Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Good work to the site ">

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Introduction

Chernyshevsky political revolutionary

Chernyshevsky was born in 1828. In 1846 he entered the St. Petersburg University. The French Revolution of 1848 had a profound influence on him. He began to follow the course of events in France and other countries of Western Europe, met A. V. Khanykov from Petrashev, and studied the works of S. Fourier. By the time he graduated from university, Chernyshevsky was a convinced revolutionary.

In May 1855 Chernyshevsky defended his master's thesis "Aesthetic relations of art to reality." In 1856 he became one of the editors of the Sovremennik magazine. Under the leadership of Chernyshevsky, despite the censorship obstacles, the magazine is turning into a militant mouthpiece for the emerging revolutionary democracy in Russia.

From 1859, as the real boundaries of the peasant reform prepared by the tsarist government were discovered, Chernyshevsky tried to draw the reader's attention to the possibility of a peasant revolution, speaking in Aesopian language about the need to lead it.

Chernyshevsky's activities ideologically prepared the foundation for the revolutionary organization "Land and Freedom". Chernyshevsky himself took a direct part in its education.

In 1862 Chernyshevsky was arrested. On charges of writing a revolutionary proclamation, he was sentenced in 1864 to seven years of hard labor. After a seven-year term, he was held in Vilyuisk, in 1883 he was transferred "to live" in Astrakhan, and then, a few months before his death, to Saratov. Chernyshevsky died in 1889.

2. Political views and political program Chernyshevskwow continuously evolved

In the first years of his work at Sovremennik, he on a number of occasions supported liberals who opposed serfdom. The publication of the tsarist rescripts, the discussion of the preparation of the peasant reform that began in the press, radically change the social situation in the country. Under the new conditions, Chernyshevsky clearly sees that there can be no question of a single national interest in the peasant question, he directly takes the position of the peasantry, the position of the class struggle against the oppressors, with the autocracy and the landowners. For the first time in Russian political literature, Chernyshevsky raises the question of the fundamental difference in the interests of the liberal nobility, the liberal bourgeoisie and the peasantry in the Russian revolution. In this respect, he anticipated by decades the actual demarcation of class forces in Russia.

Criticism of serf relations and serfdom occupies an important place in Chernyshevsky's literary heritage. Bypassing censorship, Chernyshevsky seeks to draw the attention of the readers of Sovremennik to the connection between serfdom and the existence of the tsarist autocracy. "If serfdom has been held up to this day, then it owed such a duration of its existence only to bad governance," he wrote in an article published in 1859. Chernyshevsky directly argued that a conscientious government should have "almost in all estates" terminated serfdom "by private court decisions on the abuse of power."

Chernyshevsky, even before the publication of the tsarist rescripts, had developed a clear and consistent program for the elimination of serfdom. In 1857, in the Sovremennik magazine, he published an article “On land ownership”, where he wrote: “That form of land ownership is the best for the success of agriculture, which unites the owner, owner and worker in one person. Of all forms of ownership, state property with communal ownership is the most suitable for this ideal. " Chernyshevsky did not plan any ransom to the landowners for the liberation of the peasants in this article.

After the publication of the tsarist rescripts, a sharp demarcation between the liberal and revolutionary approaches to the peasant question was revealed. "The liberals, like the feudal landlords," stressed Lenin, "stood on the basis of recognizing the property and power of the landowners, condemning with indignation any revolutionary ideas about the destruction of this property, about the complete overthrow of this power." The revolutionaries were on the side of the peasantry. "At the head of these, extremely few then, revolutionaries," notes V. I. Lenin, "there was N. G. Chernyshevsky."

Characterizing Chernyshevsky's attitude to the impending reform, VI Lenin wrote: “Chernyshevsky understood that the Russian feudal-bureaucratic state was not able to free the peasants, that is, to overthrow the serf-owners, that it was only able to produce an" abomination ", a pitiful compromise interests of the liberals and landowners, a compromise that inflates the peasants with the specter of security and freedom, but in fact ruins them and betrays them headlong to the landowners. And he protested, cursed the reform, wishing it failure, wanting the government to get entangled in its balancing act between liberals and landowners and a collapse that would lead Russia onto the road of open class struggle. "

On the pages of Sovremennik, Chernyshevsky tirelessly defended the interests of the peasantry, exposed the plans of the feudal landlords and liberals. Declaring that the concessions he had made in favor of the landlords had been brought "to the very limit beyond which common sense does not allow," he outlined a minimum program for revolutionary democracy, which consisted in increasing peasant holdings by one third, and setting the ransom amount in the amount of 532 million rubles, that is, at least four times less than the landlords demanded, and the redemption operation must be carried out by the state. There is every reason to believe that Chernyshevsky did not believe in the possibility of real implementation of this project, however, propagating it in the press, he could clearly demonstrate the true predatory nature of the projects for the "liberation" of peasants, emanating not only from pro-government circles, but also from the liberal camp. As V. I. Lenin emphasized, Chernyshevsky "knew how to influence all political events of his era in a revolutionary spirit, carrying - through the obstacles and slingshots of censorship - the idea of ​​the peasant revolution, the idea of ​​the struggle of the masses for the overthrow of all the old authorities." Assessing Chernyshevsky's article "Criticism of philosophical prejudices against communal ownership", written during the preparation of the peasant reform, V. I. Lenin noted that "purely revolutionary ideas" Chernyshevsky "knew how to express in censored press."

The radical opposition between the revolutionary democratic program of Chernyshevsky and the program of the liberals is especially evident in the course of the struggle that unfolded between the liberals and revolutionary democrats around the position taken by Herzen.

Addressing Herzen, the liberals KD Kavelin and BN Chicherin urged him to "restore the connection and a living direct stream between the tsar and the people." The only political article by Herzen, written "with due discretion", they considered a letter to Alexander II.

Chernyshevsky's consistent criticism of liberalism was highly appreciated by VI Lenin, who emphasized that Chernyshevsky abruptly pursued "the line of exposing the betrayal of liberalism, which is still hated by the Cadets and liquidators."

The manifesto of February 19, 1861 was greeted by Chernyshevsky purely negatively. It is significant that against the backdrop of endless praises of the liberal press, only one journal, Sovremennik, did not respond in any way to the tsarist manifesto. Unable to directly express his attitude to the manifesto in the censored press, Chernyshevsky writes and tries to publish in an underground printing house, a proclamation "Bow to the peasants of the land for their well-wishers." Presumably the proclamation was written in early 1861.

Chernyshevsky exposes the predatory nature of the reform, notes that the peasants are turned over to the landowners. “Just to say, the landowners will turn everyone into beggars by the tsar's decree,” the proclamation says.

Chernyshevsky seeks to show the real role of the tsar in the preparation of the reform, to break the still lingering tsarist illusions of the peasantry, explains why belief in the tsar is unfounded. “Who is he himself if he is not the same landowner? Whose specific peasants are they? After all, they are his serfs. Yes, and all the tsars gave you to serfs to the landowners. The landowners have serfs, and the landowners have the tsar's servants, he is the landlord over them. It means that he is, that they are all one. And you know, a dog doesn't eat a dog. Well, the king keeps the lordly side. And that he issued a manifesto and decrees, as if he was giving you freedom, he did it only for seduction. "

The proclamation contains a call to prepare for an uprising. You should agree in advance about the upcoming performance, study military science, stock up on guns. Chernyshevsky warns the peasants against unorganized spontaneous uprisings.

The social ideal of Chernyshevsky was not limited to the task of eliminating serfdom. He dreamed of creating a socialist society in Russia.

Chernyshevsky was a utopian socialist. His utopian socialism differed in a number of essential features both from Herzen's "Russian socialism" and from the views of the outstanding utopian socialists of Western Europe. Unlike Herzen, he is far from idealizing the patriarchal peasant community, he was not going to transfer it to socialism unchanged.

Chernyshevsky resolutely dissociated himself from the utopian views that the transition to socialism was possible as a result of the philanthropic actions of the ruling classes. Important feature Chernyshevsky's utopian socialism in that he linked the implementation of his ideas with the class struggle of the peasantry, with the victory of the peasant revolution.

In his works, the thinker strove to show the true face of Russian absolutism. So, in "Letters without an address", published abroad, he wrote that for the Russian autocracy the invariable rule "was to rely on the nobility." The same idea is expressed even more vividly in the proclamation "I bow to the lords peasants from their well-wishers." In a somewhat disguised form, the idea of ​​the deviation of Russian absolutism from the goals inherent in the state by virtue of its essence, Chernyshevsky expressed in the pages of Sovremennik.

