The crisis of classical ideologies at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. and search for new models of social development

The crisis of classical ideologies at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. and search for new models of social development. Social liberalism, social democracy, Christian democracy.

The main types of political ideologies that are defined by science as classical include liberalism, conservatism, and socialism.
Conservatism as a political ideology is a system of political consciousness that prefers the old system of government to a new one, as well as the principles of political participation, attitudes towards the state, personality, and social structure. Conservatism considers it necessary to maintain the stability of the social structure in its unchanged form. Its main features: the recognition of the imperfection of human nature and the existence of a universal moral and religious order, the belief in the inequality of people from birth, the need for a class and social hierarchy. This manifests radicalism, uncharacteristic of conservatism, the desire for forceful methods of resolving conflicts, although conservatism is confident in the ability of politics to alleviate tension between social strata.
By the beginning of the twentieth century. the objective prerequisites for the existence of protective traditional conservatism were exhausted. With the deepening of modernization processes, the reduction of traditional social groups and the strengthening of the main classes of industrial society, the conservative ideology was deprived of its former protective pathos.
Neoconservatism recognizes the need for state intervention in the economy, but assigns a significant role to market mechanisms of regulation. In the political doctrine of neoconservatism there are a number of priority provisions: the subordination of the individual to the state, ensuring the political and spiritual community of the nation. The state of neoconservatives should be based on moral principles, provide the individual with the necessary living conditions on the basis of law and order, while developing institutions civil society maintaining a balance between man and nature. At the same time, there is always a readiness of neoconservatism to use extremely radical means in relations with the enemy.

The term "liberalism" comes from the Latin "free", "pertaining to freedom". That is why all definitions of liberalism include the ideas of personal freedom.
Since its inception, liberalism has defended a critical attitude towards the state, the principles of political responsibility of citizens, religious tolerance, and humanism. The complex of ideas of classical liberalism includes:
in social sphere: the assertion of the absolute value of the human personality and the equality of all people, the recognition of inalienable human rights to life, freedom, property;
in the economy: recognition of private property, on the basis of which the public economy is based, the demand for the abolition of restrictions and regulations by the state;
in the political sphere: recognition of human rights, separation of legislative and executive powers, recognition of competition.
The main problem of liberal ideology has always been the determination of the permissible degree and nature of state interference in a person's private life, the combination of democracy and freedom.
At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. First of all, in those countries of Europe that were engulfed by the processes of accelerated, "catching up" modernization, large-scale reforms began in the socio-economic and political spheres, designed to prevent the transformation of these countries into the periphery of the industrialized world. But a direct perception of the experience of liberal transformations, an orientation towards the principles of classical liberalism threatened the power of the ruling elite of these countries - the direct initiator of the ongoing reforms. The liberal project did not correspond to the peculiarities of political culture this society, the specifics of mass consciousness.
Attempts to resolve these issues and bring to life the ideas of classical liberalism led to the emergence in the 20th century of the concept of "new liberalism" or "neoliberalism". Neoliberalists are making attempts to reform classical liberalism, changing its form and ideological content. The political program of the neoliberals was based on the ideas of the need for the participation of the masses in the political process, the agreement between the rulers and the ruled. In general, neoliberalism tries to soften some of the extremes in the ideas of liberalism.

The emergence of socialism is connected with the centuries-old desire of the public masses for social justice, social protection of the individual. During the period of development of industrial capitalism, which led to the growth of the class of wage workers, it became necessary to express and protect the interests of this class. In this regard, doctrines are being formed that provide for a radical change in the structure of society, the replacement of capitalism by socialism without the exploitation of the masses by the bourgeoisie. With the spread of these ideas among the workers, they began to be called socialist ideas and theories.
Followers believed that socialism is a society whose banner is inscribed "Everything in the name of man, everything for the good of man." This is a society where:
the means of production are in the hands of the people, the oppression of man by man, social oppression, poverty and illiteracy of millions of people are forever finished;
scientific and technological progress does not lead to unemployment, but to a steady increase in the well-being of the people;
secured equal right for labor and its remuneration in accordance with the principle “From each according to his ability to each according to his work”;
national inequality has been eliminated, equality, friendship and brotherhood of all nations have been approved;
the ideas of freedom, human rights, the unity of rights and duties is ensured, the same laws and norms of morality, one discipline for all, there are more and more favorable conditions for the comprehensive development of the individual;
a socialist way of life has developed based on social justice, collectivism and mutual assistance, giving a person confidence in the future.
In general, socialism underestimates and even completely denies the importance of the economic freedom of individuals, competition and unequal remuneration for labor as a prerequisite for growth. material well-being person and society.

Social liberalism is a kind of [Download file to view link] that advocates (as opposed to [Download file to view link]) government intervention in economic processes. Bordered by [ Download file to view link ].
Unlike classical liberalism, which considered the market as a self-regulating category and had a negative attitude towards the possibility of regulating economic and social relations,
Social-liberals believe that for the implementation in practice of the main principle of liberalism, ensuring the right of the individual to self-determination and self-realization, only his own efforts are not always enough. Equalization of starting opportunities is impossible without the participation of the state, and it is the state that should ensure the redistribution of a part of the social product in favor of socially weak members of society, supporting them and thereby contributing to the harmonization of social relations and strengthening social and political stability. However, in contrast to various varieties of [Download file to view link] ideology, social liberals are committed to [Download file to view link] type of economy.
According to social liberals, the state is obliged to intervene in economic processes in order to combat monopolism and maintain a competitive market environment. Society must have legal grounds, if the income does not correspond to the contribution of a person to the common good, to withdraw part of this income through taxes and redistribute it to social needs. Improving the living conditions of the poorest sections of society will contribute to the growth of the domestic market and economic growth.
The application of these approaches, according to social liberals, should mitigate conflicts in society and gradually transform "capitalism of the era of free competition" into a society with a "social economy" based on private property and regulated market relations.

