The main provisions of liberalism. Liberal political views: history and modernity. Basic features and features

A few years ago, the All-Russian Center for the Study of the public conducted a survey of the population, the main issue of which was: "What is liberalism, and who is such a liberal?". Most of the participants, this issue was misleading, 56% could not give an exhaustive answer. The survey was held in 2012, most likely, today the situation has hardly changed for the better. Therefore, in this article, we will briefly consider the concept of liberalism and all its main aspects for educating the Russian audience.

In contact with

About the concept

There are several definitions describing the concept of this ideology. Liberalism is:

political flow or ideology uniting fans of democracy and parliamentarism;
the worldview, which is characteristic of industrial, defending their rights political nature, as well as entrepreneurial freedom;
implementing the philosophical and political ideas of the theory, which appeared in Western Europe in the 18th century;
the first meaning of the concept was liberty;
tolerance and tolerance of unacceptable actions.

All these definitions can be safely attributed to liberalism, but the main thing is that this term denotes the ideology affecting the device and the state. FROMlatini liberalism translates as freedom. Is all functions and aspects of this flow are really built on freedom?

Freedom or limit

Liberal movement includes such key concepts as good benefit, Freedom of personality and equality of people As part of politics and. What liberal values \u200b\u200bpromotes this ideology?

Common good. If the state protects the rights and freedom of personality, and also protects people from various threats and monitors compliance with the execution of laws, such a device of society can be called reasonable.
Equality. Many shout about the fact that all people are equal, although it is obvious that it is completely wrong. We differ from each other in different aspects: intelligence, social status, physical data, nationality and so on. But liberals imply equality in human capabilities. If the person wants to achieve something in life, no one has the right to prevent this on the basis of racial, social and other points . The principle is such that if you come to make efforts, you will achieve more.
Natural rights. British thinkers Locke and Hobbes came to the idea of \u200b\u200ba person's accessories of three rights from birth: to life, ownership and fortune. It is not difficult to express this for many: no one has the right to take life from a person (only the state for certain misconduct), property is considered as the personal right of ownership of anything, and the right to happiness is the very freedom of choice.

Important! What is liberalization? There is also a concept that means expanding civil liberties and rights in the framework of economic, political, cultural and social life, this is the process when the economy gets rid of the influence of the state.

Principles of liberal ideology:

there is nothing more valuable than human life;
all people in this world are equal;
each has its inalienable rights;
personality and its needs more valuable society as a whole;
the state arises according to the general agreement;
laws and government values \u200b\u200ba person forms independently;
the state is responsible in front of a person, a person in turn - before the state;
the government should be divided, the principle of organizing life in the state based on the Constitution;
only in fair elections can be elected by the government;
humanistic ideals.

These principles of liberalism formulated in the 18th century English philosophers and thinkers. Many of them have not implemented. Most of them seem to be utopia, to which mankind is so like, but it cannot be achieved.

Important! Liberal ideology could be a rescue circle for many countries, but there will always be any "pitfalls" hindering development.

Founders of ideology

What is liberalism? At that time, his every thinker understood his own way. This ideology has absorbed completely different ideas and opinions of thinkers of that time.

It is clear that some of the concepts can contradict each other, but the essence remains the same.

Foreigners of liberalism You can consider English scientists J. Lokki and T. Gobbs (18th century), along with the French writer, the Epoch of Employ, Charl, Montesquie, who was the first to think and expressed his opinion on the freedom of a person in all areas of his activities.

Locke marked the beginning of the existence of legal liberalism and stated that only in a society in which all citizens are free, there may be stability.

Initial theory of liberalism

Followers of classical liberalism were more preferred and paid more attention to the "individual freedom" of a person. The concept of this concept is expressed in the fact that personality should not obey or society or social orders. Independence and equality- These are the main steps on which all liberal ideology stood. Under the word "freedom" then understood the lack of various prohibitions, limits or veto for the implementation of the personality, given the generally accepted rules and laws of the state. That is, that freedom, which would not be challenged the established dogmas.

As the founders of the liberal movement believed, the government should guarantee equality between all its citizens, but a person had to take care of his material situation and status. The restriction of the sphere of government government was the fact that liberalism tried to achieve in turn. According to theory, the only thing that the state should have ensured - is Security and protection of order. That is, the liberals tried to influence the minimum of all its functions to a minimum. The existence of society and power could only be subject to their general subordination to the laws within the state.

It is still clear that the classic liberalism is still clear when in 1929 the terrible economic crisis arose in the United States. His consequences were tens of thousands of bankrupt banks, the death of many people from hunger and other horrors of the economic downturn state.

Economic liberalism

The main concept of this flow was the idea of \u200b\u200bequality between economic laws and natural. The intervention of state power in these laws was prohibited. Adam Smith - the founder of this currentand its basic principles:

for a push of economic development, a personal interest is needed;
state regulation and the existence of monopolies harms the economy;
the growth of the economy needs to be promoted. That is, the government should not interfere in the process of the emergence of new institutions. Enterprises and suppliers acting in the interests of income and within the market of the market imperceptibly sends a "invisible hand." All this is the key to competent satisfaction of the needs of society.