Chernyshevsky was close to understanding the anti-popular, anti-democratic essence of the bourgeois state. He argued that "not only in autocratic states, but also in England and the United States, the government can issue many laws and orders, regardless of popular desire or participation, meeting approval or condemnation only in the parties of the upper and middle classes." Chernyshevsky shows that in England "the magnificent spectacle of parliamentary government is almost always a pure comedy", that the members of parliament "have a way of thinking far behind the desire of the masses." In bourgeois states "the government keeps troops as a support against enemies not so much external as internal."

According to V. Ya. Zevin and E. V. Shamarin, Chernyshevsky was able to reveal the class essence of the bourgeois state and bourgeois democracy. This conclusion seems to be ill-founded. Chernyshevsky did not have a clear idea of ​​the class structure of bourgeois society; as a rule, he did not single out the proletariat from the general mass of the exploited population. He came very close to understanding the true essence of the bourgeois state, but failed to see in it an instrument of the bourgeois class, a machine for suppressing, above all, the working class.

Showing the falsity and hypocrisy of bourgeois democracy, Chernyshevsky at the same time did not deny its importance in the struggle for social liberation. It should be noted that he did not come to an understanding of this problem immediately. So, in 1857, he apparently believed that the socialist reorganization of society can be carried out within the framework of various forms of the state. And the unlimited monarchs, and the constitutional monarch in England, and the American democrats, wrote Chernyshevsky, "all equally approved of Robert Owen." "In essence, the principle of association is not a political matter at all, but purely economic as trade, as agriculture, it requires one thing: silence, peace, order - the benefits that exist under every good government, whatever the form of this government", - - this is how Chernyshevsky reasoned at that time.

In the future, he changes his point of view. In 1859-1862. on the pages of Sovremennik, he more and more often notes the importance of political rights and freedoms. Political demands are consistently put forward by Chernyshevsky in the proclamation "I bow to the lords peasants from their well-wishers." “So this is what kind of a will in the world is in corrective action: so that the people have a head for everything, and all the authorities obey the world, and so that the judgment is righteous, and there would be a judgment equal to everyone, and no one dared to commit outrages over a peasant, and so that there was no per capita salary, and there was no recruitment, ”we read in the proclamation. Chernyshevsky calls for replacing the tsar with an "elected people's headman". “And one must say so,” wrote Chernyshevsky, “when the people's headman is not by inheritance, but for a period of time is elected, and is not called a tsar, he is simply called the headman of the people, but in their foreign language,“ resident, then people can live better, people can be richer. "

According to the recollections of S. G. Stakhevich, Chernyshevsky, being in hard labor, in a conversation with his "fellow prisoners" said: "As air is necessary for the life of an individual, so political freedom is necessary for the correct life of human society."

In a number of works by Chernyshevsky, bourgeois economic liberalism, based on the principle of non-intervention of the state in economic life... Chernyshevsky attacks this concept and proves that it fully corresponds to the ideology of the capitalists, justifies the unlimited exploitation of the poor by the rich. He shows that the idea of ​​non-intervention of the state in the economy is a myth, that in fact the state is extremely active in economic matters. The most detailed considerations about what the directions of this intervention should be were formulated by Chernyshevsky in his article "Capital and Labor". In particular, the thinker talks about the role that the state should play in the organization, leadership and financing of labor associations of workers. At the end of the article, he notes that "a simple and easy idea" about partnerships has not yet been realized and, in all likelihood, will not be realized for a long time. He promises to talk about the reasons for this another time, but the corresponding article did not appear on the pages of Sovremennik. In the article "Economic Activity and Legislation", he considered it necessary to note that the direction and possibilities of state intervention in economic issues "extremely much depends on the qualities of state power."

Speaking for the peasant revolution, Chernyshevsky did not plan to establish a socialist system immediately after its victory. He recognized the need for a "transitional state" on the path from the old social system to the new. The role of the state during this period seemed to him very significant.

He saw one of the regularities of social life in the fact that "there is not a single part of the social order that would be established without theoretical explanations without the protection of government power." He fully extended this pattern to the transitional state.

It is the state that emerged in the course of the revolution that confiscates land from the landlords and transfers it to the peasant communities. Analysis of the article "Capital and Labor" suggests that, according to Chernyshevsky, this state should finance the formation of industrial and agricultural partnerships and initially (within one year) manage these partnerships. Along with partnerships, he plans to create state-owned enterprises.

Conclusion

Thus, Chernyshevsky, albeit in a very general form, outlines the contours of the economic activity of the state during the transition period. As for the political activity of the state during the "transitional state", nothing is said about it. However, the consistent democracy of Chernyshevsky, the desire to transfer power after the victory of the revolution "into the hands of the lowest and most numerous class - farmers + day laborers + workers", a steady interest in history French revolution The 18th century, especially to the period of the Jacobin dictatorship - all this suggests that he understood the importance of the state as an important political tool in the hands of the revolutionary people.

A number of interesting considerations related to this issue were expressed by Chernyshevsky when commenting on the events of the Italian revolution of 1859-1860. Chernyshevsky stressed that an important condition for the success of a revolutionary government is the energetic implementation of the outlined program, the absence of hesitation in choosing the measures really necessary for its implementation. “Political coups,” he noted, “have never been committed without facts of arbitrariness, violating the forms of the legal justice that is observed in a quiet time ... A person who takes part in a political coup, imagining that they will not be with him many times violated the legal principles of calm times, should be called an idealist. "

Chernyshevsky paid a certain amount of attention to studying the tendencies in the development of democracy. For primitive society, he argued, the consistent implementation of the principles of self-government and federation is characteristic, then these principles are destroyed. However, the thinker believed, development goes in a circle - today, self-government and federation are reborn in Switzerland and North America. Chernyshevsky strongly opposes BN Chicherin, in whose opinion "democracy is similar to absolutism in the sense that it is very fond of bureaucracy and centralization."

Chernyshevsky shows that “in its essential character, democracy is the opposite of bureaucracy; it demands that every citizen be independent in matters concerning only before him; each village and each city are independent in matters concerning it alone, each region in its own affairs. Democracy requires the administrator to be completely subordinate to the residents of the district he is in charge of. "

Chernyshevsky's political theory occupies an important place in the history of political thought. Lenin stressed that Chernyshevsky “made a huge step forward against Herzen. Chernyshevsky was a much more consistent and militant democrat. His writings breathe with the spirit of the class struggle. "

In terms of its objective class content, Chernyshevsky's political theory is a theory of revolutionary peasant democracy. It was the highest achievement of pre-proletarian revolutionary thought.

Chernyshevsky's political theory paved the way for Marxism in Russia. His teaching about the inevitability of the collapse of the old world under the blow of the oppressed classes was a major step from utopian socialism to scientific one.

Chernyshevsky and his associates were the forerunners of the Russian revolutionary social democracy. “The revolutionaries of 1961,” wrote V. I. Lenin, “remained loners and, apparently, suffered complete defeat. In fact, they were the great figures of that era, and the further we move away from it, the clearer their greatness is to us. "

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Similar documents

The main milestones in the biography of N.G. Chernyshevsky. Studying at the theological seminary and university. Moving to St. Petersburg, thesis defense. Creation of the secret revolutionary society "Land and Freedom". The arrest of Chernyshevsky, the verdict in his case and the civil execution.

presentation added on 10/10/2014


The study of the populist movement in Russia based on the analysis of the ideas and views of A.I. Herzen and N.G. Chernyshevsky. Revealing the phenomenon of "going to the people". The activities of organizations of revolutionary populism: "Land and Freedom", " People's will"and" Black Limit ".

abstract, added 01/21/2012


Consequences of the reform of 1861 Organization "Land and Freedom": basic requirements, program, co-founders. The ideas of communal socialism by Herzen and Chernyshevsky as the basis of the political trend of the radical intelligentsia - populism, its stages and ideologists.

abstract, added 04/22/2009


The history of the emergence of the Narodnaya Volya movement: The split of the organization "Land and Freedom", the founding and activities of the party "Narodnaya Volya". Organizational work of the party, participation of student and working groups. Analysis of the programs of the "Narodnaya Volya" organization.

abstract, added 07/26/2010


The main currents of social thought and movement in Russia in the 19th century. Official and opposition trends. Slavophiles and Westernizers. Ideologists of Russian liberalism. Stages of the movement of radicals in the second half of the 19th century. Perception of the ideas of Herzen and Chernyshevsky.

abstract added on 10/21/2013


Revival of terrorist ideas in Russia at the end of the 19th century. Organizations "Narodnaya Volya" and "Land and Freedom", which adopted the terrorist method of fighting the government, the emergence of a "political" trend and the growth of its influence in the revolutionary movement.

abstract, added 12/31/2010


The contradictions in Russian reality are the source of the revolutionary ideology of the Decembrists. Legal and semi-legal associations of the pre-Decembrists. "Constitution" and "Russkaya Pravda" - socio-political transformation programs political system Russia.

test, added 11/28/2010


Circles and publicistic speeches of the progressive intelligentsia in the 30s of the XIX century. Political poetry as a means of revolutionary agitation. Formation of a revolutionary democratic direction. The activities of Belinsky and Herzen in the 40s.

abstract, added on 12/07/2006


The legacy of T.B. Macaulay in English historiography. Choosing a Path: Between Politics and Writing. Great Britain in the first half of the 19th century: problems political life... Participation of T.B. Macaulay in political struggle, his views on political reform 1832

term paper, added 02/22/2011


The crisis of autocracy and the aggravation of political, economic and social contradictions in Russian society. The first bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia in 1905-1907. The main stages of the revolution. Political parties.

