble-we without so-qi-al -but-po-ly-tic-tri-se-ny. Pro-me-zhu-accurate in-zi-tion for-ni-ma-whether the party of li-be-ral-no-go center-tra: De-mo-kra-ti-che-re- party forms (M.M. Ko-va-lev-sky, V.D. Kuz-min-Ka-ra-va-ev, etc.), Mir-no-go update of couples -tia (P.A. Gei-den, M.A. Sta-kho-vich, D.N. Shipov, etc.), Party Progressives (I.N. Ef- re-mov, N. N. Lvov, E. N. Tru-bets-koy, etc.). They are on-the-flock-wa-whether on the new-le-nii of the political and right-in-howl life of Russia by way of the evolution of the traditional uk-la-yes and in a degree-pe-no-go-for-me-sche-niya of ar-ha-ich-nyh elements of so-qi-al-noy sis-te-we are co-time-men-us-mi.

Li-be-ral-nye parties of races-count-you-wa-whether pre-zh-de everything on par-la-ment-skuyu so-ti-ku. They play a key role in the activities of the State Duma of all four co-zy-vov, in 1915, the initiation-ro-wa-li created yes-tion “Pro-gres-siv-no-go block”, volume-e-di-niv-she-go op-po-zi-qi-on-noe pain-shin-st-in 4th Du-we, in the pe-ri-od of the 1st world-war-we for-nya-whether we-do-ing in the Zemsky soyuz, Soyu-ze go-ro -dov, Zem-go-re and in-en-but-pro-mouse-len-nyh-ko-mi-te-tah, some-rye ways-of-st-in-va-li con-co- whether-da-tion op-by-zi-qi-he-but on-stro-en-noy general-st-ven-no-sti. Li-be-ra-ly did-bi-li from-re-che-nia from the power of Emperor Ni-ko-lai II, after pa-de-nia sa-mo-der-zha-via in ho -de of the February revolution of 1917, sfor-mi-ro-va-li the first composition of the Provisional government-vi-tel-st-va, after-the-st-vii of their pre-st- vi-te-whether teaching-st-in-va-li in the ra-bo-those of all his co-hundreds. After the October Revolution of 1917 and the us-ta-nov-le-ny dik-ta-tu-ry more-she-vi-kov is-chez-la so-qi-al-naya and a lytic environment for races-pro-countries of liberal ideas in Russia.

Further development of a li-be-ral-noy thought about-is-ho-di-lo in the circles of the Russian emigration. Su-shche-st-ven-ny contribution outside the authors of the journal "No-vy grad" (I.I. Bu-na-kov-Fon-da-min-sky, N.A. Ber- dya-ev, S.I. Ges-sen, F.A. Ste-pun, G.P. Fe-do-tov, etc.), syn-te-for Liberalism and the principles of so-qi-al-noy of justice. Raz-ra-ba-you-vaya conception of christ-an-sky de-mo-kra-tii, they considered that pre-ob-ra-zo-va-nia in eco -no-micic sphere they don’t have self-mod-dov-leu-che-th value, but only must be able to niyu in-sti-tu-tov right-in-go-su-dar-st-va and civil society-st-va, oh-ra-no-che-nie right-va cha-st- noy own-st-ven-no-sti should not put under question the pri-mat of a person-lo-ve-che-personality.

In the post-Soviet period in Russia, li-be-real ideas were based-but-you-va-lied mainly on the end-chains-qi-yah not-windows-ser -va-tiz-ma and liber-ta-ri-an-st-va. Their sides-no-ki on-stai-va-li on mi-ni-mi-za-tion ro-li go-su-dar-st-va pre-zh-de everything in eco-but- the magical sphere, proceeding from the idea of ​​​​sa-mo-or-ga-ni-zuyu-schem-sya market, from-ri-tsa-li ha-rak-ter -nuyu for the modern European liberal thought-whether the concept of so-qi-al-no-go-su-dar-st-va.

The concept of "liberalism" appeared in the early 19th century. Initially, liberals were called a group of nationalist deputies in the Cortes - the Spanish parliament. Then this concept entered all European languages, but in a slightly different meaning.