Neoliberalism

This direction was formed in the XIX century and implies a new tendency in, which is in complete non-interference of the government in trade relations between its subjects.

The main principles of neoliberalism are Constitutionalism and equalitybetween all members of society in the country.

Signs of this course: Power should contribute to self-regulation of the economy in the market, and the process of redistribution of finance must first take into account the low-income population layers.

Neoliberalism does not oppose the state regulation of the economy, while classic liberalism denies it. But the process of regulation should include only the free market and competitiveness of subjects for the collateral of economic growth along with social justice. The main idea of \u200b\u200bneoliberalism - Support for foreign trade policyand internal trading to increase the gross income of the state, that is, protectionism.

All political concepts and philosophical movements have its own characteristics, and neoliberalism has not exceeded:

the need for state intervention in the economy. The market must be protected from the possible advent of monopolies, and the competitive environment and freedom are provided;
protecting principles and justice. All citizens must be involved in political processes to maintain the necessary democratic weather;
the government should support existence different economic programsassociated with financial support for social layers with small income.

Briefly about liberalism

Why in Russia distort the concept of liberalism

Output

Now the question is: "What is liberalism?" No longer calls the disturbed dissonance. After all, the understanding of freedom and equality is simply presented under other terms that have its own principles and concepts affecting different areas of the state device, but remaining unchanged in one - only then the state will flourish when it will cease to limit their citizens in many respects.

Liberalism is an ideology that is placed in the head of the development of society of human freedom. State, society, groups, classes are secondary. The task of their existence is only in providing a person of free development. Liberalism proceeds from the fact that, firstly, a person is a reasonable, secondly, in the very nature of a person laid a desire for happiness, success, comfort, joy. Realizing these aspirations, a person will not make evil, for, as reasonable, understands that it will come back to him. So leading your life along the path of mind, a person will strive to improve it not at the expense of other people, but by all other available ways. Only he should not be disturbed. And then, building their own destiny on the principles of mind, conscience, a person will achieve the harmony of all society.

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

The idea of \u200b\u200bliberalism is built on the Old Testament Command: "Do not do another of what you are not fed up"

History of liberalism

Liberalism was born in Western Europe in the era of the bourgeois revolutions of the XVII-HVIII centuries in Nideralndah and England. The principles of liberalism put forward a British teacher and philosopher John Locke in the composition of "two treatises of the Board", in continental Europe, his ideas were supported and developed by such thinkers as Charles Louis Montesquieu, Jean-Baptiste Say, Jean Jacques Russo, Voltaire, American and Great figures French revolutions.

The essence of liberalism

Economic freedom
Freedom of conscience
Political freedoms
Human right
For private property
On defense of the state
Equality of all before the law

"Liberals ... represent the interests of the bourgeoisie, which is necessary for progress and any ordered legal system, compliance with legality, constitution, ensuring some political freedom" (V. I. Lenin)

Crisis of liberalism

- Liberalism as a system of relationship between people and states, like communism, can exist only on a global scale. It is impossible to build a liberal (as well as socialist) society in one separate country. For liberalism is a social system of peaceful, respectable citizens, without coercion to aware of their rights and obligations to the state and society. But peaceful, respectable citizens always lose in a collision with aggressive and unscrupulous. Consequently, they or should try to build a universal liberal world in all ways (which is trying to make the United States today) or refuse most of their liberal views for the sake of preservation in the inviolability of their own little Mirka. Both are no longer liberalism.
- The crisis of the principles of liberalism consists also in the fact that people in their nature can not on time, on reasonable borders, stop. And the freedom of individual, this alpha and Omega liberal ideology turns into human permissiveness.

Liberalism in Russia

In Russia, liberal ideas came with the writings of French philosophers and enlighteners of the late XVIII century. But the authorities were frightened by the Great French Revolution, the authorities began to be active with them, which lasted until the February Revolution of 1917. The ideas of liberalism were the main theme of the disagreements of the Westerners and Slavophiles, the conflict between which, then subsided, then intensifying, continued for more than a century, until the end of the twentieth century. The Westerners were guided by the liberal ideas of the West and called them to Russia, Slavophiles rejected liberal principles, arguing that Russia had a special, separate, not similar to the path of European countries. Historical road. In the 90s of the twentieth century, it seemed that the Westerists wanted, but with the entry of humanity in the information age, when the life of Western democracies ceased to be a secret, source of myths and the subject for imitation of Russians, Slavophiles took revenge. So now the liberal ideas in Russia are clearly not in the trend and is unlikely to return their position in the near future.