Nikolay Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky (1828 - 1889) - a radical democrat, a representative of Russian socialism.

Major works: "What to Do?"

The issue of communal land use. Chernyshevsky knew about the shortcomings of the peasant community of his day (serfdom, tax oppression, land hunger), but he believed that all this was disastrous for any form of land tenure. Disadvantages of communal land tenure: frequent redistribution of land, overlap are easily eliminated. He hoped that the community would help the peasants save the land. Community ownership is capable of the best way to ensure success in agriculture, since communal property "unites the owner, owner and worker in one person."

In political matters Chernyshevsky was a supporter of the legal society, local government, federation ... One of the most unfavorable consequences of serfdom, according to Chernyshevsky, is the general habit of lawlessness and lawlessness, the weakness of the legal principle in Russian life. To raise the welfare and moral level of the people, it is necessary “ self management ». « Democracy ... demands that every citizen be independent in matters that concern himself only; every village and every city are independent in matters concerning it alone; each area - in its own affairs. Democracy requires the administrator to be completely subordinate to the residents of the district he is in charge of. " Those. " democracy requires self-government and brings it to the federation ". An example of a democracy that is organically moving into a federation is the United States (a village is a small republic; several villages are a parish; a union of several parishes is a county; several counties are a republican state; a union of states is a state). Chernyshevsky assumed that such a principle of multi-stage federalism would be acceptable to Russia.

The question of forms of government ... He was little interested in this question. He had no hopes for a monarch or other progressive autocrat, since knew that any authoritarian power quickly degenerates into the power of the surrounding camarilla. But the republican form in itself did not seem to him an absolute value (the unsuccessful experience of the Second French Revolution).

State and economy. Questions of production and distribution cannot be left to chance, without the assistance of the law. Because the state, according to Chernyshevsky, cannot but have a huge impact on the economy, then one should start "defining truly useful items and really reasonable boundaries for inevitable intervention." The criterion “no need to do anything unnecessary” is the basic principle of economics. The government should not do things that go well without its intervention. But if non-intervention threatens with large economic losses and exacerbation of social injustice, the participation of the state is useful and even necessary.

Human rights concept ... Chernyshevsky fully shared the humanistic aspirations to "improve the position of the lower classes." He condemned the reluctance of the rich to pay taxes on social assistance to the poor, the attempts of the manufacturers to impose a legislative reduction in the working day, the resistance of large landowners to all projects. agrarian reforms... Chernyshevsky believed that it was necessary to supplement the list of human rights with the most important social guarantees, otherwise there would be no law and order or democracy. He did not call for an equalizing distribution of social wealth, but believed that society and the state had no right to leave their disadvantaged fellow citizens to their fate, they should reward a person for honest and useful work.

Attitude towards socialism ... Chernyshevsky saw in socialism the heir to liberal values. Socialism in his interpretation appears as a natural addition to the ideas of freedom with ideas of social justice, greater equality and confidence in the future. To calm society down, the earliest possible improvement in the material and moral life of the poorest class is needed.

Camarilla (from Spanish - the court of the monarch) is a court clique that runs the affairs of the state for their own selfish purposes.

14.2. Utopian socialism

Unkovsky and Filaret represented a liberal position in relation to the peasant question. And since the reform of 1861 did not meet the expectations of the peasants with regard to land provision and freedom and caused various complaints, then in the 60s

the so-called "radical version" or the populist, developing the "Slavophil doctrine" on the peasant question. As a result - Russian utopian appears("peasant") socialism. This phenomenon was not homogeneous, but their representatives (primarily the diverse intelligentsia) were distinguished by a sacrificial aspiration to protect the humiliated and disadvantaged, combined with radical opposition to landlord and bureaucratic arbitrariness. The main features of the political and legal ideology of the socialists were: 1) hatred of all types of social and political oppression, inequality and humiliation of the masses, deep faith in their strength and the bright future of the people; 2) multilateral and deep criticism of the feudal and bourgeois state and law, showing their anti-popular character and demanding their elimination; 3) the combination of revolutionary democracy with utopian socialism into an indissoluble whole, which was reflected in the views on the existing society, state and law, in the ideas about the future political and legal order and the solution of the question of the ways of transition from one to another; 4) great attention to national issue and its resolution from the standpoint of the recognition of the right of nations to self-determination.

the state "serves
to the one on whose side the power "

The first developer of the ideas of Russianholism was Alexander Ivanovich Herzen(1812-1870), belonging to the generation of the nobility; revolutionaries. While studying at Moscow University, reflecting on the events of December 14, 1825, Herzen with his friend N.P. The Ogarevs took an oath to devote their lives to the revolutionary struggle against tsarism. Police pursuits forced Herzen to emigrate in 1847. He lived in France, then in England. In 1853 he founded the first Free Russian Printing House in London, where he published "Polyarnaya Zvezda" - a magazine with portraits of five executed Decembrists on the cover, and later, in 1857-1867, "Kolokol" - a newspaper advocating the liberation of peasants. The epigraph to "The Bell" was "Vivos voco!" ("I call the living!").

Herzen, being a materialist and dialectician, deepened his understanding of a number of state and legal problems, expressed many realistic ideas that historical development is not random.

Considering the issues of the origin of the state, Herzen noted the progressiveness state forms public life

and their temporary, in the future transitory nature. However, the main reasons for the emergence of the state, he considered two main "elements" of human life - selfishness and public, without which, in his opinion, there would be no history or development. In this regard, Herzen called the state public union, necessary for harmony between the individual and society, necessary until egoism becomes "reasonable", uniting the interests of the individual and the collective.

The goal of the state, according to Herzen, is to protect public safety. It "does not have its own definite political content - it serves equally to reaction and revolution, to the one on whose side there is power." This formulation consisted both of the idea of ​​the superclass of the state in general and the logical transition to the recognition of its real service to specific political forces.

Herzen was critical of the feudal and bourgeois state and law of his day, pointed out the lack of rights of the people in Russia, the atrocities of the landowners, the abuse of officials and oppression by royal power... He was a supporter of the elimination of serfdom.

His assessment of imperial power varied. Sometimes she seemed to him an independent force, however, emphasized that until now she acted in the "community of robbery with the nobility." On the eve of the 1861 reform, Herzen believed that the tsar could be persuaded of the need to free the peasants under the threat of a revolution. After the reform, he at first even welcomed the king as a liberator. The news about the real consequences of the reform, about the brutal suppression of peasant unrest dispelled these liberal illusions. Through the Bell, Herzen addressed the peasant masses:

You hate the landlord, you hate the clerk, you are afraid of them - and you are absolutely right; but you still believe in the tsar and the bishop .. Do not believe them! The king is with them, and they are his.

As for state and law, Herzen believed that tsarist (feudal) laws in Russia and bourgeois legislation

in France they are internally similar and have only external differences.

The difference between your laws and our decrees differs, - he wrote to the French publicist I. Michelet in 1851, - only in the capital formula. The decrees begin with the overwhelming truth: "The king deigned to command"; your laws begin with outrageous lies: an ironic misuse of the name of the French people and the words "liberty, fraternity and equality." The Nikolaev vault is calculated against the subjects and in favor of the autocracy. The Napoleonic codex has decidedly the same character.

Herzen reveals the limitations and formalism of bourgeois democracy, shows the purely external character of republican forms and popular sovereignty in Western countries. The republics there are not social, but only political, and the republics are only in name. The power in them belongs to the bourgeois.