Christia
nskaya demokra
It is independent of the [ Download file to view link ] political movement advocating a solution to the [ Download file to view link ] and [ Download file to view link ] issues while adhering to the [ Download file to view link ] principles.
According to the original doctrine, Christian democracy called for harmony, avoiding the extremes of both liberalism and socialism.
Christian Democrats share a number of values ​​[ Download file to view link ]: respect for tradition, recognition of the imperfections of man and society, [ Download file to view link ], [ Download file to view link ], private property, emphasis on due process and okay. However, they often disagree with conservatives on issues such as [Download file to view link], [Download file to view link], the possibility of structural change in society.
Christian Democrats agree with [Download file to view link] on the need for a welfare state and limiting the market, but they support [Download file to view link] and reject the idea of ​​[Download file to view link].
Christian Democrats exhibit [ Download file to view link ] in moral terms and adherence to the principles of [ Download file to view link ]. They consider [Download file to view link] as one of the foundations of society, but believe that property should be used [Download file to view link] in an acceptable way. They also advocate [Download file to view link] as long as [Download file to view link] individuals and community organizations.

Social Democracy direction in [ Download file to view link ] and the labor movement, advocating the transition to a socially just society by reforming the bourgeois; stands for the preservation of capitalist relations and their improvement.
Social Democracy emphasizes social justice, [ Download file to view link ] strategically important enterprises, state intervention in the economy, social partnership between workers and employers, [ download file to view link ], ideological pluralism, belief in the principles of freedom.
Social Democracy borders on [ Download the file to view the link ]:
1) the principle of state intervention in economic relations; 2) equalization of starting opportunities thanks to the state tool for the redistribution of benefits and support for socially vulnerable groups of citizens.

First of all, the classification of ideologies can be carried out according to the stages of its development. Interpreting political ideology as an ideal construction that reflects the interests of individual communities of social groups, the so-called classical ideologies: liberalism, conservatism and socialism. All these ideologies have long roots in European social thought, are based on the values ​​of Western civilization and have a long history of their existence, thanks to which these doctrines developed, evolved, acquiring new maxims and borrowing some ideas from each other. But the emergence of political ideologies in the political space is associated with the emergence of political parties and organizations.

liberal ideology originated in modern times and was fed by the ideas of the French Enlightenment, the Great French and American revolutions about the freedom of the individual, the rule of law, civil society that limits the state, and the creation of conditions for the realization of human rights. The ideal of the socio-political structure of liberalism is a parliamentary republic or a parliamentary monarchy. Main value liberalism - the individual, his free development and self-realization through their own efforts and talents, but thanks to equal opportunities. In the economy, priority is given to private property. These priorities were reflected in the works of such classics of liberal thought as D. Locke, A. Smith, A. Tocqueville, C. Montesquieu, J. S. Mill. In the XX century. liberalism especially developed in the works of X. Belloc, F. Teitland, B. Russell, who formed a separate branch called "pluralism". In the same period, the economic foundations of liberalism, a kind of liberal manifesto of modernity, was formulated by M. Friedman in his concept of a monetary economy, which justifies the reduction of state intervention in the economy.

Pluralism and neoliberalism in this case are focused on expanding the practices and forms of political and civil participation of citizens in public life, on the need for the existence of various organizations, associations, interest groups within civil society within the framework of a developing democratic structure, which complements and enriches the classical political representation in the conditions of parliamentary democracies.

It should be noted that modern ideological thought does not exclude such forms as, for example, social liberalism, based on the adoption of a number of ideas of the welfare state, which implies a certain degree of nationalization of the economy and the provision of social guarantees.

modern socialism(especially in its political manifestations) includes many different currents. Obviously, the socio-political model of the European social democracy differs significantly from the model of the Latin American socialists or from the Chinese communists. At the same time, it was the socialist ideology that significantly changed the socio-political map of the 20th century. The socio-political ideal of socialists is based on the assumption that the basic unit of society is a social group. This is the ideology of collectivism in the first place. Following this logic, the power in the state should be wholly or to a greater extent belong to the working people, i.e. direct producers of material and (or) spiritual goods, directly or through the representation procedure. A state based on the principles of election and representativeness (parliamentary) through various mechanisms, the development of civil society, local and territorial self-government and management of labor collectives, ensures a high degree of participation of the population in the political and social life. The split in the left ideology occurred at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries, when the left radical communist wing and social democracy were formed.

Note that at the beginning of the XX century. it was the left that came up with projects of social reconstruction that actually changed the world. Socialism and socialist values ​​fit into the political practice of Western civilization in such a way that it is possible not only to name the 20th century after R. Dahrendorf. a century of social democracy, but also a century of realized social utopia.

The socialist area that expanded after the Second World War, on the one hand, and the formation of welfare states, on the other, demonstrated different options and ways of implementing left-wing ideas in society.