from lat. Liberalis is free) - the name of the "family" of ideological and political trends historically developed from rationalistic and educational criticism, which in 17-18 centuries. Western European Corporate Society, political "absolutism" and dictate church in secular life were subjected to. The philosophical foundations of the "members of the liberal family" were always different before incompatibility. Historically the most important among them: 1) the teachings on the "natural rights" of a person and the "public contract" as the foundation of a legitimate political device (J. Locke and others, a public contract); 2) the "Cant paradigm" of the moral autonomy of the Nuemental "I" and the concept of the "legal state" consecutive from it; 3) the ideas of "Scottish Enlightenment" (D. Yum, A. Smith, A. Ferguson, etc.) on the spontaneous evolution of social institutions, movable by the unreasonable scarce of resources in combination with egoism and ingenuity of people related, however, "moral feelings"; utilitarianism (I. Betpam, D. Ricardo, J. S. Mill, et al.) With his program "The greatest happiness for the greatest number of people", considered as calculating maximizers of their own benefits; 5) somehow connected with the hegelev philosophy "Historical Liberalism", approving the freedom of man, but not as something inherent "from birth", but as, according to R. Collingwood, "acquired gradually inspired, because a person comes In the self-aassial possession of a self-person by ... moral progress. " In modified and often eclectic versions, these various philosophical foundations are reproduced in modern discussions within the "liberal family". The main axes of such discussions, around which new groups of liberal theories are developing, moving into the second plan to differences in philosophical grounds, are the following. First, there should be liberalism as its main goal to strive for "restricting the forcing power of any government" (F. Hayek) or this question is a secondary, solved depending on how liberalism copes with its most important task - "maintaining conditions without which is impossible to free practical realization by the person of his abilities "(T. X. Green). The essence of these discussions is the attitude of the state and society, the role, functions and permissible scales of the first to ensure freedom of the development of the individual and the free hostel of people. Secondly, whether liberalism should be "value neutral", a kind of "clean" technique of protecting individual freedom, regardless of which values \u200b\u200bit is expressed (J. ROULZ, B. Akkerman), or it embodies certain values \u200b\u200b(humanity, tolerance and solidarity, justice, etc.), the departure of which and infinite moral relativism are fraught with the most detrimental, including directly political, consequences (W. Galeston, M. Walzer). The essence of this type is the regulatory content of liberalism and the dependence on it of the practical functioning of liberal institutions. Third, the dispute of the "economic" and "ethical" (or political) liberalism. The first is characterized by Formula L. von Mises: "If you condense the entire program of liberalism into one word, then it will be private] property ... All other requirements of liberalism flow out of this fundamental requirement." "Ethical" liberalism argues that the relationship of freedom and private ownership is ambiguous and is not unchanged in different historical contexts. According to B. Krone, freedom "must have the courage to take the means of social progress, which ... are diverse and contradictory," considering the principle of Laissez Faire only as "one of the possible types of economic order".

If various types of liberalism, classical and modern, cannot find a common philosophical denominator and their approaches to key practical problems differ so much, the fact that then allows us to talk about their belonging to one "family"? The prominent Western researchers reject the opportunity to give liberalism to the Unified Definition: His story only offers a picture of "breaks, randomness, diversity ... thinkers, indifferently mixed in a bunch under the sign" Liberalism "(D. Gray). The community of various in all other types of types of liberalism opens if they are considered not from their philosophical or political and software content, but as an ideology that determines the function of which does not describe reality, but to act in reality, mobilizing and directing the energy of people for certain purposes. In various historical situations, the successful implementation of this feature requires access to various philosophical ideas and nominations of various software plants in relation to the same market, "minimization" or expansion of the state, etc. In other words, the only general definition of liberalism can only be the fact that It is a function of implementing some values \u200b\u200btargets specifically manifested in each specific situation. The dignity and measure of the "perfection" of liberalism are determined not by the philosophical depth of his doctrines or the faithfulness of one or another "sacral" formulations about the "naturalness" of human rights or "inviolability" of private property, and its practical (ideological) ability to bring society to their goals and not give It "breaks" to the state that is radically alien to them. The story has repeatedly demonstrated that philosophically poor liberal teachings turned out from this point of view much more efficiently for their philosophically sophisticated and sophisticated "counterparts" (we comply with at least the political "fate" of the views of the Fathers Fathers of the United States as they are set out in the "federalist" and others . documents, on the one hand, and the German Cantianism - on the other). What are the sustainable goal values \u200b\u200bof liberalism who received various philosophical substantiations in its history and embodied in different practical action programs?

1. Individualism - in the sense of the "primater" of the moral dignity of a person in front of any encroachments on it from any team, no matter what considerations of expediency such encroachments are neither supported. Understandable about. Individualism does not exclude the a priori of human self-sacrifice, if he recognizes the requirements of the team "Fair". Individualism is not listed in a logically necessary way and with those ideas about an "atomized" society, within which, on the basis of which he was originally approved in the history of liberalism.