Governments, judges, officials are the "clerks" of the bourgeoisie. Parliaments serve either to "distill public needs into words and endless debate" or to bless troops that shoot workers. Universal suffrage in bourgeois countries, according to Herzen, is an "optical illusion".

Herzen recognized the advantages of bourgeois democracy over feudal-absolutist regimes, but he regarded genuine freedom, real equality and a real or "social republic" as a negation of contemporary European life, that is, as a denial of bourgeois statehood. He was convinced of the anti-nationality of the bourgeois state and law, and was much closer to understanding their class essence.

Questions of a concrete revolutionary transition to socialism were solved by Herzen ambiguously in different periods of his life and in relation to Russia and the West. His position on the question of where the revolution could take place earlier and who would introduce whom to socialism — the West European proletarian or the Russian peasant — changed several times. In the end, he began to evaluate their revolutionary capabilities equally.

In relation to the conditions of Russia, Herzen called his theory the theory of "Russian socialism". It was based on his ideas about the advantages of the rural community in Russia. Idealizing the community, he viewed it as a ready-made cell of socialism. He saw the preservation of the rural community as a guarantee of the transition of Russia

to socialism, bypassing capitalism. He considered the Russian peasant a born socialist.

We Russian socialism we call that socialism that comes from the land and peasant life, from the actual allotment and the existing redistribution of fields, from communal ownership and communal management - and goes along, with the workers' artel towards that economic justice, to which socialism in general aspires and which science confirms.

"Herzen saw" socialism "in the emancipation of the peasants from the land, in communal land tenure and in the peasant idea of ​​the" right to land, "noted V.I. the more and cheaper the peasants would receive land in 1861, the faster and wider the development of capitalism would go in the country.) The real content of Herzen's utopian socialism was revolutionary democracy, expression of the interests and aspirations of the peasants who fought for the complete overthrow of landlord power and the complete destruction of landlord land ownership.

Herzen was a supporter of the republican form of government and a principled opponent of the preservation of monarchical forms. Pursuit combine socialism and democracy reflected in his slogan of the struggle for a "social republic". At the same time, an important step was taken towards the formulation and solution of the problem of eliminating alienation political power from the people. Herzen strove to create a statehood where the people, directly and through their representatives, would solve all issues of social and political life. He advocated universal election of government bodies, accountability of officials to the people, the possibility of political decisions "by the whole world." These principles seemed to Herzen as the primordial principles of communal self-government, which should be extended to the whole country from top to bottom. Herzen's idealization of the order of the rural community was nevertheless combined with the recognition of the necessity of the state under socialism, with calls for the struggle for the creation of a democratic republic. Breaking with the anarchist MA Bakunin, Herzen wrote in Letters to an Old Comrade: "From the fact that the state is a transitory form, it does not follow that this form has already passed."

Herzen associated the future offensive of a stateless system with the victory of socialism on a world scale, with the destruction of

militarism inherent in bourgeois states, as well as with a long-term re-education of the person himself.

A large place in the work of Herzen was national question. Speaking out against all types of national oppression, he defended the right of nations to self-determination and the formation of an independent state. He was concerned about the situation of Poles, Kyrgyz, Finns, Georgians, Armenians, Latvians and Lithuanians, Belarusians and Ukrainians.

Herzen condemned the tsarist government, which suppressed the Polish uprising of 1863. He did not preach the disunity of the peoples of Russia, but believed that in a new, free Russia all its peoples could live in harmony. If Russia comes to a new life, Herzen wrote, "I do not think that Ukraine would want to secede from it."

N.G. Chernyshevsky:
"it is necessary to give funds,
to use it
right "

Nikolay Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky(1828-1889), a commoner by birth, one of the most prominent political figures in Russia in the 19th century. He came to revolutionary-democratic views when he was still young and developed his theory in a number of special scientific works, and even more so in the topical articles of the Sovremennik magazine.

Combining his philosophical approach (and he was a materialist) and attention to the economic side of social issues with the study of political and legal problems, Chernyshevsky was able to give a multilateral coverage of both general theoretical and specific historical issues of state and law.

Problem origin of state and law considered by Chernyshevsky in a number of works. In the article "Economic Activity and Legislation", he explained the emergence of laws - political, civil, criminal - primarily by the disproportion between people's needs for material benefits and the means of their satisfaction. The second source of the emergence of laws is "disharmony in human nature itself", which proceeds, however, from the first, root source. Hence the laws, in his opinion, are the rules that determine the state structure, relations between people and the protection of those and other rules.

Historical development, the emergence of the state occurs in leaps and bounds, in the course of which old political forms are destroyed and new ones are established. Breaking the old is often done

violent coup. The emergence of the state was preceded by the tribal system, and the initial stage in the formation of statehood was the union of nomadic communities. The development of civilization leads to the mixing of tribes and the formation of nations. "Little by little, small tribes merge and merge, so that they finally disappear in the administrative sense in huge states", there is a complete contrast between tribal life and the state. In the state "special people are in charge of everything, called officials and policemen, who by their origin and personal relations have no connection with the population of the district." It is in the state that, instead of general participation in war and court, separate classes of military and judges arise.

The emergence of the state and law is associated with private property, initially "land", which replaced communal property, in which the land belonged to society, and not to private individuals. With the emergence of private property and the development of inequality in property, according to Chernyshevsky, more and more people are removed from the management of public affairs.

The state is historical and transitory, its essence, emergence, future are determined by economic factors, especially property inequality. Specific features of the state consist in the creation of a special administrative apparatus, army, police, court. According to Chernyshevsky, "all the people who make up a nation, viewed as one whole, are called a state." However, when analyzing specific states, he reveals their protection of the interests of the economically ruling classes.

So, calling the tsarist autocracy "Asiaticism", Chernyshevsky included in this concept arbitrariness, lawlessness, suppression and robbery of the people in Russia. A characteristic feature of the tsarist government is its commitment to the interests of the nobility and a bureaucratic course of action. Serfdom, he noted, created by a government that relies on the nobility and voluntarily gives him privileges. Even before the reform of 1861, Chernyshevsky wrote that from the tsar and

landlords, feudal landowners and liberals, that is, forces and classes whose interests are opposite to those of the peasants, one cannot expect real liberation from serfdom.

During the reform of 1861, Chernyshevsky's slogan was the words of one of the heroes of his novel Prologue: "All the land is peasant, and there is no ransom."

Characterizing the bourgeois state and law, he distinguishes between classes mainly according to property, and not according to their place in the system of social production. Chernyshevsky distinguishes, on the one hand, laborers, workers, proletarians, commoners (the poor classes), on the other hand, the capitalists, the bourgeois, the propertied classes in general. He came close to understanding the class character of the bourgeois state and law. Chernyshevsky noted that in Western countries the bourgeois rule the state, and the government is the "humble servant" of capital; the forms of the state can be different and even change repeatedly in a short period, but social relations, in which one class oppresses another, remain unchanged. Chernyshevsky sharply criticized the liberals who spoke of "freedom" and "equality", but restricting freedom by saying that "they said this word, but wrote it in the laws, and ... do not destroy the order in which 9/10 of the people are slaves and proletarians" ...

Chernyshevsky believed that in conditions where there are no material guarantees of equality and individual rights proclaimed in European countries, then these rights are illusory for the people. "It is not enough to say that you have the right," he wrote, "you must give the means to use this right." The right to work in a bourgeois society is "the right to seek work, but not to have it." The mechanism of the political domination of the bourgeoisie rests on "coercive law" - bayonets and buckshot, and parliament has been turned in Europe into a "talking shop", in which bourgeois parties, hostile to the interests of the people, take over in turn.

The main conclusion that Chernyshevsky, like other revolutionary democrats, made from an analysis of the feudal and bourgeois state and law, was the conclusion about the need for a people's revolution and the transition to socialism. According to Chernyshevsky, Russia can bypass the stage of capitalism thanks to the presence of communal land tenure. However, he did not see the community as

a ready-made cell of socialism, believing that communal land ownership must be supplemented by collective farming and that socialism will arise from the development of cooperation in industry and agriculture. Without solving all the issues of the transition to socialism in detail, Chernyshevsky understood that this would not happen immediately, would require a "transitional state", but the main thing was that this would happen thanks to the activities of the future state, born of the people's revolution.

