Anarchy - the absence of state power in relation to an individual or the whole society. This idea came to Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1840, he called anarchy political philosophy, which meant the replacement of the state by a stateless society, where the social structure was replaced by the forms of the primitive system.

Anarchy is divided into several types.

1. Individualist anarchism (anarcho-individualism). The main principle: freedom of disposal of oneself, which is given to a person from his birth.
2. Christian anarchism. The main principle: the immediate implementation of the principles of harmony and freedom. Note that the teachings of Christ initially had anarchic sides. God created people in his own image without anyone's parting words, therefore it is believed that people are free in their choice, and are not required to follow the rules established by the state.
3. Anarcho-communism. The basic principle: the establishment of anarchy based on the solidarity and mutual assistance of all members of society. The foundations of the doctrine include equality, decentralization, mutual assistance and freedom.
4. Anarcho-syndicalism. Basic principle: trade unions are the main weapon of workers, with the help of which it is possible to carry out a coup/revolution, carry out radical social changes and create a new society based on the self-government of the workers themselves.
5. Collectivist anarchism (often called revolutionary socialism). Adherents of this form of anarchism opposed forms of private ownership of the money of production, and called for its collectivization through revolution.

The reason for the appearance of anarchy is considered to be the belief of people that under the existing government, citizens cannot live and develop normally. Anarchists believe that people are able to independently change their lives, control it, exclude ideological systems that prevent them from living in peace and harmony, and also get rid of political leaders that limit the opportunities of the population living in the country.

The principles of anarchism are:

1. Renunciation of any authority;
2. Absence of coercion. Those. no one can force a person to do anything against his will;
3. Equality. Those. all people have the right to enjoy the same material and humanitarian benefits;
4. Diversity. Those. lack of control over a person, each person independently creates favorable conditions for his existence.
5. Equality;
6. Mutual assistance. Those. people can unite in groups to achieve a goal;
7. Initiative. It involves the construction of a social structure “from the bottom up, when groups of people can solve social issues without pressure from the ruling structures.

The first mention of anarchy dates back to 300 BC. This idea arose among the ancient Chinese and ancient Greek inhabitants. Today, the Greek anarchist organization is considered the most powerful in the world.

On a note: some people believe that anarchists want to bring chaos and disorder into society by replacing entrenched state principles with the law of the jungle. Anarchists themselves say that their regime involves anarchy, not opposition or opposition.

Video

Anarchism is a combination of both general principles and fundamental concepts that provide for the abolition of the state and the exclusion from the life of society of any political, economic, spiritual or moral power, and practical methods for implementing these concepts.

Etymologically, ἀν and ἄρχή are Greek words, together they literally mean "without dominion". “Arche” is power, and power in the understanding not of an organization as such, but in the sense of domination, imposition, control from above. "Anarchy" means "without power, domination and violence over society" - something like this word should be translated into Russian.

Philosophical basis of anarchism

There is no single philosophy of anarchism as such. Anarchist theorists throughout the history of this movement have ultimately converged only on the idea of ​​the need to remove power from people's lives. Anarchists may share the same goals and ideas about the path to them, but the philosophical background and argumentation may be completely different. It is enough to simply compare the views of at least a few of the main theorists of anarchism.

For example, Bakunin gravitated toward the neo-Hegelian tradition, although he also integrated elements of other philosophical views. Kropotkin, on the contrary, called himself a positivist, although he had little to do with positivism in the traditional sense of the word. He proceeded from a philosophical and ethical idea of ​​life, rather a biological one: he paid much attention to the criticism of social Darwinism with its praising of the “struggle for existence”, contrasting it with a tradition that goes back to Lamarck and involves adaptation to nature and harmony with it.

If we look at the positions of anarchists of the second half of the 20th century or those who took part in the 1968 movement, then we will meet supporters of a wide variety of philosophical views: adherents of the Frankfurt School, existentialism, situationism, supporters of the views of Michel Foucault, and so on ... But all the anarchists mentioned shared one and the same goal - the approval and dissemination of the anarchist model of society and the idea of ​​a revolutionary path to transition to it. Kropotkin was trying to make a heroic grand sweep: he set out to formulate "scientific anarchism," as he called it, although it is doubtful that such a edifice could actually be erected. So it would probably be wrong to talk about a unified philosophy of anarchism.