2. Egalitarism - in the sense of recognition for all people equal moral value and denial of importance for organizing the most important legal and political institutions of society of any "empirical" differences between them (in terms of origin, property, profession, gender, etc.). Such egalitarianism is not necessarily justified according to the formula "All from birth." For liberalism, Introducing the problem of equality in the logic ~ "~" Everything should be considered morally and politically equal, "regardless of whether the introduction of the" Natural Rights ", Gegelian dialectics of the" slave and master "or utilitarian calculation of its own strategic benefits.

3. Universalism - in the sense of recognizing that the requirements of individual dignity and equality (in the indicated understanding) cannot be rejected through references to the "immanent" features of those or other cultural and historical groups of people. Universalism should not be linked to the ideas about the outside theory "human nature" and the same understanding of all the "dignity" and "equality". It can be interpreted and so that in every culture - in accordance with the nature of the human development inherent in it - there must be the right to demand respect for the dignity and equality, as they are understood in their historical certainty. It is not universal that people in different contexts require, and how they require what they require, namely, not as slaves seeking mercy, in which the owners can rightfully refuse them, but as decent people who have the right What they require.

4. Meliorism as approving the possibility of correction and improvement of any public institutions. Meliorism does not necessarily coincide with the idea of \u200b\u200bprogress as a directional and deterministic process, with which it has been historically connected for a long time. Meliorism admits various ideas about the ratio of conscious and spontaneous began in the change of society - in the range from the spontaneous evolution of Hayekado rationalistic constructivism of Bentama.

This consulation of the values \u200b\u200bof the goals of liberalism declares itself as a modern ideology other than earlier political teachings. The border here can be indicated by the conversion of the central problem. All the limited political idea of \u200b\u200bone way or another focused on the question: "What is the best state and what should be his citizens?" In the center of liberalism, another question: "How may the state possibly, if the freedom of people who can be poured into a destructive time remarks, dismissed?" All liberalism, figuratively speaking, follows from two formulas Gobbs: "There is no absolute good, devoid of any relationship to anything or to someone" (i.e., the question of the "best state" is deprived of meaning) and " The nature of good and evil depends on the combination of the conditions currently available "(i.e.," the right "and" good "policy can be determined only as the function of this situation). The change of these central questions and determined the general contour of the liberal political thinking, outlined by the following lines of positions: 1) so that some state could take place, it should be included anyone who concerns, and not only virtuous or other special Signs that make them suitable for political participation (as it was, for example, Aristotle). This is the liberal principle of equality, which was filled with content during the history of liberalism, progressively extending all new groups of people excluded from politics at previous stages. It is clear that such a spread occurred through a democratic struggle against the previously established institutional forms of liberalism with the mechanisms of discrimination inherent in them, and not due to self-relocating the "immanent principles" of liberalism. But another thing is important: the liberal state and ideology were capable of such development, while earlier political forms (the same antique policy) broke while trying to expand their initial principles and distribute them to the groups of oppressed; 2) If there is no absolute good, self-evident for all policy participants, then the achievement of the world involves the admission of freedom to follow their own ideas about good. This assumption "technically" is implemented through the establishment of channels (procedural and institutional), according to which the people are satisfied with the people of their aspirations. Initially, freedom comes into the modern world is not in the form of a "good gift", but in the form of a terrible challenge themselves the basics of the hostel of people from their violent self. Liberalism had to recognize this coarse and dangerous freedom and socialize it according to the primitive formula of "freedom from", which such expressively transmits early liberalism. Such recognition and something that flowed out for political theory and practice is necessary for the realization of the very possibility of living together people in the conditions of modernity. (In the sense of the hegelev formula, "Freedom is necessary", i.e., freedom has become a necessity for modernity, which, of course, has little common with the "dialectic and materialistic" interpretation of this formula F. Engels - freedom as disabled). But the need to recognize freedom in its gross form does not say that liberalism does not go further in understanding and practice of freedom. If ethically liberalism sought to something to something, then it was to ensure that freedom itself has become an end in itself for people. The formula of this new understanding of freedom as "freedom for" can be considered the words A. Detokville: "The one who is looking for something else, besides her, created for slavery"; 3) if freedom is recognized (and in the first, and in its second understanding), then the only way of the state of the state is the consent of its organizers and participants. The meaning and strategic goal of a liberal policy is to achieve consensus as the only real foundation of the modern state. Movement in this direction - with all its failures, contradictions, the use of instruments of manipulation and suppression, as well as with the moments of historical creativity and the implementation of the new opportunities of the Emancipation of people, is the actual history of liberalism, its only meaningful rich definition.