The essence of liberalism remains unchanged throughout the history of its existence. Liberalism is a statement of value human personality, her rights and freedoms. From the ideology of the Enlightenment, liberalism borrowed the idea of ​​natural human rights, therefore, liberals included and continue to include the right to life, liberty, happiness and property among the inalienable rights of the individual, with the greatest attention being paid to private property and freedom, since it is believed that property ensures freedom, which in its 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 (conscience, speech, meetings, associations, etc.). The economy is market based on private property and competition. Such economic system is the embodiment of the principle of freedom and a condition for the successful economic development of the country.

The first historical type of worldview containing the complex of ideas outlined above was classical liberalism (late 18th - 70s-80s of the 19th century). It can be seen as a direct continuation political philosophy era of the Enlightenment. No wonder John Locke is called the "father of liberalism", and the creators of classical liberalism, Jeremiah Bentham and Adam Smith, are considered major representatives 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, by the lack of connection with revolutionary processes, as well as by its 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 seek to improve it, believing in the 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 violate the rights and freedoms of a person, and the individual has the right to protect them against encroachments 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 things, 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 opposite situation would mean the death of the state. It is curious that for the first time one of the founders of classical liberalism I. Bentham drew attention to this. He wrote that "natural, inalienable and sacred rights never existed", since they are incompatible with the state; "...citizens, demanding them, would only ask for anarchy ...". However, the principle of individualism played into the highest degree progressive role in the development of Western civilization. And in our time, it still gives the individual the legal right to defend their interests in the face of the state.

The principle of utilitarianism is a further development and specification 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 but the sum of the interests of its constituent individuals. Therefore, any actions of politicians and any institutions should be evaluated solely from the point of view of the extent to which they contribute to the reduction of suffering and increase the happiness of individuals. Model construction ideal society, according to I. Bentam, unnecessary and dangerous from the point of view of possible consequences class.

Based on the principles of individualism and utilitarianism, classical liberalism proposed a very specific model of society and the state as an optimal one. The state should not interfere in socio-economic relations: it is more likely to disrupt harmony than to promote 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 the formal equality of opportunities for citizens, the means is the adoption of relevant laws and ensuring their strict implementation by all, including state 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 supposed to come from private philanthropy. The essence of the rule of law is briefly expressed by the formula: "the law is above all."

The legal "small state" should be secular. Classical liberalism advocated the separation of church and state. The supporters of this ideology considered religion to be a personal matter of an individual. It can be said that any liberalism, including classical, is generally indifferent to religion, which is not regarded as either a positive or a negative value.

The programs of the liberal parties 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.

The second idea, borrowed by social liberalism from social democracy, is the idea of ​​social justice, understood as the right of everyone to a decent life. The broad social programs proposed by the Social Democrats, which involve the redistribution of profits from the rich to the poor through the system of state taxes, also became a concrete way to implement it.

Social insurance for sickness, unemployment, old age, insurance medicine, free education and so on. - all these programs, gradually introduced and expanded in the countries of Western civilization during the late 19 - 70s of the 20th century, existed and continue to exist thanks to the introduction of a progressive taxation scale. Such a system of levying taxes assumes that people with more income or capital pay higher percentage from this income or capital than people who have less means of subsistence. Social programs simultaneously contribute to the development of the economy, as they expand effective demand.

At present, the influence of liberalism as a political worldview is growing. This is connected both with the resurrection by neoconservatives of a number of fundamental provisions of classical liberalism, and with the collapse of the USSR, the world system of socialism, with the transition of the European countries that were part of it to a liberal economic model and Western-style political democracy, in the establishment of which liberalism and liberal parties played a decisive role. At the same time, the crisis of the liberal parties continues.

Socialism

The concept of "socialism", which came into general use in the third decade of the 19th century, was intended to designate the direction of social thought, seeking to develop a fundamental new model arrangement of society as a whole based on the transformation of socio-economic relations. It is difficult to give a brief meaningful definition of this ideology, since the concept of socialism combines a large number of concepts that are very different from each other, which can be divided into two large groups: actually socialist and communist.

The concepts of the first group assume that worthy life workers can be achieved in a society based on a combination of public and private ownership of the means of production, and universal absolute equality is neither necessary nor desirable. The concepts of the second group propose to create a society based solely on social forms of ownership, which implies complete social and property equality of citizens.