Chernyshevsky rejected absolute monarchy as not ensuring the natural rights and needs of man, moreover, the people, he believed, have an inalienable right to the destruction of unnatural conditions of existence. Only democratic republic, is able to ensure the democratization of the state apparatus: the subordination of the administrator to the residents of the district, the possibility of bringing any official to trial for abuse of power, the election of officials.

In Russia, Chernyshevsky believed, it was necessary to limit the tsarist autocracy, introduce local representative government and self-government, free the peasant community from bureaucratic oppression and guardianship, exercise government on the basis of laws, the court should be independent and righteous. In this case, it is necessary to focus on peasant revolution. Power in the state under socialism will have to pass to the real majority of the people - farmers, day laborers, workers. And, finally, it is precisely such a state, in his opinion, that is called upon to build socialism.

In the article "Economic Activity and Legislation" Chernyshevsky develops the theory of non-interference of the state v the economy and neutrality in relation to her rights. State and law are inevitably subordinate to economic development. Because of this, following new phenomena in the economy, new laws appear, such as, for example, laws on joint-stock companies. Laws that contradict existing economic phenomena turn out, according to Chernyshevsky, to be "useless" and inoperative. Another no less important theoretical provision of this article is to defend the conclusions about the active use of state and law in the interests of the forces in power.

According to Chernyshevsky, the economic role of the future people's state will consist in the confiscation of the landlord's land and the transfer of it to the peasants, the organization and support of industrial

and agricultural partnerships, the creation of state enterprises and the liquidation (or ousting) of bourgeois production, the rise, in economic development, in order to ultimately achieve full satisfaction of human needs. In this regard, he distinguished two periods in the development of socialism: the first, the initial, associated with distribution according to work, and the second, with distribution according to needs.

Combining the theory of non-interference of states in the economy in a common logical system with his theory of the origin of state and law, Chernyshevsky came to the conclusion that with the onset of the second period, there will be a transition to stateless structure. Thus, the problem of eliminating the alienation of political power from the people and the creation of real social self-government was further developed. The legal ideal of Chernyshevsky included the requirements for real ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens, strict compliance with the requirements of the law. "Where there is no law, there is arbitrariness, arbitrariness in itself is constraint."

Chernyshevsky developed an original "the theory of improving the people's life", based on - special role communities. The community allows you to accelerate social development: its existence in a high stage of civilization is not an obstacle to entering this civilization, in communal ownership - higher form relations of man to the land, every farmer is guaranteed the possession of land, which strengthens the national welfare. The legal situation in communal land ownership has been developed over generations on the basis of a legal custom or agreement, it is supported and protected by the forces of society itself, is self-sufficient and more reasonable than the government one, it favors the development of straightforwardness of character and qualities necessary for a citizen. Internal reasonable legislation, in the absence of interference by any central and outside administration, gives indisputability and independence to the rights of a private person. Therefore, people with a common interest should unite in societies and jointly use the forces of nature and the means of science. In agriculture, the transition of land to communal use will take place, in industry - the transition of factories and plants into the communal property of all workers.

Developing an idea equality of all nations and nationalities, Chernyshevsky was critical of racism, emphasized its political

in fact, he paid great attention to the protection of the national liberation movement in Russia, the countries of the West, the United States, in the East. He condemned the claims of the governments of the so-called civilized countries to arrogate to themselves "the obligation to take violent measures to improve the customs of uncivilized foreigners subject to him."

Chernyshevsky's revolutionary democratic theory was a significant contribution to the development of world political and legal thought. She also influenced many foreign thinkers, in particular in the Balkans, in the countries Latin America who had similar historical tasks.

Herzen and Chernyshevsky are classified as revolutionary democrats and at the same time as utopian socialists.

The book is given with some abbreviations.

The heyday of Chernyshevsky's activity is associated with the events of the 50-60s of the XIX century - one of the most intense periods in the history of Russia, saturated with major socio-political events, sharp class battles between the forces of reaction and progress.
Chernyshevsky arrived in the capital just before the start Crimean War... On October 20 (November 1), 1853, Nicholas I declared war on Turkey. Britain and France, who provoked it into a military conflict with Russia, took the side of Turkey. Despite the heroism of Russian soldiers and sailors - the brave defenders of the Sevastopol bastions, royal Russia, due to its political and economic backwardness, suffered a defeat, demonstrated the rottenness and impotence of the serf regime. The Russian people were paying for the shameful failure of the "Crimean campaign" with countless new hardships and disasters. A peasant liberation movement was growing in the country, which, with all its spontaneity and disunity, shook the foundations of the old order and threatened to sweep it away in the storm of a revolutionary uprising.
Not to mention the democratic strata of Russian society, dissatisfaction with the policies of the tsarist government also covers some circles of the noble intelligentsia.
Tsarism was forced to take the path of "reforms". The "liberal" course of the government of Alexander II was characterized by a hypocritical policy of small concessions in order to preserve the monarchy and the privileges of its class support - the feudal landlords.
However, the entire course of the country's economic development pushed towards the abolition of serfdom. By I860, the total number of industrial enterprises in Russia had reached 15338 with more than half a million workers. Serfdom decisively hindered the further growth of the country's productive forces.
In agriculture, there were processes of decline and decay. The feudal landlords intensified the merciless exploitation of the masses, which led to the final undermining of the economy of the peasant farms. Lenin pointed out that “the production of grain by landowners for sale, which developed especially in recent times the existence of serfdom was already a harbinger of the collapse of the old regime. " The struggle of the serfs against the landlords became more and more fierce and stubborn. In the years 1855-1860, 474 cases of peasant unrest were officially recorded. "The whole spirit of the people, - the third department informed the tsar," is directed towards one goal - towards liberation. " Frightened by peasant riots, the tsarist government was forced to raise the issue of abolishing serfdom.
It took about five years to prepare the peasant reform (1857-1861). This time was marked by a fierce class struggle between peasants and landowners. The situation that developed in Russia in 1859-1861 was characterized by Lenin as one of the historical examples of a revolutionary situation.
The "Party of the People", selflessly defending the interests of the enslaved peasantry, was headed by Chernyshevsky. The landowners 'party was supported by a motley front, from the tsarist bureaucratic dignitaries, who were entrusted with the practical implementation of reforms, to the Slavophiles and noble liberals, who ultimately acted as ideological defenders of landowners' interests. Tsarism repulsed the attack of the revolutionary forces in the era of the "first democratic rise." But the enormous, invaluable historical result of the activities of the Russian revolutionary democracy and its leader Chernyshevsky was that the prospect of the future victory of the people over tsarism was tangibly revealed. The revolutionary struggle of the glorious predecessors of Bolshevism was of great historical significance.
The St. Petersburg period of Chernyshevsky's life and struggle, right up to his arrest and then exile to hard labor, was the path of his revolutionary maturing, the path of titanic labor that left a vivid mark in the history of progressive Russian social thought. At first, upon his arrival in St. Petersburg, Chernyshevsky still cares about getting a university department. He is taking his master's exam and is working hard on his dissertation. For some time, Chernyshevsky works as a teacher in the cadet corps. The beginning of his journal collaboration dates back to the summer of 1853. His articles and reviews appear in Otechestvennye zapiski and some other bodies. In the fall of the same year, Chernyshevsky met Nekrasov and began writing for Sovremennik. Later, Chernyshevsky warmly recalled his meeting with Nekrasov, whom he considered a great poet even then. Under the influence of Nekrasov, who immediately appreciated the outstanding talent of the beginning writer, Chernyshevsky refused to cooperate in Otechestvennye zapiski and began working for the Sovremennik magazine. It was at the beginning of 1855. By this time, Sovremennik had already published Chernyshevsky's reviews of the works of secondary, but then popular noble writers M. Avdeev and E. Tur. Everyone noticed that a fresh voice of strict, direct and impartial ideological and aesthetic assessments appeared in the department of criticism and journalism, so unlike the moderately insipid or empty feuilleton chatter of previous reviewers. The above authors were sharply condemned and ridiculed by Chernyshevsky for the emptiness of content, for adherence to mediocre "artistic" embellishment and sympathy for the landlord-protective ideology.
On May 10, 1855, a public defense of Chernyshevsky's dissertation "The Aesthetic Relationship of Art to Reality" took place, which aroused noisy talk in scientific and literary-magazine circles.
NV Shelgunov - a prominent democrat-publicist, one of the followers of Chernyshevsky - conveyed his impressions of the event, which he himself had witnessed. “The small audience set aside for the debate was packed with listeners. There were also students, but it seems there were more outsiders, officers and young people from the state. It was very cramped, so the listeners stood at the windows. I was also one of them, and next to me was Serakovsky (an officer of the General Staff, who later took part in the Polish uprising and was hanged by Muravyov). During the dispute, Serakovsky came into the most noisy delight and was carried away to the point of impossibility ... Chernyshevsky defended his dissertation with his usual modesty, but with the firmness of unshakable conviction. After the dispute, Pletnev (presiding) turned to Chernyshevsky with the following remark: "It seems that this is not what I read to you in my lectures!" And, indeed, Pletnev read not what he read, but what he read would not have been able to lead the public to the delight into which the dissertation led her. Everything was new and alluring in it: new thoughts, argumentation, simplicity and clarity of presentation. "
In November-December 1855, the first chapters of Chernyshevsky's book about Belinsky appeared on the pages of Sovremennik - "Essays on the Gogol Period of Russian Literature" (the printing was completed in 1856).
These two major works, which put their authors among the famous Russian writers, were that kind of manifesto that publicly proclaimed the most important philosophical, sociological and literary principles of the new revolutionary democratic direction.
In the spring of 1856, Chernyshevsky meets with Dobrolyubov. This meeting marked the beginning of their joint journal activities, their friendship. In Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky had a loyal and talented like-minded person.
In turn, Dobrolyubov spoke admiringly of Chernyshevsky as his teacher.
In a letter to N. Turchaninov, a student of Chernyshevsky at the Saratov gymnasium, who, by the way, introduced Chernyshevsky to Dobrolyubov, the latter declared: imbued with love of truth - I not only did not find, but never expected to find ... With Nikolai Gavrilovich we talk not only about literature, but also about philosophy, and I remember at the same time how Stankevich and Herzen taught Belinsky, Belinsky - Nekrasova, Granovsky - Zabelina, etc. "