Lit.: Leonpüvent V.V. The story of liberalism in Russia. 1762-1914. M., 1995; Dunnj. Liberalism.- Idem., Western Political Theory in The Face Fue Future. Cambr .. 1993; Galston W.A. Liberalism and Public Morality.- Liberals on Liberalism, ED. By A. Damico. Totowa (N.J.), 1986; Gray). Liberalism. Milton Keynes, 1986; Hayekf.a. The Constitution F Liberty. L., 1990; Holmes S. The Permanent Structure of Antiliberal Thougoht.- Liberalism and The Moral Life, Ed. By N. Rosenblum, Cambr. (Mass), 1991; Mills W. C. Liberal Values \u200b\u200bin the Modem VBRld.- Idem. Power, Politics and People, Ed. By I. Horowitz. N.Y, 1963; Rawlsj. Political Liberalism. N. Y, 1993; RUGGIERO G. DE. THE HISTORY OF LIBERALISM. L., 1927; Wallerstein 1. After Liberalism. N. Y., 1995, Pans 2, 3.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

1.2 Main representatives of liberalism and their theory

One of the representatives of those who have become from the origins of liberalism is John Locke. John Locke (1632-1704) - English philosopher (founder of empiricalism in the theory of knowledge) and the political thinker. Born in the family of notary. He graduated from College of Oxford University. This university then taught Greek language and moral philosophy. At the same time continued to be interested in natural sciences, especially medicine.

In 1667, Locke became a home physician and trustee Lord A. Esley (Graph Shertsbury) - the future leader of the Vigi party who opposed the expansion of the Royal Putrogatives. Locke was in the center of great politics. He took part in a failed plot against King Charles II and was forced to emigrate in the Netherlands, where he joined the supporters of Wilhelm Orange. In 1689, when Prince Orange joined the English throne, Locke returned from emigration and published two works at once, who brought him wide fame: "Experience about human understanding" (1690) and "Two treatises about the Board" (1690).

"Two treatise on the board" - work from the field of political philosophy. In it, Locke laid the foundations of the European concept of liberalism based on the recognition of the inalienable and inalienable rights of individuals and separation of the authorities, opposing the CE concept of absolutism. Locke is also at the origins of the ideological justification of the rule of law.

This work, which had a huge impact on many political thinkers and the constitutional development of a number of countries, was published anonymously, and Locke - from caution - did not seek to recognize his authorship. The first treatise of this work was devoted to the actual criticism of the theory of the Divine Right of Sovereigns to Power. In the second treatise, Locke justified the theory of natural law, public contract and separation of the authorities.

On Locke, until the emergence of the state, people are in a natural state. In pre-government dormitory there is no "war against all." Individuals, without requiring a matter of permission and did not depend on anyone who will be freely managed by their own personality and their property. The equality is dominated, "in which every power and any right is mutual, no one has more than the other." In order for the norms (laws) of communication, acting in a natural state, were observed, nature endowed every opportunity to judge the transmitted law and expose them to relevant punishments. However, there are no bodies in their natural state that could impartially solve disputes between people, to carry out proper punishment of those responsible in violation of natural laws, etc. All this generates an insecurity situation, destabilizes the usual dimension life.

In order to reliably ensure natural rights, equality and freedom, personality protection and property, people agree to form a political community, establish a state.

Locke especially emphasizes the moment of consent: "Any peaceful education of the state was based on the consent of the people."

The state is, on Locke, a set of people connected to one whole under the auspices of the established general law and creating a court, eligible to settle conflicts between them and punish criminals. From all other forms of collectivity (families, the Lords, economic units), the state is characterized by the fact that only it expresses political power, i.e. The right in the name of the public good to create laws (providing for various sanctions) to regulate and preserve property, as well as the right to apply the strength of the community to enforce these laws and protect the state from the attack from the outside.

The state is the social institution that embodies and sends the function of public (in the local political) power. It is incorrect, of course, to remove this one of the allegedly congenital, the data itself to every individual person of the properties of the permissions to take care of itself (plus about the rest of humanity) and punish the misconduct of others. However, Locke in the indicated "natural" properties of the individual saw the initial right and source as "legislative and executive power, as well as the governments themselves and societies." Here we have a bright manifestation of that individualism, which permeates the content of almost all liberal political and legal doctrines.

The teachings of J. Locke about the state and the right was a classic expression of ideology of non-Russian revolutions with all its strong and weak parties. It has absorbed many achievements of political and legal knowledge and advanced scientific thought of the XVII century. In it, these achievements were not simply assembled, but deepened and revised, taking into account the historical experience, which gave the revolution in England. Thus, they have become suitable in order to respond to the high practical and theoretical demands of the political and legal life of the next, the XVIII century - the centuries of enlightenment and the two largest bourgeois revolutions of the new time in the West: French and American.

The text of the origins of liberalism stood Montesquieu. Montesquieu Charles Louis de (1689-1755) - French lawyer and political philosopher, representative of the ideological flow of Education XVIII century. Comes from the noble family. In Jesuit College, he received solid training in classical literature, and then for several years he studied jurisprudence in Bordeaux and Paris. From 1708 he began to engage in lawyers. In 1716 he inherited from uncle name, condition, as well as the post of chairman of the Bordeaux parliament (judicial institution of that time). For almost ten years, it is trying to combine the responsibilities of the judge with the occupations of a versatile researcher and writer. Since 1728, after its election to the members of the French Academy, travels through Europe (Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Holland, England), studying the state structure, laws and customs of these countries.