A characterization of socialist ideology, taking into account the existence of the two directions of socialist thought outlined above, can be given as follows. Socialism presupposes a critique of bourgeois society from the positions of some ideal, "situated" according to the socialists in the future. The formulation of the main features of the future society is given from the standpoint of the most disadvantaged part of the population, earning a living by their own labor. The society of social justice itself assumes the essential role of social forms of ownership, the convergence of the extremes of wealth and poverty, the replacement of competition with solidarity and mutual assistance. The new society is conceived as capable of ensuring faster and more comprehensive social progress than the bourgeois one.

The first historical type of socialist ideology is the humanistic socialism of the first half of the 19th century, also called utopian socialism (at present, the second name seems unreasonable, since Marxism also turned out to be a utopia, although in a different sense). Its founders and major representatives are Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier (France), Robert Owen (England). This socialism is called humanistic because its creators, formulating the main features of a society of social justice, proceeded from the interests of a person in general, and not a representative of any class or stratum, although the implementation of the proposed model was supposed to bring the greatest gain to working people.

The specific systems of views of the founders of humanistic socialism were different, but in general, the society of social justice was conceived as based on a combination of public and private forms of ownership, on the cooperation of classes. It was supposed to preserve social and property inequality associated with the unequal contribution - financial and labor - to the development of the enterprise, with the different roles of representatives of various social strata in society. The transition to a new social organization was conceived as gradual and taking place exclusively by peaceful means. The following were proposed as means of transition: appeal to those in power, to representatives of big business, the creation of exemplary enterprises on new principles, and the promotion of positive experience. It is the indicated means of transition to a society of social justice that gave rise to the name "utopian socialism".

In the 40s of the 19th century, Marxism arose, also called workers' or economic socialism, as well as scientific communism. This ideology appeared on the basis of Karl Marx's analysis of the economic relations of bourgeois society under the conditions of the growth of the labor movement. The basic tenets of Marxism are as follows.

Capitalist society will inevitably lose its economic efficiency due to its inherent contradiction between the social character of production and the private form of appropriation. In order to eliminate this contradiction and open up scope for the development of the productive forces, private ownership of the means of production must be abolished. Accordingly, the future society of social justice will be at the same time the most economically efficient. In it there will be public ownership of the means of production, there will be no classes, exploitation will disappear, complete social and property equality will be established, the state will cease to exist as political organization of the economically dominant class (it will be replaced by public self-government), the creative self-realization of each person will become possible.

The transition to a new society is possible only through class struggle and social revolution, which will be carried out by the working class, led by the Communist Party, armed with knowledge of the laws of social development. Immediately after the victory of the revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat will be established, which will become a new, higher form of democracy, since by that time the proletariat will constitute the majority of the population in society.

The development of Marxism in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries led to the emergence of two modern types of socialist ideology: Marxism-Leninism and the ideology of social democracy. Marxism-Leninism, also called Bolshevism and scientific communism, emerged as an adaptation of Marxism to the conditions of Russia and to the practice of socialist construction after the victory of the Russian revolution of 1917. The parties that adopted this ideology began, as a rule, to be called communist.

An attempt to implement the Marxist model, carried out in the USSR and other countries of the world socialist system, led to the emergence of a society in which the state economy was controlled from a single center in the absence of political democracy. It was another attempt to overcome the crisis of liberalism and the liberal economic model. However, the created society did not become either more humane or more economically efficient than the capitalist one in the long run, and therefore left the historical arena.

The ideology of social democracy, which was formed in the 90s of the 19th century, arose as a criticism, a revision of Marxism. Its main provisions were developed by the German Social Democrat Eduard Bernstein and gradually adopted by the international Social Democracy, although not without a sharp conflict of opinions. There was a rejection of such fundamental provisions of Marxism as the social (socialist) revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat, the complete replacement of private ownership of the means of production by public ownership.

The revision of Marxism turned out to be possible and inevitable, since in the last decades of the 19th century it became obvious that the situation of the working class was not worsening with the development of capitalism, as K. Marx predicted, but improving. From this fact, E. Bernstein drew far-reaching conclusions that have not lost their significance today, and developed a program for building democratic socialism.

Since economic development under capitalism leads to an increase in the material well-being of the workers, the task of the social democratic parties should be to improve the existing society, and not to liquidate it and replace it with another that is fundamentally different from the bourgeois one.