Nevertheless, it can be argued that, one way or another, all types of anarchism have a common philosophical basis. And it originated long before anarchism itself - in the European Middle Ages, when a famous philosophical dispute flared up among the scholastics between nominalists and realists, that is, between those who believed that general concepts really exist (realists), and those who believed that they really exist only a single, separate, and general concepts are only a general designation, a set of separate, individual (nominalists).

If we transfer this dispute to the problem of human existence, then the main question of all philosophy will not be the question of the primacy of matter or consciousness. It will sound differently: the individual person, individuality, or some kind of community, into which a person has been included, perhaps from his very birth, and whose laws he is obliged to obey, is primary.

Anarchism and liberalism

Two seemingly diametrically opposed ideologies, such as anarchism and liberalism, in the matter of the primacy of a person or society, proceed from the same premise: for them, the human personality is primary. But then the main differences begin, because the following question arises: how do these personalities relate to each other? After all, a person does not live by himself, he is still a social being. And since he lives in society, he must somehow build his relationships with other personalities.

What are the principles of these relations? This is where anarchism and liberalism diverge in the most radical way. A liberal will say that a person is selfish: people by nature are such that they will build relationships on the principle of hierarchy, domination, and inevitably the strong by nature will suppress the weaker in all human relations. Therefore, for liberalism, a certain hierarchy is natural by nature and will inevitably be established in human society. Thus liberals, however much they criticize the state, are essentially "archists" as well, i.e. supporters of domination. Even if it is not carried out in a state form, but if each person is his own state, then even an extreme liberal will eventually accept such a form of domination.

The anarchist, on the other hand, proceeds from a different principle. He believes that all people, precisely by virtue of their very existence, initially have equal rights to life - already because they came into this world, although they were not asked whether they wanted it or not. And if someone is stronger, and someone is weaker, someone is more talented in some areas, someone is inferior in some areas, then this is not the fault and not the merit of those people who are characterized by these properties, and such are the circumstances, a certain prevailing life situation. It should not affect the right of these people to life, to equal opportunities to live in harmony with each other and with nature and to satisfy their needs on an equal footing.

Anarchism in this sense does not average man; it is not the notion that all people should live the same way because everyone has the same needs. Anarchism stands for the equality of diversity - this is its main principle. That is why anarchists believe, unlike liberals, that people can unite with each other and form societies not on the principle of dominance over each other, but on the basis of interaction, rational agreement and harmonious arrangement of relations with each other and with the outside world. This is precisely the philosophical basis that will be common to all real anarchists, regardless of what philosophical schools they belong to and what philosophical views they hold.

Freedom in anarchism

The most important for anarchism is the concept of human. What is freedom for anarchism? there is a great many. All of them can be divided into the concepts of "freedom from" and "freedom for". "Freedom from" is, for example, what we are accustomed to understand as civil liberties. This is freedom from prohibitions, from restrictions, from persecution, from repression, from the inability to express one's point of view, from the inability to do something. Of course, such freedom is recognized by anarchists, but it is, so to speak, “negative freedom”.

But, unlike liberalism and any democracy in general, anarchists do not stop there. They also have ideas about positive freedom - “freedom for”. This is freedom of self-realization - an opportunity for a person to realize his inner potential, which is inherent in him, without external restrictions. This is an opportunity to freely build your own life in harmonious harmony with the same free personalities. That is, for an anarchist, freedom is not a thing that ends where the freedom of another begins.

Freedom in the view of anarchism is inseparable. The freedom of one person presupposes the freedom of another person and cannot be limited by it. It turns out that the freedom of each is a condition for the freedom of all. And the freedom of all, in turn, is a condition for the freedom of everyone. Self-realization, the ability to agree, ensuring the course of development of society - this is the basis for positive anarchist freedom. In this sense, any anarchist is a bit of a voluntarist. After all, he proceeds from the fact that the development of society can be determined by the agreed decisions of the people themselves, and not by “laws” external to them.