Political and legal ideals of the enlightenment are initially developed by Montesquiece in its works: "Persian letters" and "reflections on the causes of greatness and fall of the Romans". From 1731, he devotes himself to writing the fundamental labor "on the spirit of laws", which will be anonymously published in Switzerland in 1748. The work of "on the spirit of laws" is unprecedented for that time work on jurisprudence.

The worldview of Montesquieu was formed under the influence of the works of the French scientist J. Boden on the history of the right, works of the Italian thinker J. Vico on the philosophy of history, as well as the works of the English philosopher J. Lokk. A special influence on Montesquieu was given natural science XVIII century. Montesquieie sought to detect objectively existing dependencies in the formation of laws, based on the facts obtained empirically. Methods of observation and comparisons become fundamental for him.

The principled novelty of legal thinking Montesquieu is to use the system of the system of research. He considers the laws in cooperation with other elements of the environment: "Many things manage people: climate, religion, laws, principles of government, examples of past, moral, customs; as a result of all this is formed by the overall spirit of the people." All these factors are a chain, the links of which are inextricably linked. Therefore, it considers Montquiece, the gain value of one can only occur due to the weakening of the value of the other: "The more enhanced in the people, the effect of one of these reasons is, the more resolved the action of others. Following such a presentation, it is logical to assume that laws can become an important element in society. Montesquieu, like all other enlighteners, laid huge hopes for reasonable laws as guarantees of human freedom.

Freedom, considered Montesquieu, can be ensured only by laws: "Freedom is the right to do everything that is allowed by law." But not all sorts of laws are able to provide freedom, but only those that are accepted by the national representation operating regularly: "Freedom would not have been in the case if the legislative assembly was not collected during a considerable period of time.

Human freedom, according to Montesquieu, primarily depends on criminal and tax legislation. "Freedom political," wrote Montesquieu, "lies in our security or, at least, in our confidence that we are safe." This can be achieved only under the condition of the justice of criminal and criminal procedural laws: "The laws allowing the death of a person on the basis of the testimony of the witness alone, and the dismissal for freedom. Mind requires two witnesses, because the witness that claims, and the accused, which denies, balance each other, and you need a third party to solve the case.

The unconditional dependence for Montesquieu also exists between human freedom and tax legislation: "Popular tax is more characteristic of slavery, a tax on goods - freedom, because it is not so directly affecting the personality of the taxpayer."

The laws on which human freedom depends is made by state power. However, it believes Montesquieu, this power is carried out by people and for the experience of centuries it is well known that "every person who has power is inclined to abuse it." To avoid abuse of power, it is necessary to distribute it between different bodies: "In order not to be able to abuse power, such an order of things, in which various authorities could mutually restrain each other". Montesquieu has developed the theory of the separation of the authorities, based on the existing state system of England, seen with his own eyes.

Montesquieu considered it necessary that in any modern state there was a power legislative, the government executive and the power of the judicial.

The political and legal ideas of Montesquieu had an enormous influence on the formation of liberalism, as well as for entire generations of theoretics of law, legislators and politicians, they firmly entered public legal consciousness.

The ideas of the early representative of the liberalism of John Locke Montescia and others were continued, this was due to the fact that the last third of the XVIII century. - Time when in Europe, capitalism has flourished and flourished. Many factors contributed to this circumstance, and many characteristic phenomena accompanied him. The European political and legal thought described in his own way, explained and justified the large socio-historical change in the country. It was hardly central to the subject of a beneficial role of private ownership, its protection and promotion, the topic of activism of the individual, guarantees of the inviolability of the sphere of private livelihoods of people, etc. The conviction prevailed that the actions of the individual as a private owner are moving both spontaneous impulses and deliberate Sober calculation on extracting maximum personal benefits from its actions. The calculation could have a wide range: from the desire to satisfy purely egoistic, solely individual interest before the desire to reasonably combine its own position with the position of other individuals, other members of society, in order to achieve a joint, common benefit to achieve their own needs.

In the development of this kind of submissions, Bentam (1748-1832) was noticeable. He appeared by the ancestor of the theory of utilitarianism, which made a number of social and philosophical ideas of T. Gobbs, J. Lokka, D. Yuma, French materialists of the XVIII century. Note four postulates underlying it. The first: getting pleasure and eliminating suffering make up the meaning of human activity. The second: utility, the ability to be a means of solving any task is the most significant evaluation criterion for all phenomena. Third: Morality is created by all the fact that it focuses on the acquisition of the greatest happiness (good) for the largest number of people. Fourth: Maximization of universal benefits by establishing harmony of individual and public interests there is a goal of human development.