A necessary condition for such improvement is political democracy. E. Bernstein drew attention to the fact that the consistent implementation of the basic liberal principles of the political system leads to the elimination of the political domination of the bourgeoisie, if the working class manages to organize and constantly support its party in the elections.

Thus, it was necessary to fight for the deepening of political democracy, the victory of the party of the working class in parliamentary elections, the formation of a social democratic government. Such a government, with the support of the parliamentary majority, must steadily implement a program of reforms extended over time aimed at improving the material situation of the working class, increasing its social security, raising its cultural and educational level, and so on.

To this end, and also for the sake of increasing economic efficiency, it was necessary to gradually carry out a partial nationalization of industry, primarily unprofitable enterprises and industries, establish state regulation of the private capitalist sector, develop and implement broad social programs based on the redistribution of profits from the haves to the poor through the tax system.

At the beginning of the 21st century, the core values ​​of international social democracy continue to be solidarity, freedom, equality, political democracy, a state-controlled market mixed economy, and the social security of the population. The gradual expansion of the public sector of the economy is no longer considered appropriate.

At present, despite the fact that social democratic parties periodically come to power in European countries By replacing the neoconservatives, the crisis of social democratic ideology cannot be considered overcome, since international social democracy has no new constructive ideas that can renew the program and practice of democratic socialism.

Liberal politics upholds the will of every individual. After all, it is the latter in this case that is considered to be of the highest value. Laws are established as the just basis of the economy and order among the people. An important role is played by the constitution, within the framework of the rules of which the state and the church have the right to influence social processes.

Main features and features

Liberal ideology is characterized by:

• equality of all citizens and a chance to influence political processes;
• the opportunity to speak freely in public, to decide on religion, to vote honestly for one or another candidate in elections;
• inviolable private property, trade and entrepreneurship are unlimited;
• the law is supreme;
• citizens are equal, influence, wealth and position do not matter.

Wide dissemination of ideas

Liberal ideology is very popular these days. IN modern world freedom plays a very important role. Attention is paid to the feeling of personal dignity, the universal rights of people. A person's personal life and private property must be inviolable. The market must remain free, religious choice must be tolerated.

When the liberal-democratic ideology reigns, the state is legal, the government is transparent, the power of the people is higher than the rulers. A good ruling force is one that is the spokesman for the opinion of the people, they are regulated and controlled. Not only the head of the country rules a man, but also a man rules his own land.

A state with a liberal ideology has those common features that are now observed in Finland, Estonia, Cyprus, Uruguay, Spain, Slovenia, Canada and Taiwan. Here the values ​​of will and freedom are given the leading role. It is on their foundation that the new goals of the country are built.

Various features in separate territories

North America and Western Europe differ in that there political currents are in solidarity with the movement for the power of the people. The liberal ideology of the "right" representatives is more inclined towards classical views on the order in the state.

Here, the influence of conservatives, who are inclined towards established models and schemes, is clearly visible. They are alien to social and cultural progress, which can shake the established norms of morality.

There used to be rivalry between traditionalists and freedom fighters, but when the Second World War, authoritarianism was discredited. The leading role went to the moderate currents, whose ideas were expressed in the desire for softer regimes of conservatism and Christian democracy.

The second half of the 20th century was marked by the fact that the liberal ideology suffered from an ingrained desire to preserve private property and privatization. Old customs had to be adjusted.

In the United States of America, the values ​​of the liberal ideology reached the people through the socialists, as well as through the "left" currents of this political direction. Western Europe, on the other hand, is characterized by differences in the actions of its public organizations. The "leftists" are pursuing a social policy in the struggle for the freedom of the people.

The Liberal Party in Europe promotes non-interference in personal affairs and in business. Such actions can be carried out only when the protection of the freedoms and property of some citizens from others must be carried out.

There is support for the cultural and economic currents in which the liberal ideology moves. Social orientation not supported. In striving to realize the rule of law, it is required that the authority has sufficient strength. Some people are of the opinion that private and public organizations are enough to ensure order. Armed movements are considered the latest and most unacceptable way to solve problems in the event of military aggression.

Differences in directions

When economic interests are observed, the liberal party can isolate itself into separate currents. Economic schemes of work that do not affect politics are considered. The state must ensure maximum freedom for the development of business and trade, without interfering with this process.