The proclaimed values ​​of both the communist and socialist wings of the left were social justice, freedom and equality of chance, solidarity and social responsibility. Having different content in the programs and political practices of the West and the East, these maxims were equally included in the political discourse of the left. However, since the time of Bernstein, the social democratic and communist trends have diverged in terms of instrumental values, where the main line of disputes has been over the question of how to achieve an ideal or optimal social order. Revolutionary measures for some and evolution for others - this is what separated socialists and communists on different sides of the barricades. Other demarcation lines of disputes were questions about the limits of the nationalization of state property, about pluralism in political life and the multi-party system, about the limits of the use of violence and the dictatorship of the proletariat, the relationship between individual freedom and the good of all, personal and social principles.

Socialists and social democrats throughout the 20th century. they did not share communist ideas about the dictatorship and hegemony of the proletariat, about the eradication of private property, about the permissibility of terror and violence in a dictatorship, just as they did not accept many components of real socialism. As for the attitude to state property, modern socialists and social democrats have abandoned the once-seeming classical idea that state, public and (or) other types of non-private property should be the predominant form of property.

During the 20th century, on the one hand, communist regimes were formed, and communism ceased to be just an idea and turned into a practice of real economic and political transformation of society. However, the widespread use of authoritarian and totalitarian practices has largely compromised the leftist idea. The disregard for the right to property was accompanied by disregard for other human rights against the background of the growth of the state-bureaucratic machine and very mediocre economic results.

On the other hand, after the Second World War, the Social Democrats incorporated into political structures, actively participated in parliamentary activities, began to form governments in most European countries and in many ways contributed to the change and transformation of the social system. Western Europe, thanks to which it became possible to form various models of the social state, the welfare state.

Socialism in the modern sense appears as a method of historical action based on the priority of collectivist solidarity, social control, public initiative.

It was these principles and methods of self-presentation that were demonstrated by the socialist and social democratic parties of Europe, which were especially strengthened in the course of the formation and development of parliamentary and democratic regimes.

Conservatism in modern politics is represented primarily by social teachings and political doctrines that insist on the connection of the past and the present, on the reproduction of the best experience of

past, preventing oblivion of basic civilizational and cultural skills and traditions. The ideal of the socio-political structure of conservatism is stability, order, continuity, based on authority and freedom. Conservatism does not exclude change, but builds its political program on loyalty and civic responsibility. As S. Huntington noted, "conservatism is a system of ideas used to protect any established order, regardless of place and time ... The essence of conservatism is its passionate assertion of the value of existing institutions." Conservatives usually lean towards a limited monarchy or such forms of presidential and parliamentary republics, which provide for a supreme office that concentrates a large amount of power (president, prime minister). Worldview conservatives are often associated with religion, both in the West and in the East, and tend to use religious dogmas as explanatory models in political and social life. The source of civil society, according to conservatives, is the state, which both gives the citizen freedom and limits it in the interests of the common good.

Conservatism in the politics of the 20th century. most clearly expressed in the reforms of M. Thatcher and R. Reagan. Note that conservative economists already in the 1970s. emphasized the negative role of state interference in economic development, calling for limiting the role of the state in this area. Their growing presence in government bureaucracies, the growing role of public choice theories and the theory of "protagonists and agents" made possible the spread of "Thatcherism" and "Reaganomics", which caused a wave of social protests both in the UK and in the USA.

In the new conditions at the end of the XX - beginning of the XXI century. postmodern society gives rise to new contradictions, new risks, becomes a society of the so-called fluid modernity, where individual choice becomes a priority, and the role of group mechanisms of self-identification is reduced, which causes a crisis of traditional classical ideologies and those political parties that are associated with them.

Global risks: social inequality of capitalism, destruction of the ecosystem, proliferation of weapons mass destruction, the reduction of democratic freedoms, the aggravation of gender contradictions, racial and ethnic conflicts, civilizational clashes - naturally give rise to the so-called new ideologies : "ideologies of globalism and anti-globalism ", ideology of the "greens".

At the same time, according to the same Giddens, the ideological approach both in politics and in science has its place in the postmodern situation. Sociopolitical theories continue to be in the force field of two ideological poles - capitalism and socialism. And no matter what they write about socialism (both the fact that it existed only as a utopian program, and the fact that real socialism had nothing in common with Marx's theory), it still remains the theoretical basis for those who do not accept capitalist principles. That is, socialism as an ideological construction exists, is reproduced, reconstructed and continues to function. Similarly, liberal constructs continue to develop and evolve. In a number of his writings, Giddens pays attention to overcoming the dichotomy between "left and right" ideological positions.

At the end of the XX century. many researchers have stated a serious crisis in which political parties oriented towards classical ideological doctrines found themselves. This crisis was expressed in a decrease in the level of trust in political parties, in a reduction in their numbers, in the devaluation of ideological values ​​and postulates. Political competition manifested itself not so much as a struggle of ideas and programs, but as a rivalry of images. Under these conditions, the "majority parties" began to shift to the center of the political spectrum, trying to become the so-called catch all party, and supporters of extreme, radical ideas gradually became marginalized. The system parties tried to adapt their strategy and main characteristics to the model of mass parties. These trends contributed to the emergence of parties, which O. Kirkheimer called parties "catch-all" ("grab everyone"). "A new type of party is developing, which is neither a cadre party nor a mass party, but an "omnivorous party" (O. Kirkheimer), a "party of voters" (J. Charlot) or a "party of attraction" (P.-J. Schwarzenberg)" . Such parties can be right-wing, centrist or left-wing. They are inter-class and even inter-ideological movements, entirely aimed at the electorate.