These postulates served Bentam Supports when analyzing them policies, states, rights, legislation, etc. His political and legal views are set out in "Introduction to the foundation of morality and legislation" (1789), in the "Fragment of the Government" (1776), " Guidelines of the Constitutional Code for all states "(1828)," Deontology, or Moral Science "(1815-1834) and others.

For a long time and firmly Bentams are listed in a number of pillars of European liberalism of the XIX century. And not without reason. But Bentamov liberalism does not quite ordinary face. It is considered to be the core of liberalism about the freedom of an individual, originally inherent on the autonomous space of activities, on the self-affirmation of the individual, provided by private property and political and legal establishments. Bentam

prefers to be discussed not about the freedom of an individual; In the focus of his attention, the interests and security of the personality. A person himself must take care of himself, about his well-being and not rely on someone else an external assistance. Only he must determine what his interest is, what is its benefit. Do not oppress individuals, advises Bentam, "Do not let others oppress them and you will make enough for society."

From here, the hostile Bentamovsky lunge is understood against freedom: "There are few words that would be so detrimental as the words freedom and its derivatives."

Freedom and personal rights were for Bentam the true incarnations of evil, and therefore he did not recognize and rejected them, as the school rejected the school and political and legal acts created under its impact. Human rights, Bentam, the essence of nonsense, and integral human rights - just nonsense on stilts. The French Declaration of Human Rights and Citizen, according to Bentam, "Metaphysical Work", part (articles) of which it is possible to divide into three classes:

a) Neelectric, b) false, c) at the same time non-communal, and false. He claims that "these natural, inalienable and sacred rights never existed ... they are inconsistent with the preservation of any constitution ... Citizens, demanding them, asked only anarchy ...".

The sharply critical attitudes of Bentama regarding the school of natural law expressed and in denial them the idea of \u200b\u200bdistinguishing the rights and law. The reason for such a denial of this idea is rather not so much theoretical as pragmatic-political. Those who distinguish between the law and the law, it is represented in that in this way they attach the anti-offensive meaning right.

"In this illegal sense, the word is the greatest enemy of the mind and the most terrible destroyer of the government ... Instead of discussing the laws in their consequences, instead of determining, they are good or bad, these fanatics consider them in relation to this imaginary natural law. i.e. they replace the judgments of the experience of all chimers of their imagination. "

The merit of Bentama - in his desire to free legislation from obsolete, archaic elements, bring it into line with the socio-economic and political change in society; He wanted to simplify and improve the legislative process, proposed to make a judicial procedure more democratic, and the defense in court was also available to the poor. The main common goal of the entire social system, on Bentam, is the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people.

England - the Motherland of European Liberalism - gave in the XIX century. The world of many worthy representatives. But among them, the John Stewart Mill (1806-1873) is allocated for the subsequent fate of the ideological life of the epoch, on the subsequent fate of the liberal-democratic thought (1806-1873). The views of this classic of liberalism on the state, power, right, the law are set forth by him in such works as "On Freedom" (1859), "Reflections on the Representative Board" (1861), "The foundations of political economy with some of their applications for social philosophy" ( 1848).

Starting his scientific and literary activities as a supporter of Bentamov utilitarianism, Mill then departs from him. For example, he came to the conclusion that it was impossible to basket all the morality only at the adultery of the personal economic benefit of the individual and the faith in the fact that the satisfaction of the mercenary interest of each individual person would not automatically lead to the well-being of everyone. In his opinion, the principle of achieving personal happiness (pleasure) can "work", if only it is inseparable, organically connected with another leading idea: the idea of \u200b\u200bthe need to coordinate interests, while harmonizing not only the interests of individual individuals, but also the interests of social.

For Mill, the orientation is characterized by the design of "moral", and therefore (in his understanding), the right, models of the Company's political and legal structure of the Company. He himself speaks about it like this: "I now looked at the choice of political institutions rather from moral and educational points of view than from the point of view of material interests. The highest manifestation of morality, virtue, by Mille, is the perfect nobility, which is an expression in the mobility for the sake of the other , in selfless service society.

All this can be a lot of free person. Freedom of the individual is the "command height", with which Mill considers key political and legal problems for himself. Their list is traditional for liberalism: the prerequisites and the content of the freedom of human personality, freedom, order and progress, the optimal political system, the boundaries of state interventionism, etc.

Individual freedom, in the interpretation of Mill, means the absolute independence of a person in the sphere of the actions that directly concern only his itself; It means the possibility of a person to be within the borders of this sphere Mr. Over himself and act in her own understanding. As the faces of individual freedom, Mill allocates, in particular, the following points: Freedom of thought and opinions (expressed internship), freedom to act together with other individuals, freedom of choosing and persecution of life goals and independent arrangement of personal destiny.

All these and related freedoms are absolutely necessary conditions for the development, self-effectiveness of the individual and at the same time barrier from all encroachments from outside the personality autonomy.