Popular articles of the site from the section "Dreams and Magic"

If you had a bad dream ...

If you had some kind of bad dream, then it is remembered by almost everyone and does not go out of my head for a long time. Often a person is frightened not so much by the content of the dream itself, but by its consequences, because most of us believe that we see dreams not in vain. As scientists have found out, a person most often dreams of a bad dream already in the morning ...

Political and legal doctrines of A. I. Herzen and N. G. Chernyshevsky.

HERTZEN (1812-70) developed the foundations of the theory of Russian socialism. The main thing for Herzen was the search for methods of combining the abstract ideas of socialism with the realities of social relations. In the 50s. he came to a decision about the possibility of combining all this in Russia. Since the peasant world contains 3 elements that make it possible to carry out an economic revolution leading to socialism.

everyone's right to land

extensive possession of it

worldly governance

These elements impede the development of the rural proletariat and make it possible to bypass the stage of capitalist development. In the 50s. Herzen founds a printing house in London and publishes the Kolokol newspaper, which was illegally imported into Russia. According to Herzen, the abolition of serfdom while preserving the community will make it possible to avoid the experience of the capitalist developing West and go directly to socialism. Herzen considered the community that existed in Russia to be the basis, but not the main unit of the future social order. He saw the lack of its heads in the absorption of the individual by the community. The main task is to combine the rights of the individual with the communal order.

Herzen paid attention to the way in which the social revolution was carried out. In his works, there are many judgments about the inevitable violent overthrow of capital, but he was not a supporter of compulsory violence. During the preparation of the peasant reform in the bell, he expressed his hopes for the abolition of serfdom by the government on favorable terms for the peasants. These hopes for a peaceful solution to the peasant question aroused opposition from other revolutionary socialists. But Herzen replied that "you need a call not to an ax, but to a broomstick to sweep the dirty linen out of the hut."

Herzen developed the idea of ​​electing and convening a Great Council - he would establish meetings to abolish serfdom, legitimize the propaganda of socialist ideas, and fight the autocracy. This idea has become part of the ideology of Russia. Herzen paid particular attention to the international union of workers (international) as the first sprout of the future economic order.

In Herzen's theory of Russian socialism, the problems of state and law are considered as secondary, subordinate to the economic and social issues... He wrote that “the state, like slavery, goes to freedom, to self-destruction. The future of society is a union of associations of self-governing communities.

CHERNYSHEVSKY (1828-1889) one of the directors of the Sovremennik magazine. In it, he devoted a number of articles to the presentation of the idea of ​​the transition to socialism through the cross community. In the article "Criticism of philosophical prejudices against communal ownership", he seeks to prove, on the basis of Hegel's law of denial, the need to preserve the community and its development into a higher organization.

In the article "Capital and Labor" he outlines a plan for organizing production partnerships with the help of a loan from the government, appointing an experienced director for 1 year. Herzen called Chernyshevsky a representative of the theory of "purely Western socialism" he referred to the ideas of Fourier, Proudhon, Louis Blanc. However, the core of his theory is the idea of ​​communal socialism in Russia.

The main idea of ​​Chernyshevsky is the development of communal land tenure into communal production, and then consumption . He considered it the most desirable to change civil institutions through reforms, but for Russia he considered reforms to be impossible. autocracy once gave rise to serfdom, and now it is trying only to change its form, while preserving its essence. In publicistic publications, he conducted anti-government propaganda, using Aesopian language, hints, historical parallels. The device of power that would overthrow the autocracy was spoken of in the proclamation "I bow to the peasants of the lords from their well-wishers." It approves countries in which the people's headman (president) is elected for a term, as well as kingdoms where the king does not dare to do anything without the people and obeys the whole people. The need for the state, according to Chernyshevsky, is generated by a conflict caused by the discrepancy between the level of production and the needs of the people. As a result of the growth of production and the transition to distribution according to needs, the conflict between people disappeared, and thus the need for the state. After a long transition, society will form a federation of self-governing unions of agricultural communities, industrial and agricultural associations, factories that have passed into the ownership of the workers. In his article "Economic Activity and Legislation", criticizing the theory of bourgeois liberalism, he argues that non-interference of the state in economic activity is ensured only by replacing the private property system with communal ownership.

The Sovremennik criticized Western European liberal theories and developing constitutionalism. Referring to economic dependence, he argued that the rights and freedoms proclaimed by the West were a hoax.

Alexander Ivanovich Herzen (1812 - 1870) - the founder of the theory of Russian socialism and populism, a prominent philosopher, social and political thinker of the radical direction of Russian Westernism.

Herzen was born in 1812 in Moscow and as a baby he survived the horrors of the French invasion and the fire of Moscow. He was the son of a wealthy landowner I.A. Yakovlev and a German woman, Louise Hague, with whom his father was not legally married. His surname was invented by his father, who followed the traditions of the Russian bar to give surnames to illegal, but beloved children, expressing parental love (the surname "Herzen" is derived from the German "Herz" - "heart").

Herzen's political views were formed under the direct influence of the uprising and the fate of the Decembrists. Since Herzen and his friends, and above all his friend and associate N.P. Ogarev, viewed their activities as a continuation of the struggle of the Decembrists. So, Herzen and Ogarev, at the age of 15 - 16, took an oath on the Sparrow Hills to give their lives for the liberation of the Russian people, and remained faithful to her until the end of their lives.

In 1829, Herzen entered the Physics and Mathematics Department of Moscow University, which he graduated from in 1833. Soon he was arrested as a member of a student circle, and exiled first to Perm, and then to Vyatka and Vladimir, where he served as a minor provincial official (was engaged in perlustration letters) under police surveillance. In 1842 he retired and until 1847 he lived in Moscow, intensively engaged in self-education.

After long and humiliating efforts, Herzen received permission to travel abroad and in 1847 left with his family for France - he was no longer destined to see his homeland. Upon learning of Herzen's revolutionary activities in the West, the tsarist government ordered him to appear in Russia. In response to his refusal to do so, Herzen was deprived of his Russian citizenship by the Senate, later becoming a citizen of one of the cantons of Switzerland.

The defeat of the revolutions and the Nikolaev reaction in Russia became a personal drama for Herzen, which only deepened after the death of an elderly mother and son during a shipwreck, as well as the death of his wife.

In 1852 he settled in London, where he created his own printing house and began publishing the anthology "Polar Star" (from 1855), and from 1857 the first Russian revolutionary newspaper "Kolokol". With the help of secret correspondents, he forwarded the newspaper to Russia, receiving from there, in turn, materials about the life of the Rkus.

On November 1, 1861, Herzen put forward the slogan "To the people!"

During the reform period of 1861, "Bell", initially supporting the Tsar's intentions, then accused Alexander II of "half-heartedness" and began to actively advocate for the emancipation of the peasants from the land. During the period Polish uprising 1863 "Kolokol" supported the Poles, which turned many Russian people away from him. Gradually the newspaper fell into decay and was transferred to Geneva. It was closed in 1867 due to economic problems.