This crisis of the representativeness of parties and politics, which can be described as a crisis of "party form", was accompanied by the erosion of ideological guidelines; visible differences in the policies of socialists and liberals became less and less obvious.

As a result, the traditional division between right and left has ceased to be so clear-cut. Both right and left parties began to borrow ideas from each other, trying to focus on the needs of the mass electorate.

The liberals actively included a social component in their programs, and the socialist and social democratic parties of Europe actually refused to use even the concept of "socialism". Indicative in this regard are the results of the elections, when the main competitors over and over again come to the finish line with almost the same result. We observed such a situation in the USA in 2000 and 2004, in Germany in 2005, in Italy, Sweden and Mexico in 2006, in France in 2007.

As A. Touraine rightly noted, European governments began to move "from socialism to capitalism", and the market again "replaced the state as the main regulating force of our society." Public sector reforms swept through almost all European countries to a greater or lesser extent and were mainly associated with a policy of transition to new management models, which primarily implied an increase in the efficiency of providing services to the population while reducing costs, removing the burden from public budgets at all levels. The most important role in this model is played, on the one hand, by changing the very structure of state ownership by changing the composition of its elements and autonomization, and, on the other hand, by shifting the emphasis from the direct provision of services to citizens by the public sector to stimulating the development of all sectors of the economy (Owen). And although managerialization in public administration is more often associated with "regonomics" and "Thatcherism", European countries, where social democrats and socialists were in power, also adopted a lot from this, in fact, conservative and neoliberal model.

The result of the search for new forms and new ideological guidelines was the strategy of the so-called third way, set out in the Manifesto of T. Blair and G. Schroeder, signed in 1999. Note that one of the ideologists of this document was one of the most famous sociologists of our time, E. Giddens, was a personal adviser to Prime Minister T. Blair, participated in the development of the program of the Labor Party of Great Britain. As Giddens himself noted, the concept of "third way" appeared because there was a "first way" (the path of the left) - in the West, the classical welfare state; there were also communist societies where the state played a dominant role.

On the other hand, liberal projects in the spirit of trade and market philosophy (Thatcherism, Regonomics) have also demonstrated their effectiveness. At the same time, there was an understanding that it was impossible to manage society as a market, some third alternative was needed.

In this new social context, the "third way" arose as an answer to the question: "How to build a just society in certain conditions?" Therefore, the problem of the third way, according to Giddens, is relevant for both Russia and China. It is about how to link politics, economics and society in a period of democratic change (Giddens).

Many left-wing sociologists, analyzing European reality, bitterly stated that the ideological crisis of socialism caused the activation of right-wing and conservative sentiments, that "the market, replacing the state, promotes the development of individualism and consumption in its most unpleasant manifestations" (Touraine).

The left-wing parties, which are traditionally mass parties, experienced the loss of their electorate and the crisis associated with electoral defeats more difficult than other parties. And although socialists and social democrats actively moved away from the class approach in the second half of the 20th century, trying to expand their electorate at the expense of other social groups, socialist rhetoric often remained unclaimed. This happened partly because in most Western European countries relatively high level social guarantees and rights, in part because the issues of regulating foreign labor and the country's place in the new international political and economic system caused by globalization processes. And these questions were articulated mainly by conservative and right-wing parties.

Thus, four types of classifications of political ideologies can be distinguished.

By purpose and core values within the framework of the axiological approach, liberalism, conservatism, socialism, fascism, and communism are distinguished. In turn, each of these ideologies implies different varieties and currents. Yes, in modern society we can single out pluralism and neoliberalism within the framework of traditional liberalism, social democratic and communist versions within the framework of socialist ideology.

By place on the political continuum right, left, centrist. Within the framework of this typology, right-wing political parties traditionally include conservative, nationalist, liberal parties, while left-wing parties include social-democratic, socialist, communist, and radical left-wing parties. Note that the analysis of modern ideologies within the framework of the proposed right-wing school is not always justified, since in recent decades ideologies have emerged that do not fit into these criteria, such as "green" ideologies, environmentalist ideologies, feminist ideologies, globalist and anti-globalist ideologies.

According to the source subject, articulating ideological maxims: party, state, religious, corporate, gender, etc.

Depending on the social base (within the framework of class or stratification approaches).

A peculiar form of manifestation of worldview changes are the concepts that proclaimed end of ideology. This formulation of the question is due to the fact that the role of ideology in the world of politics varies depending on historical conditions, the situation in the country, the balance of power. It was on this basis that in the 1960s 20th century D. Bell, R. Aron and X. Arendt concluded about the "end of ideology" and the beginning of the era of de-ideologization.

D. Bell associated this process with the de-ideologization of mass culture, which becomes the main tool for shaping the way of life, norms, values, culture, and H. Arendt emphasized that in a pluralistic society, unlike a totalitarian one, ideology cannot become dominant and dominating. The quintessence of these ideas was reflected in the work of F. Fukuyama "The End of History?", where the idea of ​​the death of the ideology of communism and the transition to a society of free competition of different types of culture was postulated.

The collapse of the USSR, the destruction of the world socialist system, the inclusion of post-socialist countries in the third wave of democratization, on the one hand, as well as the successes and evolution of the welfare state, which synthesized the principles of liberalism and social democracy, on the other, gave reason to talk about a decrease in the role of ideologies in the political process and about the departure of ideology from public discourse.