Anarchists generally believe that the iron laws of history do not exist. There should be nothing that absolutely will not depend on the human will. Anarchists believe that the development of society as a whole, if we are talking about the rules of its functioning, depends only and exclusively on the people themselves. That is, if people themselves agree on how society should develop, they will be able to do whatever they want. Naturally, some restrictions are possible, say, dictated by nature, and anarchism does not deny this. But in general, anarchists, one way or another, recognize collective voluntarism.

Freedom equality Brotherhood

All the principles of anarchism fit into the triad: freedom, equality, fraternity. However, although the French Revolution proclaimed this, the reality of the same modern France, even if it has written this motto on its coat of arms, is fundamentally different from the content of the proclaimed principles.

Modern society believes that, first of all, there is “freedom from”, and its main content is freedom from restrictions on entrepreneurship. It argues that equality is first of all equality before the law, and nothing more, and brotherhood is something completely abstract, rather reminiscent of the commandments of Jesus Christ, or in general a formula devoid of practical meaning. After all, modern society is based on competition, and if a person is a competitor to a person, then he can hardly be called a brother.

Although it was not the anarchists who made the Great French Revolution and it was not them who formulated the slogan, this triad is the most consistent with the anarchist ideal, and not each of its parts separately, but precisely in the aggregate and interconnection of these concepts. In anarchism, freedom does not exist without equality. As the anarchist theorist Bakunin said, "freedom without equality is a privilege and injustice, and equality without freedom is a barracks." Freedom without equality is the freedom of the unequal, that is, the building of a hierarchy. Equality without freedom is the equality of slaves, but it is unrealistic, because if there are slaves, then there is a master who is by no means equal to them. Genuine brotherhood is incompatible with competition, which results from freedom, understood as freedom of enterprise, and equality before the law. In anarchism, freedom and equality do not contradict each other. These are some of the fundamental principles of anarchism.

Anarchism and politics

Anarchists usually reject politics, saying that it is based on the notion of the domineering structure of society. Some of them prefer to call themselves anti-politicians. The reason why one-man power, be it monarchical or dictatorial, is rejected is quite simple. As Mark Twain once wittily put it, “absolute monarchy would be the best form of social organization if the monarch were the smartest, kindest person on earth and lived forever, but this is impossible.” Despotism is no good, because the despot has his own interests and in the name of these interests he will act. People under a despotic system are not free and therefore cannot be accepted by anarchism.

Democracy has another problem. At first glance, anarchism should not deny democracy, because democracy is the power of the people and the people themselves decide how society should develop. What is the problem? Herbert Marcuse once said: "The freedom to choose a master does not cancel the existence of masters and slaves." Democracy is also "cracy", it is also "arche". Democracy is also the power and domination of man over man, that is, a society of unequals.

Any representative democracy assumes that the people are competent only in choosing their leaders. Next, the leaders propose this or that program of action, which the people will approve in the elections by voting for this or that party, after which this group of competent persons receives the right to govern society on behalf of society itself.

Sovereignty is indivisible - this is the main provision of any theory of the state. A higher body can always overturn the decision of a lower one. The first position of such theories is representativeness, management on behalf of people. The second position is centralism, that is, decision-making is not from the bottom up, but from the top down, not by collecting and joining grassroots impulses, but by formulating national tasks. These two points are characteristic of any representative democracy, and anarchism denies them.

Followers of anarchism oppose this with anarchy, that is, universal self-government as a system. In fact, the concept of "anarchy" can be replaced by the concept of "self-government". No decision that affects the interests of one or another group of people can and should not be made against the will of these people and without these people taking part in the decision-making. This is the principle of self-government.

During different periods of the existence of anarchism as a social trend, the institution of self-government was called differently. We are talking about general meetings of those people who are directly affected by this problem. It is now customary in most anarchist groups to refer to such gatherings as assemblies.