While living in London, Herzen found himself at the center of many European revolutionary movements, in constant communication with leaders not only of the Russian, but also of the French, German, Italian, Polish and Hungarian emigration. So, he personally knew Bakunin and the Decembrist Orlov, R. Owen and P. - J. Proudhon, L. Blanc and L. Koshut, D. Garibaldi and D. Madzini. At the same time, Herzen's relationship with Marx and his circle did not work out. This was due, among other things, to the fact that Marx somewhat one-sidedly imagined Herzen's position on the question of the historical fate of Russia and the Slavs, considering him to be a supporter of "Pan-Slavism."

Herzen went through a good philosophical school, being for some time a Hegelian in his youth, a supporter of the teachings of Feuerbach, Saint - Simon and Comte. As a philosopher, however, who did not create a harmonious philosophical system, he did not strive for the completeness of philosophical constructions, but primarily for the search for the practical meaning of philosophy. Thus, he perceived Hegel's philosophy as the "algebra of revolution". In his philosophical writings, imbued with atheism, hostility to Christianity was invariably expressed, based not on the true spirit of the great doctrine, but mainly on ecclesiastical abuses. The most famous works of A.I. Herzen, in addition to political articles in the "Polar Star" and "The Bell": "The Past and Thoughts" (political and ideological autobiography), "To an old comrade" (addressed to M.A. political testament), as well as dedicated to his reflections on the ways of development of Russia and the West "Letters from France and Italy", "From the other side", "Ends and Beginnings", "Western Arabesques". At the same time, the views and positions of Herzen underwent a certain historical evolution.

Herzen's initial feelings after moving to emigration were disgust for official Russia, for bureaucratic absolutism, for serfdom, for police constraints. The whole situation of the Nikolaev regime allowed almost every thinking Russian person to look at the West from the standpoint of religious faith: "we believe in Europe, as Christians believe in paradise." At the same time, his ideas about the West were abstract and utopian: “We are in Europe with our own ideal and with faith in it. issues that occupy the upper layer of life, on exceptional events in which it does not resemble itself. "

Like any Russian person, Herzen escaped abroad "intoxicated", when "the heart is wide open, the tongue is untied." Acquaintance with the customs and orders in the West, as well as the revolutionary events of 1848 - 1849. forced him to look much more closely at the economic foundations of bourgeois society. Herzen's views in emigration underwent a certain evolution - if at the beginning he idealized the revolution and the Western path of development for Russia, then in subsequent works, outraged by Western pettiness and philistinism, he speaks in favor of the evolutionary path of development and the special vocation of Russia, called upon to move to socialism bypassing capitalism through the community. In the writings Letters from France and Italy, From the Other Shore, and The Ends and Beginnings, Herzen, to whom the entire West appears as “dead bones,” rushes from one extreme to the other. He is disappointed with people, not events, with the whole Western society, and not just with the class of entrepreneurs.

In "Western Arabesques", which are a single chord of despair, he no longer expects anything, after what he saw and experienced, he became "indifferent" to almost everything, and yet he found everything he was looking for. He wanted a revolution, but saw its defeat in 1848. It is clear to him that violence can only clear space for the future, and he never tired of speaking out against the poeticization of "flare-ups," which MABakunin especially sinned against, against the nihilistic denial of universal human values ​​and culture of past eras. Herzen suffered and understood that with our suffering we reach humility and obedience to the truth and save the next generations from these sorrows. With us, humanity is sobering up, we are its hangover ... There is no way out. "

Further, Herzen began to look for faith in the West, for faith in Russia, which was now in relation to Herzen in the position of the same "beautiful distant" as the West originally: "Starting with a cry of joy when crossing the border, I ended up with my spiritual return to my homeland. Russia saved me on the brink of moral ruin. "

Gradually, the main historical, cultural and socio-political ideas of Herzen were formed:

1) Russia really lagged behind Western countries in terms of socio - economic development (“ historical events as if they swept over the Russian people ");

2) The main reasons for the backwardness of Russia are the ignorance of the people and the despotic autocracy that paralyzes all the living forces of the country;

3) At the same time, Russia should not idealize and copy the path of the liberal West, where the enemies of progress have become philistinism, narrow egoism, the pursuit of comfort, hypocrisy, half-heartedness of thought and action - since freedom here is used by people to arrange their "little affairs": "The modern generation has a single God, whose name is capital; bourgeois European civilization has no rivals, but there is an epoch of philistinism, this rotten wormhole in the body of Europe ... Here Christianity itself became shallow in the peaceful harbor of the Reformation, and the revolution in the peaceful harbor of liberalism became shallow ";

Herzen, with impartial courage, denounced the low level of education of the average European, the decline of art, which does not tolerate "vulgarity," the decline of personality and other symptoms of philistinism. At the same time, Herzen's denunciation of Europe was carried out in the name of the principle he had gained through suffering that man is the measure of all things: “Nations, like royal houses, before the fall, grow dull. Bourgeois Europe will become obsolete in the twilight of stupidity, in sluggish feelings without convictions ... The weak, sickly, stupid generations will somehow reach before an explosion, to this or that lava, which will cover them with a stone veil and consign the chronicles to oblivion ”. Moreover, it is important to note that one of the most enlightened and internally free people of his time denounced Western civilization, not blinded by its brilliance, its great historical past and modern successes.

4) The domination of philistine psychology makes Western democracy empty and lifeless: “Democracy cannot create anything - this is not its business ... Democrats only know what they don’t want, what they want, they don’t know”. Western parliamentarism is a fiction that covers up the activities of parties to satisfy their narrowly selfish interests;

5) Since the bourgeois type is eternal (due to the "bourgeoisisation" of the Western system of values), no violent revolution can bring Europe closer to a more just and harmonious social order... Therefore, European "socialism will be philistine", without providing any real emancipation of the individual;

6) Since the West is completely incapable of realizing its ideals because of the dominant philistinism, only Russia is called upon to fulfill the most advanced aspirations of the West - to go from feudalism directly to socialism, bypassing capitalism;

7) The Russian people, which have preserved the original principles of life, are most sensitive to socialism, the main unit of which should be the rural community: “The community saved the Russian people from Mongol barbarism, from landowners painted in European style and from the German bureaucracy. The communal organization, although severely shaken, withstood the interference of the authorities; she happily lived to see the development of socialism in Europe ”;

8) The community is an example of the economic and administrative structure of society under future socialism: “... In the hut of the Russian peasant we found the embryo of economic and administrative institutions based on common land tenure, on agrarian and instinctive communism”;

9) At the same time, in the real Russian community there are a number of manifestations of underdevelopment and inertia (“undeveloped communism”), which can be overcome by introducing the achievements of Western science into the peasant life with the help of advanced Russian people (future populists). At the same time, the main task is to combine the rights of the individual with the communal structure: “To preserve the community and preserve the personality, to extend the rural and volost to the cities, to the state as a whole, while maintaining national unity, to develop private rights and to preserve the indivisibility of the land - this is the main issue of the Russian revolution”;

10) If this does not happen, then Russia will receive a crude and primitive communism, suppressing personality - like the communism of H. Babeuf in the West (Some of Herzen's words sound just prophetic about the fate of socialism in the twentieth century: “Perhaps the day will come when socialism will turn out to be the worst form of tyranny - tyranny without a tyrant, then a new thirst for freedom will awaken in the souls of a new generation unknown to us, and it will revolt against socialism in the name of freedom ");

11) The most likely way to transform Russia is revolution - but only if the reforms are supported by the tsar, they can be evolutionary and gradual: "I am not at all afraid of the word" gradual "vulgarized by the cruelty and wrong step of various reforming authorities."

Herzen's activities and literary work had a tremendous impact on the development of various areas of Russian philosophy. So. For example, VI Lenin considered Herzen's "great merit" to the Russian liberation movement that he was the first to raise "the great banner of the struggle against the tsarist monarchy by addressing the masses with a free Russian word." It was he, according to Lenin, who "launched the revolutionary agitation", which was "picked up, expanded, strengthened, tempered by the revolutionaries - commoners." It is no coincidence that the majority of the populists were influenced by the theory of "Russian socialism".