But literally a decade later, the strengthening of the role of factors that needed ideological assessments (racial unrest, a wave of cultural non-conformism in Europe, unemployment, inflation, the crisis of the welfare society, etc.) forced scientists to speak of the "era of re-ideologization." At the same time, understanding the results and consequences of neoliberal reforms against the backdrop of the outbreak of the financial crisis is increasingly taking the form of a socialism-liberalism dichotomy.

As for Russia, after the collapse of the socialist system, there was a massive rejection of ideological constructs, which was largely the result of the ideological dictate of previous years. The very word "ideology" acquired a negative context, and the reforms of the 1990s. marked an era "end of ideology" implying a complete de-ideologization of public life.

However, in reality, this did not mean the absence of an ideology of reforms, which were clearly liberal in nature and became a concentrated expression of the ideology of right-wing liberalism.

In the context of a multi-party system and ideological confusion, it was difficult to consolidate the electorate and agree on political positions. As a result, the part of the political elite that carried out the privatization in its own interests and quickly returned to using the administrative resource won. United Russia, as the successor to previous parties in power, used the rhetoric of a "supra-ideological party" in this regard for a long time, while trying to become the so-called "catch all party "conditional political center, which was declared by its leaders. Turning to the Russian parliamentary elections of 1999, 2003, 2007, let us say that it was not by chance that they demanded political centrism, implicated in state ideology. A huge number of citizens, not fully sharing either right or left ideological constructs and not formally belonging to the so-called "middle class", nevertheless considered themselves to be in it. The idea of ​​the center as an expression of stability and sustainability was then very popular in an unstable society.

At the same time, parties of the right and left spectrum were formed and institutionalized in Russia, their sequence largely forced " United Russia"to look for new ideological guidelines, which have become traditional conservative values.

Let us note that the process of formation of the classical "left-right spectrum" in Russia, as well as in most CIS countries, has not yet been completed. It is possible that under the conditions of the dominance of one party, the party-ideological landscape will acquire other "non-classical" forms.

CRISIS AND COLLAPSE OF THE SOVIET IDEOLOGY

The ideological state of people and society as a whole is formed under the influence of many factors, and not just ideology. And chief among them is their experience. Everyday life.

Soviet people knew the shortcomings of their society as well as Western observers. Moreover, they experienced them in their own skin. Therefore, the state of discontent was common for them at all levels, from the cleaning lady, who was unhappy that the workers were spitting and throwing cigarette butts on the floor, and ending with the General Secretary of the CPSU, who was dissatisfied with the fact that the workers did not stop drinking vodka, did not want to strengthen labor discipline and increase labor productivity, without which society could not move as quickly towards full communism as we would like. However, only under certain conditions was this general discontent directed against the communist social system and played the role of one of the factors in its (system) collapse.

In the post-Stalin years, a crisis situation began to grow in the Soviet ideological sphere. A complex of factors, both internal and external, played a role in its generation.

Soviet society entered the stage of mature communism ("developed socialism"). Soviet people on their own experience and on the basis of common sense they were convinced that there would be no heavenly communism, which they were promised by the classics of Marxism. They understood the following fundamental truth of our era: what they had was real communism. The ideological picture of Soviet society began to be perceived by people as a blatant lie, as a fraudulent disguise of an unattractive reality. The demoralizing effect of this turned out to be strong not because people realized the shortcomings of real communism (they became familiar), but because reality did not live up to the promises of the leaders and ideologists of society.

In the Khrushchev years and the first years of Brezhnev's rule, further, a comprehensive criticism of Stalinism began in all strata of Soviet society. This criticism gradually developed into criticism of the Soviet communist system in general. This happened within Soviet society, one might say, for internal needs. What broke out and became known in the West was only a small fraction of this critical epidemic. The extreme manifestation of this epidemic was the dissident movement, "samizdat" and "tamizdat". Stalin's "vulgarization" of ideology was also criticized, which gradually developed into a disdainful attitude towards ideology in general. Even in the circles of the ideologists themselves and party leaders involved in ideology, they began to be ashamed to appeal to ideology and refer to it. Countless articles and books appeared within the framework of ideology and in near-ideological spheres, in which, however, ideology was slighted or ignored altogether, at best, they got rid of it with a few meaningless quotes and mentions. Even the former ardent Stalinists were captured by this epidemic, often ahead of the "innovators" (for opportunistic reasons, of course). Crowds of all sorts of "theoreticians" rushed into the realm of ideology, i.e. losers, graphomaniacs and careerists from various sciences, who literally flooded the ideology with fashionable ideas and buzzwords. And all this was done under the sauce of the creative development of Marxism. Moreover, these creators themselves in their narrow circles mocked the Marxism they developed. They imagined that they were making a spiritual revolution, only out of necessity hiding behind the interests of Marxism. In fact, they could not produce anything other than unbridled verbiage. However, they did damage to the ideology, having rewards and praise for this.