The threat of such autonomy proceeds, in Mille, not from the institutions of the state, not "only from government tyranny", but also from the "Tiracy of the Opinion dominating in society", the views of the majority. Spiritual and moral despotism, often practiced by the majority of society, can leave in their cruelty behind "even what we find in the political ideals of the most stringent disciploters from among the ancient philosophers."

The blasting of the Mill's despotism of public opinion is very symptomatic. It is a kind of indicator of what has begun to be approved in the middle of the XIX century. In Western Europe, the "mass democracy" is fraught with the leveling of personality, the "averaging" of a person, the suppression of individuality.

Mill faithfully caught this danger. From the above, it is not at all implies that neither the state nor public opinion is in principle to implement legal persecution, moral coercion.

Both are justified if they are warned with their help (stopped) the actions of the individual who harm the people around him, society. It is significant in this connection that Mill in no way identifies individual freedom with a self-fence, permissiveness and other asocial things. When he talks about the freedom of individuals, he has in mind the people already introduced to civilization, the evil industry, which have achieved some noticeable level of civilian-moral development.

Freedom of individual, private person is primarily in relation to political structures and their functioning. This is a decisive, by Mille, the circumstance puts the state dependence on the will and the ability of people to create and establish a normal (according to the European civilization standards achieved) a human hostel. Recognition of such a dependency encourages Mill to revise the early liberal point of view on the state. He refuses to see in him the institution, bad by its very nature, from which only undergoes, the a priori suffers good, consistently virtuous society. "In the end," Mill concludes, "the state is always no better and no worse than the individuals, its components." The statehood is such as society as a whole, and therefore it is primarily responsible for its condition. The main condition for the existence of a decent state is the self-improvement of the people, the high qualities of people, members of the society for which the state is intended.

Right - the problem of confrontation between the "enemy". The main enemy for them was communism, and the main task is the liberation of Europe from communism. According to the theorists of this direction, the main danger of the modern political consciousness treated with liberalism is the underestimation of the danger and inability to hostility: the process of moral decline in Western societies has come so far that the struggle is not for life, and ...

Ideology is hampered by the complexity, diversity and contradictory of socio-political processes. 4. The focus on the integration of society. Expressing the interests of a specific social group or class, political ideology aims to unite society as a whole. The most vividly integration function is manifested in national ideologies seeking to rally all the representatives of the nation ...

Liberal ideology is a popular teaching, the basic principles of which were formed in the 17th century. Its occurrence directly connected with which occurred in the 17-18th centuries. There was a struggle with the remnants of feudalism, characteristic of that time. There was a formation of capitalism. Accordingly, the new era was required by the doctrine that would correspond to the spirit of the times, since the previous basic political ideologies ceased to cope with their task. They became the so-called liberalism.

This ideology was formed under the influence of the works of such scientists as J. Mill, J. Lokk, A. Smith and many others. The basic principles of this teaching were made to the Declaration of the Sample 1789, as well as in the published in 1791.

What basic ideas carries such a popular current as a liberal ideology? The fundamental principle is that human rights and freedoms are more prioritized than the needs of the state and society. That is, liberalism proclaimed individualism. The dominant link in this teaching is considered that it is possible to safely implement entrepreneurial activities. The basic principle of liberalism is also the importance and priority of private property before the state.

Consider the main signs of this teaching. First, the liberal ideology involves the individual freedom of citizen. Secondly, the defense of all major human rights is important. Thirdly, this is the freedom to carry out entrepreneurial activities and the priority of private ownership of property. Fourth, it is a great importance of equality of opportunities than Fifth, this is the division of civil society and the state. Sixth, this is the legal equality of people. Seventh, these are free elections for all branches of power. Eighth, this is the importance of a person's privacy and a guarantee of non-interference in it from the state.

It is worth noting that the classical liberal ideology led to some negative phenomena. First, it is a big difference between the poor and rich. Secondly, it is unlimited competition, which led to the absorption of small organizations larger. In economics and politics began to prevail a monopoly, which contradicted the main ideas of liberalism.

The new "flourishing" of this teaching began in the 20th century. At this time, after numerous discussions, some of the ideas of liberalism were revised. The doctrine itself was renamed. Now it is called "neoliberalism." Consider its differences from classical teaching. A new liberal political ideology implies consent between subordinates and managers. It carries the ideas of democracy, that is, the obligation to participate citizens in political life. Improved teaching takes into account the importance of government regulation in the social and economic field (including the restriction of the formation of monopolies). Neoliberalism implies the provision of certain in particular, the right to pensions, work and education. Teaching involves protecting people from various negative consequences and influences of the market system.

Advanced liberalism is popular in most developed countries. Neoliberalism serves as if the foundation for the formation of the state, which ensures the legal equality of citizens, the normal development of the market economy and the guarantee of the provision of fundamental freedoms to each person. At the moment, this doctrine is considered one of the main among political ideologies.