On the contrary, the “culturephilism” of K. Leontiev, an enemy of the revolution, absorbed the ideas of the historiosophical works of late Herzen, disillusioned with Western progress, horrified by the prosaic prospect of reducing all people to the type of the European bourgeois and with the merciless persistence of attacking the vulgarity and colorlessness of this all-consuming type, with energy no less than the Slavophils did. N.A. Berdyaev in Herzen's work was carried away by ideas about personal freedom - he noted that Herzen's socialism is both populist and individualistic (which is not typical for the Russian tradition). The historian of Russian thought S.A. Levitsky considered the best features of Herzen to be the high ethical idealism and moral sensitivity that were nurtured and brought up in him by Christianity, noting the "duality of his nature": his "religious searches ... could not find an adequate way out with his naturalistic worldview Hence - the split between ethics and philosophy, between Western ideals and faith in Russia and its great mission. " SN Bulgakov called Herzen "Prometheus, chained himself to the rock of materialism," when "his every mental flight, vague attraction to transcendental spheres only more makes you feel the chains of common sense, through which Herzen wanted to solve all questions of being." “a mental philistine, a reasoner of common sense, strangles Prometheus, who is constantly being burned by that inner fire that he had stolen from heaven. This is the mental drama. "

Thus, from the point of view of the above assessments, Herzen (as, incidentally, many thinkers of his critical era), is seen as an ambiguous figure in the history of Russian thought, which survived the evolution of its views and influenced representatives of its most diverse directions - from radical - revolutionary (populism ) to liberal and even protective - monarchist (K. Leontiev).

The scientific - philosophical, literary and social activities of Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky (1828 - 1889) began in the mid - 50s, in the last decade of pre - reform Russia. Chernyshevsky was originally formed as a revolutionary radical. Back in the 50s, i.e. Even before the reform, the young philosopher, literary critic and economist came to the deep conviction of the inability and unwillingness of the Russian "top" to satisfy the just demands and aspirations of the people (and above all of the serf peasantry). In his opinion, formally, the legal emancipation of the peasants is the most that the serf-owners - liberals - are capable of. But such "liberation", if it is not supplemented by a just redistribution of land, transferring it into the hands of the peasants, will further worsen the life of the people and will inevitably lead to an explosion, to a people's revolution. Chernyshevsky and his associates were waiting for such a revolution, wishing and preparing for it.

Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky was born in the city of Saratov in the family of a priest, received a thorough religious education. Nikolai Gavrilovich's father, being a well-educated, broad-minded and very kind man, was the first teacher of the boy, who early showed extraordinary abilities that amazed all acquaintances and those around him. He studied at the theological seminary, but at the age of 18 - 20, having gone through a serious internal crisis, he turned to materialism and atheism. In 1846, a 17-year-old boy notes his "striving for glory and for the benefit of mankind"; in 1848 he wrote in his diary that he would not spare his life for the triumph of his convictions. In 1848 - 1849 he took part in the Petrashevsky circle; the circle will soon be crushed by the authorities, but Chernyshevsky himself happily escaped repression.

Chernyshevsky entered St. Petersburg University, where he showed brilliant abilities. It was here that he studied a wide range of literature, and above all socialist literature, of which Fourier made the greatest impression on him. In addition, he reads I. Bentham, J. St. Mill, A. Smith, D. Ricardo, R. Malthus, O. Blanka, L. Feuerbach.

In 1851 - 1853 works as a teacher in his native Saratov.

In 1853 Chernyshevsky settled in St. Petersburg, choosing a career as a professional writer. Soon he became an employee, and then the de facto head of the Sovremennik magazine, around which young radical writers and publicists rallied. In Sovremennik, where Chernyshevsky will work for about 10 years, his closest associates will be N.A. Nekrasov and N.A. Dobrolyubov.

In 1859 - 1861, during the upsurge of the revolutionary democratic movement, Chernyshevsky in his articles in Sovremennik advocated a peasant revolution, for the creation of a revolutionary organization in Russia. Chernyshevsky participates in the creation and distribution of proclamations, in the institution secret society"Land and Freedom". As a result, in July 1862 Chernyshevsky was arrested and spent about two years in Peter and Paul Fortress before trial and on trial. The accusation was fabricated with the help of provocateurs. As the guilt, he will be accused of calling for the overthrow of the government, as well as the spread of atheistic and socialist ideas.

The Senate sentenced Chernyshevsky to 14 years of hard labor and eternal exile; Alexander II confirmed the sentence, reducing the term of hard labor to seven years. Chernyshevsky was subjected to the humiliating procedure of "civil execution" (scaffold, pillar, broken sword over his head) and sent to Eastern Siberia, to the Vilyui region (Yakutia). Only 25 years later, shortly before his death, the scientist managed to return to his native land (Saratov), ​​where he died in 1889. Thus, at 34, he was actually withdrawn from the social and political life of Russia, leaving behind only artistic and publicistic works.

Let us dwell further on considering the legacy of Chernyshevsky as a thinker. Of the publicistic heritage of greatest interest are two articles published in Sovremennik - Criticism of Philosophical Prejudices against Communal Ownership (1858) and Economic Activity and Legislation (1859). The thinker outlined his vision of socialism in the novel What Is to Be Done? (in the literary supplement to the novel - in "Dreams of Vera Pavlovna"). In the above article, using Hegel's dialectics, Chernyshevsky seeks to prove the need to preserve the community at a higher stage of social development.

1) The goal of social development is socialism based on the socialization of labor (peasant and handicraft);

2) There can be only one path to socialism in Russia: the people's revolution; 3) The revolution should become a prerequisite for subsequent socialist transformations, involving the restriction of private property, the elimination of wage labor, the development of collective ownership in agriculture and industry;

4) The main support of Russian socialism ("Russian cooperation") should be the peasant community, supplemented by the achievements of civilization - provided that its fate will be decided not by the reformers from above, but by the peasants themselves. The peasants must redeem their allotments, and the community is called upon to help preserve them (the dignity of the community lies in the fact that it “unites the owner, owner and worker in one person” - in the West, where private property prevails, there is “unlimited rivalry”, “labor donated to capital ");

5) Reforms aimed at overcoming the general habit of lawlessness and lawlessness, corruption and arbitrariness are of great importance for Russia. administration and court reforms;

6) This can be done by making the activities of officials accountable to society and subordinate to the law: "We must make sure that official activities cease to be a clerical secret ... and society can express its opinion about every official action of every official" - in every district, city and village ;

7) The foundation of the coming Russian socialism should be a network of communities and artels uniting free producers (that is, he is close to the ideas of "cooperative socialism" advocated by R. Owen);

8) Issues of production and distribution should not be ignored by the state - at the same time, interference in them is permissible only in exceptional cases and should be carried out according to the law;

9) Society and the state are obliged to take care of their disadvantaged citizens: “they are obliged to“ provide a decent remuneration for work to a person who is willing and able to do honest and useful work ”;

10) Future Russia should be built on the principles of federation and self-government ("self-government brought to the level of a federation" - or the principle of "multi-stage federalism") - an example of such a federation can serve, according to Chernyshevsky, the United States of America;

11) According to the form of government, Russia should not be a monarchy or autocracy - a republic is better, but its dignity should not be exaggerated.

The ethics of rational egoism is implemented in life by the heroes of Chernyshevsky's novel "What is to be done?": They can be truly happy only with the happiness of other people. And this is not a sacrifice on their part, not a "feat", but a natural disposition, a norm of life and actions of "new people" who are replacing selfish and greedy people - rude, unenlightened and unreasonable egoists. Thus, the theory of rational egoism had a very eloquent revolutionary - democratic, social meaning: it was supposed to educate in new generations a readiness for any test in the name of high moral ideals, reasonable employment of life.

Chernyshevsky's contribution to Russian social thought and philosophy is truly enormous. In the history of pre-Marxist thought, no one has come as close to scientific socialism as he. It is no coincidence that Lenin defined him as an outstanding thinker, from whose works "breathe with the spirit of the class struggle." At the same time, N.G. Chernyshevsky is not an armchair thinker. He was the inspirer and leader of the entire revolutionary democratic camp of the 1860s. In the history of the Russian liberation movement from Chernyshevsky, there is already a direct path to the revolutionaries - populists and Russian Marxism (suffice it to recall that it was Chernyshevsky who had a significant influence on the formation of the convictions of Plekhanov and Lenin).

Today one can have different attitudes towards the personality of Chernyshevsky, his searches and aspirations. It is hardly justifiable to sneer at him as a fanatic and dogmatist, as the aesthetic writer - emigrant V. Nabokov does in his novel "The Gift", and yet Lenin's judgment that "the gigantic state talent and mind of Chernyshevsky were ruined tsarist autocracy ".

Questions of state and law in the works of G.V. Plekhanov.