Herculean efforts were made in the Soviet Union to impress Soviet people with certain ideas about the West and develop in them immunity to the corrupting influence of the West. This pernicious influence is not fiction Soviet propaganda and the KGB. It was a real fact Soviet life, and a fact of the highest degree serious. In the post-Stalin years, the West began to exert a huge influence on the ideological state of Soviet society, and the influence was precisely pernicious, demoralizing, weakening Soviet society from the inside. A special study is needed in order to find out how the Soviet Union benefited from communication with the West after the lifting of the "Iron Curtain" and how much damage it was caused by the influence of the West. But now the following is indisputable. The West became a permanent factor in the daily life of Soviet society. For the first time, Soviet ideology faced a serious adversary that threatened its power over society. When Soviet leaders, while allowing peaceful political coexistence with the West, ruled out peaceful ideological coexistence, they thereby adequately assessed the danger of Western influence on the ideological state of Soviet society. This danger could not be overcome by measures of repression alone. Soviet ideology had to show how capable it was by its own means of overcoming the disease of "Westernism" that had already penetrated deeply into Soviet society.

But the main factor that gave rise to a trend towards a crisis in the ideological sphere is the Cold War, which began immediately after the end of World War II and is basically an ideological war.

The West has always occupied a significant place in Soviet ideological life, i.e., in its ideological teaching, in the operation of the entire system of indoctrination of the population, and in the ideological state of the country's population. In ideological teaching, this is primarily Lenin's teaching about imperialism as the highest and last stage of capitalism and about the inevitability of the victory of communism throughout the world. Soviet party leaders and professional ideologists "developed" Lenin's teachings further, taking into account the fact of the formation of the socialist camp and the split of the world into irreconcilable social systems. They did this in strict accordance with the canons of ideology: they verbally dissected modernity in such a way that it began to look like a confirmation of Lenin's plans, and the doctrine itself was dressed in verbal clothes, giving it the appearance of enduring relevance. Here we have a typical example of an ideological attitude to reality: the latter is not directly reflected in the minds of a certain category of people engaged in ideology or absorbing it, but through an artificial verbal grid. The task of this ideological grid is to denigrate the enemy, to ennoble oneself.

In the Brezhnev years, the West brought down on Soviet society a powerful stream of information (rather disinformation) about life in the West, Western culture (rather, mass pseudo-culture), ideology, propaganda of the Western way of life and criticism of the Soviet way of life. And I must say that he found a favorable situation here. The Soviet ideological apparatus was unable to resist him. No efforts of the Soviet counter-propaganda and punitive organs (including jamming of Western radio stations and arrests) could stop this offensive of the West on the souls Soviet people. The latter, especially the educated and privileged strata, experienced such an influence from the West that not only Soviet, but even pre-Soviet Russian history had not known until now. It turned out that the Soviet people had no protective immunity against such influence.

The West, through numerous channels, bursting into the inner life of Soviet society, inflicted on it such psychological and ideological damage as Soviet society had to face for the first time. The West dealt a blow to the fundamental principles of ideology about the advantages of the Soviet system and way of life over the Western one. The West contributed to the shift of people's interests towards purely material needs and temptations. The West has greatly contributed to the flourishing of corruption in the ruling strata of society, up to the very highest.

The negative phenomena of real communism became the object of grandiose anti-communist propaganda in the West and in the Soviet Union by the West. Capitalism has not left the stage of history, as predicted by Marx and Lenin, but has gained a foothold and in this period of history seems to have won the competition with communism. The Soviet Union was in economic recession, while the capitalist West experienced unheard-of prosperity. Soviet people began to see the earthly paradise promised by the communists there. The system of higher spiritual and moral values, which the Soviet ideology sought to instill in the Soviet people, turned out to be inadequate to the real qualities of people and the conditions of their existence. The system of Western values, reinforced by the temptations of the Western way of life, fell upon humanity with unprecedented force, including the Soviet people in its sphere of influence. And they rushed from one extreme to another, becoming the most malleable object of an ideological and psychological attack from the West.

The West in the imagination of the Soviet people was rapidly turning into the greatest temptation. The propensity for a critical attitude towards everything one's own, envy of everything alien, as well as the impunity of countless actions that in one way or another harmed Soviet society, completed the set of reasons that made the ideological crisis of Soviet society inevitable.

As a result of the anti-communist coup in the Gorbachev-Yeltsin years, all the main pillars of the Soviet social order were destroyed. The Soviet state ideology was simply discarded. The gigantic army of Soviet ideologists capitulated without a fight. She just vanished like she didn't exist at all. But instead of the liberation from the tyranny of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism promised by the reformers and their Western manipulators, a state has come in which the word "lawlessness" is more appropriate than in relation to other aspects of the country's social organization.

A powerful, unrestrained stream of Western ideology poured into Russia. He mastered most of the means with astonishing speed. mass media who, as in the West, became a kind of "Vatican" of Westernism. The Western system of values ​​has found extremely favorable ground in Russia. Western Mass culture, which is an instrument of the ideology of Westernism, began to conquer the souls of Russians, especially of new generations. An unbridled revival of religions began, and above all Orthodoxy, which began to behave almost like a state religion. It enlisted the support of the highest authorities and persistently entered the struggle for the souls of the Russians. Former convinced atheists from the party apparatus and from the highly educated intelligentsia turned into equally convinced believers with lightning speed and contributed to church building with the same enthusiasm with which their predecessors in the twenties and thirties did it to church destruction.

Although the Soviet ideology was abolished as a state and generally obligatory one, it left a deep imprint in the minds of many millions of Russians, in culture, in education, in political parties, and so on. It makes itself felt in the need for an ideology that unites the population into a single society and serves its system of power and control, as well as in the need for a single state ideological mechanism. Attempts to satisfy this need can be seen in the search for a "national idea", in the composition of all kinds of doctrines, in policy statements, in the desire to create a "party of power".