Anarchists often face this problem: their terminology is not always "translated" into the dominant terminology of modern society, and it is necessary to select concepts that are close in meaning. Therefore, some anarchists say that they are in favor of "direct democracy", although this is wrong, because democracy is already "cracy", power, domination.

The anarcho-syndicalist Rudolph Rocker once defined power as "the monopoly of decision-making," just as property is the monopoly of possession. If there is a monopoly on making decisions that concern other people, then this is already power, even if the decision is made by a majority of votes and sealed by a referendum. In this sense, anarchists are not supporters of direct democracy. They are supporters of self-government.

Anarchism and anarchy

Usually the words "anarchy" and "anarchism" in the mind of the layman are associated with violence, with the forcible coercion of people to live according to some pattern dictated by them. In fact, this opinion is far from the truth. Anarchism proceeds primarily from the freedom of the human person, and, consequently, no one can be forced to be its supporter. Of course, anarchists count on the fact that sooner or later the majority of people will share their ideals, that they will accept this model. But anarchism is a purely voluntary thing, without any coercion to accept it.

There is an understanding of anarchy as chaos. Periodically, any conflicts are called anarchy: lack of order, power, discussion of problems. In other words, anarchy is associated with chaos and violence. This is one of the misinterpretations that have little to do with anarchist theory. Such myths were largely created by opponents of anarchism to discredit this idea.

The German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who himself was not an anarchist and considered this ideal unrealizable, nevertheless gave a completely fair definition: "Anarchy is not chaos, it is order without domination." This is the most accurate definition of the concept today. We are talking about a model that assumes a self-determined, self-governed existence of people in society without coercion and violence against them.

All supporters of the state organization of society - from the radical communist statesmen "on the left" to the Nazis on the "right" - are "archaists", that is, "rulers", supporters of the existence of human power over man. Anarchists, as followers of a stateless form of organization of society, form as wide a spectrum as the diversity of statesmen. Adherents of very different currents call themselves anarchists, and they represent anarchism itself in different ways.

These may be supporters of market relations and their opponents; those who believe that an organization is needed and those who do not recognize any organizations; those who participate in elections of municipal authorities, and opponents of any elections in general; supporters of feminism and those who believe that this is a secondary problem that will automatically be solved by the transition to anarchism, and so on. It is clear that some of these positions are closer to the real principles of anarchism, which will be discussed later, while others - marketers, supporters of elections, and so on - will be "unified" with real anarchism only by the rejection of the state and similar terminology.

Self-rule in anarchism

A community is a collection of residents of a microdistrict, quarter, employees of some enterprise, and so on. That is, any group of people that somehow faces some kind of problem or wants to do something is called, from the point of view of anarchists, to make a decision at their general meeting. Different anarchists have different attitudes towards the decision-making process, but all, one way or another, ideally strive for the principle of consensus. This is necessary so that people can have the opportunity to calmly discuss all issues - without pressure, without haste, without pressure to come to a decision that will suit everyone to one degree or another ... But this is far from always possible.

Not all issues can reach a unanimous decision. In case of disagreement, different options are possible. In real life, we can refer to the experience of cooperatives, communes, Israeli kibbutzim ... Here, for example, one of the possibilities: cardinal issues are decided by consensus, secondary - by voting. Again, there are different options here. A minority may still agree to comply with the decision against which it opposed - unless, of course, its disagreement is of a very fundamental nature. If it still wears it, then it can freely leave the community and create its own. After all, one of the principles of anarchist communities is the freedom to join it and the freedom to leave it, that is, no one can force a person or a group of people to be in this community. If they disagree on something, they are free to leave.

If there are any serious disagreements, then the majority makes some kind of temporary decision for a certain period. A year later, the question is raised again, the position of people during this time may change, and people will be able to come to some kind of consensus.

There is another option: the majority and the minority carry out their decisions, but the minority speaks only on its own behalf, that is, there is complete autonomy for any group, including any group within the anarchist community.

Anarchism postulates self-government not only at the grassroots level. This principle is designed to operate “from the bottom to the top” and cover the whole of society in one way or another. This principle of self-government does not exist without a second principle, equally fundamental, which is called federalism.