Only moderate regulation of the monetary system can be carried out, the international market is available. Obstruction in foreign economic activity is not carried out by the authorities. Any initiative, on the contrary, is encouraged. Conduct the privatization process. An example of such management was shown by Margaret Thatcher, who carried out a series of reforms in the UK.

The effect of putting ideas into practice

Today, liberals can be attributed to centrist currents or to social democratic ones. In Scandinavia, such management models are very popular. There were economic downturns, due to which the issues of protecting society were especially aggravated. The population suffered from unemployment, inflation and poor pensions.

The Social Democrats increased taxation, the state sector played an important role in the economy. For a long time, "right" and "left" political forces fought for rule.

Thanks to this, effective laws have appeared, the government has become transparent, now it is engaged in the protection of civil human rights and property of business entities.

In our time in Scandinavia, the state does not regulate pricing policy. Banks are run by private companies. Trade is open to everyone who wants to participate in a fair competition in both local and international markets. A liberal-democratic system of politics was implemented. Level social protection became extremely high. Other European countries are characterized by similar processes. There, social democracy is mixed with the liberal politics of government.

Proclamation of rights and freedoms

The main goals of liberal currents are to strengthen democratic views that give freedom to the people. The state should take as a basis the right to ensure an independent system of justice. The transparency of the work of the ruling structures should be controlled. Protect civil rights and provide room for competition.

It's important to understand when we are talking about this or that party, whether it belongs to the social liberals, libertarians or the right sector.

Society also promotes the ideas of equality and freedom in a variety of ways. Some support a free choice of sexual life, the right to sell drugs and weapons, to expand the powers of private security organizations, to which some of the powers of the police can be transferred.

In the context of the economy, a stable income tax is maintained or its change to a per capita one. Trying to privatize educational institutions, the procedure for providing pensioners, health protection. They want to make science connected with self-sustaining sponsorship. A number of states are characterized by the fact that the liberal party seeks to abandon the death penalty, disarm the troops, reject the development of nuclear weapons, and take care of the environment.

Unity of peoples

The debate around multiculturalism is getting sharper. Ethnic minorities should share those values ​​of the people that are considered fundamental. The majority of the population, having the same roots, must protect the rights of small communities. There is also an opinion that there must be an early integration between minorities in order to keep the nation intact.

Organizations and associations

Since 1947, the Mont Pelerin Society has been working to unite economic, entrepreneurial, philosophical minds, and journalistic figures in order to maintain the ideals that the classical struggle for freedom preaches.

In our time, this policy is promoted by the Liberal International, which unites 19 organizations based on the Oxford Manifesto. As of 2015, there are 100 members in education, including the Free Democratic Party of Germany, Yabloko in Russia, and so on.

In 2012, the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM) conducted a survey in 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 changed dramatically in a few years, and therefore let's look at what principles liberalism professes and what this socio-political and philosophical movement actually consists of.

Who is a liberal?

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

Answering the question of who a liberal is, many experts argue that this is someone who considers political, personal and economic freedom the highest priority in the life of the state and society. For supporters of this ideology, freedom and the rights of every 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. According to Western political scientists, this is the ideal that many developed countries are striving for. However, this term can be discussed not only in terms of politics. In its original meaning, this word was used to refer to all freethinkers and freethinkers. Sometimes they included those who in society were prone to excessive condescension.

Modern liberals

As an independent worldview, the considered ideological movement arose 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 that time, it was believed that the freedom of enterprise and the non-interference of the state in private life would inevitably lead to the prosperity and improvement of the well-being of society. However, as it turned out later, the classical model of liberalism did not justify itself. Free, uncontrolled competition led to the emergence of monopolies that drove up prices. Interest groups of lobbyists 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 called neoliberalism or social liberalism. Its supporters advocate the protection of the individual from negative consequences and abuse in market system. In classical liberalism, the state was something like a "night watchman." Modern liberals have recognized that this was a mistake and have incorporated into their program such ideas 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 disparity is to a large extent due to the fact that several varieties of this ideology operate simultaneously on the territory of Russia. The most notable of these are liberal fundamentalism (represented by Alexei Venediktov, editor-in-chief of the Ekho Moskva station), neoliberalism (represented by social liberalism (Yabloko party) and legal liberalism (Republican Party and PARNAS party).