Marxism-Leninism is still alive as the ideology of the communist parties. But it is unlikely to again become such a significant social phenomenon as it was not so long ago. Of course, if some kind of upheaval occurs in the world, and humanity finds itself in a state similar to that which took place during the years of the birth and rise of Marxism, then it will be possible to revive Marxism as an ideology of the former scale. But the likelihood of this is negligible. The evolution of mankind has gone in such a direction that it is pointless to count on it. Moreover, from the point of view of the intellectual state, Marxism cannot count on the success in the twenty-first century that it had in the past.

Ideology is a system of values, attitudes and ideas that reflect people's attitude to politics, to the existing political system and political order, as well as the goals that politicians and society as a whole should strive for. The author of the term is the 19th-century French philosopher A. Destut de Tracy. So he called the doctrine of ideas that allow you to establish a solid foundation for political life.

Functions of ideology in the state: Orientation: Ideology includes basic ideas about society and the political system, about politics and power, helps a person navigate political life and carry out conscious political actions. Mobilization: Offering society a certain model (idea, program) of a more perfect state (system, regime), ideology thereby mobilizes members of society to bring them to life. Integrative: Ideology seeks to formulate national and nationwide values ​​and goals, offers them to society, uniting people on their basis. Depreciation (mitigating): Explaining and justifying in the eyes of people the existing political system and political reality, ideology thereby contributes to the removal of social tension and the resolution of crisis situations when the state authorities do not have the material or organizational capabilities to influence society and citizens.

Classical ideologies of the 19th century. Liberalism Ideological and political trend, where the ideas of freedom are in the first place (first of all, freedom of entrepreneurship, personality, rights and property), human rights and freedoms are protected, a ban on state intervention in the economy. The right of the oppressed to overthrow tyranny and oppression is postulated. D. Locke; Jean-Jacques Rousseau; D. Diderot

Classical ideologies of the 19th century. Conservatism An ideological and political trend that postulates the protection of national and religious traditions, the old foundations of life and denies the possibility of revolutionary changes in society F. Chateaubriand; J. de Maistre

Causes of the crisis of classical ideologies of the XIX century. Conservatism Represents the interests of the reactionary strata of society (big landowners, aristocracy, nobility) Liberalism Represents the interests of the capitalist strata of society (bourgeois, capitalists, merchants, etc.) Working classes, proletariat - ?

Ideologies of the 20th century Socialism Social Democracy Neoliberalism Teaching based on the ideas of social equality and characterized by a negative attitude towards private property Teaching based on the ideas of social justice and the redistribution of incomes of citizens Teaching based on the ideas of liberalism of the XIX century. Government intervention in the economy

Ideologies of the 20th century Socialism A doctrine based on the ideas of social equality and characterized by a negative attitude towards private property. Originated in the middle of the 18th century. developed in the 19th century. in Europe as a reaction to the intensification of capitalist exploitation. A. Saint-Simon; C. Fourier; R. Owen; K. Marx; F. Engels

Ideologies of the 20th century Neoliberalism A doctrine based on the ideas of liberalism of the 19th century. State intervention in the economy is introduced. Occurs in the 30s. as a reaction to the global crisis of the first half of the 20th century. J. M. Keynes In Russia in the 1990s E. Gaidar conducted economic policy radical neoliberalism, the so-called. "Shock therapy"

Ideologies of the 20th century Social Democracy A doctrine based on the ideas of social justice and the redistribution of citizens' incomes. Recognizing private property in the economy, it attaches great importance to other forms of ownership (nationalized, municipal, cooperative) The principle of "social partnership" and "class cooperation" is proclaimed.

The main types of political ideologies that are defined by science as classical include liberalism, conservatism, and socialism.

As an independent ideological trend, liberalism was formed on the basis of the political philosophy of the English Enlightenment at the end of XVII-XVIII centuries. The term "liberalism" came into wide use in the first half of the 19th century in a number of Western European states and comes from the Latin "free", "related to freedom". That is why all definitions of liberalism include the ideas of personal freedom.

The origins of the liberal worldview date back to the Renaissance. Representatives of the European and American Enlightenment, German classical philosophy, European classical political economy contributed to the formation of a complex of ideas of liberalism.

Since its inception, liberalism has defended a critical attitude towards the state, the principles of political responsibility of citizens, religious tolerance, and humanism. The complex of ideas of classical liberalism includes:

in the social sphere: the assertion of the absolute value of the human personality and the equality of all people, the recognition of inalienable human rights to life, freedom, property;

in the economy: recognition of private property, on the basis of which the public economy is based, the demand for the abolition of restrictions and regulations by the state;

in the political sphere: recognition of human rights, separation of legislative and executive powers, recognition of competition.

The main problem of liberal ideology has always been the determination of the permissible degree and nature of state interference in a person's private life, the combination of democracy and freedom.

Attempts to resolve these issues and bring to life the ideas of classical liberalism led to the emergence in the 20th century of the concept of "new liberalism" or "neoliberalism". Neoliberalists are making attempts to reform classical liberalism, changing its form and ideological content. The political program of the neoliberals was based on the ideas of the need for the participation of the masses in the political process, the agreement between the rulers and the ruled. In general, neoliberalism tries to soften some of the extremes in the ideas of liberalism.