The anarchist community as the basis of human society cannot be too numerous: the general decision-making of the assembly within the framework of large structures is difficult to imagine. Even the ancient Greeks said that the policy should be "foreseeable". Therefore, the principle of self-government is inextricably linked with the principle of federalism.

What is federalism in the modern sense? The statesmen say that this is such a principle of state structure, in which the various parts of the state can choose their own organs of power, subject to general laws. For anarchists, federalism is something else. It is bottom-up decision making by matching impulses that come from below. According to this principle, the “top” cannot override the decision of the “bottom”. The "top" (more precisely, the "center") does not order, does not dispose - it only coordinates those decisions that come "from below", from the assemblies. In fact, there is no “up” or “down” anymore. There is only coordination "from below", matching of decisions.

If there is a specific issue that affects the interests of a given community and which this community can solve on its own, without resorting to outside help from other communities, then such an issue is resolved absolutely autonomously and sovereignly by this community itself. No one here can tell her how to resolve this issue.

If the issue concerns others, goes beyond the purely local framework, then it requires coordination and joint efforts of several communities. These communities must agree on decisions among themselves and come to some kind of common opinion. How? This happens with the help of delegates who will be elected by the general meetings. The delegate has nothing to do with the deputy. He is elected on a one-time basis to carry out a specific assignment in order to convey to the conference of delegates from all interested communities the point of view of his group. The delegate himself does not decide anything and has no right to violate the decision of the meeting that sent him. Each local community can either accept the decision agreed upon at the conference or reject it. In this sense, the anarchist society will be different from the modern one, which strives for the fastest and most effective decision-making. Elaboration, common understanding and involvement of all is much more important than speed.

Anarchism and economics

Most anarchists are radical opponents of both the market economy on the one hand and central planning on the other. Anarchism presupposes a completely different principle of economics, production and satisfaction of needs. The same two postulates of self-government work: the autonomy of the “grassroots” community and federalism. If a community is capable of producing a product for its own consumption on its own, then it must do so without any interference.

At one time, the anarchist theorist Kropotkin formulated another principle. For the modern economy, production is primary, consumption is secondary, because people cannot consume more than what they produce. In an anarchist society, the question is put differently: consumption guides production. First of all, the needs of real people are identified. That is, “planning” is taking place, but it is again about planning “from below”, about establishing what is really needed not by an abstract market, but by quite specific, living people. And they decide it themselves, not specialists and bureaucrats. Here is such a summary list of what the residents of the community need, which is brought to the manufacturers as a kind of “long-term order”.

Every community has its own production facilities. They are also self-governing and autonomous. This "long-term order" is an "order" to them. The outcome of this "planning" is a summary sheet of how much product is to be produced, what can be met locally, what requires the involvement of or agreement with other communities, and what can be made available to them to meet their needs. In this federalist way, communities "dock" with others at the level at which it is needed. The question of money in such an anarchist society disappears, because exactly what is needed for consumption is produced. This is no longer trade and exchange, but distribution.

For anarchism, the ecological aspect is also important. There is even a special trend called eco-anarchism. In general, the environmental agenda has taken an important place in anarchist theory since the 1970s. However, in a sense, this follows from the very foundations of the anarchist doctrine, because if anarchists promote harmony between people, then it is natural that they will promote harmony with the outside world.

Anarchism and culture

Many authors have tried to explore the hypothetical reorganization of the economy, which will reduce the working day to four or five hours due to the fact that people will be released who work in non-environmental industries or are engaged today in those activities that would not be needed under an anarchist system: trade, management, finance , war and police service. If working time is reduced, then free time increases, that is, the conditions for self-realization and cultural activities expand. In this area, anarchism offers nothing rigidly defined. The sphere of culture is a sphere of complete autonomy. Only the tastes of the people themselves, their personal preferences, operate here. If people have completely different cultural preferences, then it is better for them to separate.

Any form of equal cohabitation and any form of sexuality may be allowed as long as it concerns only the relationship of two people. But BDSM practices, according to the logic of anarchism, should be treated negatively, because domination in one form or another, even playful, is unacceptable for anarchism.