In Russia at the end of the 18th century, liberalism was born in constant confrontation and overcoming the traditions of autocracy and serfdom, bureaucratic irresponsibility. It was aimed at recognizing the individual's right to a worthy existence. Russian liberal thought in the period of its appearance was characterized by an anti-democratic tendency. On the verge of the 19th-20th centuries, there was a tendency for the concept of liberalism and democratic ideas to converge. The development of liberal thought in Russia proceeded mainly in line with the study of philosophical and legal problems.

Thus, liberalism at different stages of its development included various components, developed new doctrines. This strengthened his ability to act, attracted supporters, but also made him more controversial and heterogeneous.

The political ideology of liberalism began to meet the requirements for scientific doctrines less and less. There was a weakening of the ideological and political positions of liberalism. Today, liberalism is faced with the need to revise its ideological base, search for new internal trends and modifications.

The next main type of political ideology can be called conservatism. The prerequisite for the emergence of conservatism was the failure of liberalism after the French bourgeois revolution in the 18th century. The term "conservatism" was first used French writer F. Chateaubriand and denoted the ideology of the feudal-aristocratic reaction to bourgeois revolution. The term itself comes from the Latin "preserve, protect."

Conservatism as a political ideology is not only a system of political consciousness that prefers the old system of government to a new one, regardless of its goals and ideological content, but also the principles of political participation, attitude to the state, personality, social order.

The ideological and political significance of conservatism is difficult to determine, since there are a number of reasons for this. First, there is an internal heterogeneity of the political ideology of conservatism. There are two ideological directions in its structure. One of which considers it necessary to maintain the stability of the social structure in its unchanged form. The second is aimed at eradicating the opposition of political forces and proposes the reproduction of the former political forces. Here conservatism appears as a political ideology:

supporting existing orders;

returning to what was lost.

But different areas of conservatism have common characteristics: the recognition of the imperfection of human nature and the existence of a universal moral and religious order, the belief in the inequality of people from birth, the need for a class and social hierarchy. This manifests radicalism, uncharacteristic of conservatism, the desire for forceful methods of resolving conflicts, although conservatism is confident in the ability of politics to alleviate tension between social strata.

The last decades in the world usually distinguish three ideological currents: traditionalist, libertarian and neoconservatism. The latter was formed as a response to the global economic crisis in the 1970s.

Neoconservatism recognizes the need for state intervention in the economy, but assigns a significant role to market mechanisms of regulation. In the political doctrine of neoconservatism there are a number of priority provisions: the subordination of the individual to the state, ensuring the political and spiritual community of the nation. The state of neoconservatives should be based on moral principles, provide the individual with the necessary living conditions on the basis of law and order, while developing the institutions of civil society, maintaining a balance in the relationship between man and nature. At the same time, there is always a readiness of neoconservatism to use extremely radical means in relations with the enemy.

In modern Russia, conservatism manifests itself in a peculiar way. During the period of domination of liberalism, the term "conservative" was used to refer to opponents from the CPSU. But soon the true meaning was returned to conservatism and it declared itself as a powerful political trend. Today, conservatism retains and increases its influence, not as a political doctrine, but as an intellectual movement.

The third political ideology, conventionally defined as classical, is socialism. The emergence of socialism is connected with the centuries-old desire of the public masses for social justice, social protection of the individual. Traces of dreams are found already in antiquity, play a prominent role in the Middle Ages, and challenge liberalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

During the period of development of industrial capitalism, which led to the growth of the class of wage workers, it became necessary to express and protect the interests of this class. In this regard, doctrines are being formed that provide for a radical change in the structure of society, the replacement of capitalism by socialism without the exploitation of the masses by the bourgeoisie. With the spread of these ideas among the workers, they began to be called socialist ideas and theories. By the middle of the 19th century, the main directions of socialist ideology had taken shape, and at the end they finally took shape, having a definite program, theoretical justification, and numerous supporters.

Followers believed that socialism is a society whose banner is inscribed "Everything in the name of man, everything for the good of man." This is a society where:

the means of production are in the hands of the people, the oppression of man by man, social oppression, poverty and illiteracy of millions of people are forever finished;

scientific and technological progress does not lead to unemployment, but to a steady increase in the well-being of the people;

ensured equal right to work and its remuneration in accordance with the principle “From each according to his ability to each according to his work”;

national inequality has been eliminated, equality, friendship and brotherhood of all nations have been approved;

the ideas of freedom, human rights, the unity of rights and duties is ensured, the same laws and norms of morality, one discipline for all, there are more and more favorable conditions for the comprehensive development of the individual;

a socialist way of life has developed based on social justice, collectivism and mutual assistance, giving a person confidence in the future.

On the whole, socialism underestimates and even denies the importance of the economic freedom of individuals, competition, and unequal remuneration for labor as preconditions for the growth of the material well-being of man and society.

Thus, the main advantages in the socialist doctrine are the state, not the individual, politics, not the economy.

To characterize socialism in Russia, the main thing is that socialist ideas were also supported by the practical organization of the matter. This was most widely reflected in "populism" - a stage in the history of Russian socialism. The means of implementing the ideas of "populism" were very diverse - from "going to the people" to "general rebellion" with the aim of seizing power by the people. That is, socialism allowed any tricks political struggle according to the principle: “the end justifies the means”.

A very characteristic feature of the 20th century was the numerous attempts to modernize theoretical basis socialist ideology. But the discrepancy between the ideas of socialism and the tendencies of world development in the 20th century and their obvious inclination towards the use of force methods of management significantly weakened the political influence of socialist ideology in the modern world.