Anarchism and ethics

There is a well-known formula that was proclaimed by the Jesuits and repeated by the Bolsheviks: the end justifies the means. For anarchists, it is absolutely unacceptable. The anarchist believes that the end cannot contradict the means, and the means cannot contradict the end. This is the very foundation of the anarchist ethic. On the principles of harmony, anarchists propose to build relationships in their own community and with the outside world. It is no coincidence that Kropotkin wrote a book on ethics all his life.

Anarchists oppose ethics to law. Why do anarchists criticize the system of laws? The fact is that any law is supported by the inevitability of punishment for its violation on the right of revenge appropriated by the state. An anarchist can still understand the principle of "grassroots revenge", but the presence of a professional institution for the execution of punishments destabilizes and poisons society itself. From a psychological point of view, an unhealthy situation arises: human society turns out to be based on fear and relies on it.

Anarchism prefers the prevention of wrongdoing. If it is nevertheless committed, it is necessary to evaluate each specific case, and not be guided by a single law for all, regardless of what caused and explains this or that misconduct. It is possible that if a person has done something absolutely terrible and is considered dangerous to others, he will be expelled from the community. He will become an outcast - like a medieval excommunication. Most anarchists recognize the right to self-defense of themselves and the community, although pacifist anarchists, for example, do not agree with this.

The same people who live in these communities will have to defend themselves. This involves the replacement of the army and police by volunteer people's militia.

In discussions about anarchist society, the problem of the psychological unpreparedness of today's world for such a model of a free and harmonious social order is often discussed. Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman called modern society an agoraphobia society, that is, people have a fear of general meetings, an inability to resolve issues and act together, and an inability to reach consensus. People prefer to wait passively for others to solve their problems for them: the state, officials, owners... In an anarchist society, on the contrary, a person must be very active, ready for dialogue and independent action. It's not easy. But there is no other way. Otherwise, the world can expect the collapse of a social human as a sociobiological species and an ecological catastrophe. The path to the free world is not predetermined. It requires a revolution in consciousness and a social revolution.

The anarchist social revolution is the removal of barriers to such a solidary community and the restoration of society from the modern chaotic atomized set of disunited individuals. Revolution in anarchism is not understood as a change of governments and ruling persons, not a seizure of power, not a political act in the narrow sense of the word, but a deep social upheaval that covers the period from the beginning of self-organization of people from below in the struggle for their specific rights and interests to the spread of new free structures self-organization for the whole society. In the course of this process, the appropriation of all the functions of the state by a new, parallel emerging, free and self-organized community takes place. But the ultimate goal is unchanged - the emergence of an anarchist society.

The first sprouts of ideology appeared was born in the 14th century during the Renaissance, when the first social crisis arose. This period is marked by the beginning of the process of secularization, i.e. liberation of social and individual consciousness from religion. The term "ideology" was first introduced into scientific circulation at the beginning of the 19th century by the French philosopher Destut de Tracy in his work "Elements of Ideology". The concept of ideology comes from the English idea and the Greek logos. By the most general definition, 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. It should be recognized that no modern society can exist without ideology, since it is precisely this that forms a political worldview for each of its members, gives them certain guidelines in the political life around them, and makes their participation in the political process meaningful.

Within the framework of political science, there are various approaches to understanding the nature, essence, role and place of ideology in the life of society. Primarily among these approaches are:

System approach (T. Parsons) considers ideology as an important functional element of the political system of society, as a system of values ​​that determines the main directions of development of a given society and supports the existing social order.

Marxist approach (K.Marx) considers the nature and functions of ideology from two opposite sides. On the one hand, he characterizes the bourgeois ideology that exists within the framework of the capitalist system as a form of false (illusory), erroneous consciousness, which the bourgeoisie consciously implants in order to maintain its dominance and manipulate the consciousness of the proletariat. On the other hand, he interprets the actual Marxist ideology (“the ideology of a new type”) as a teaching or doctrine that objectively expresses the interests of the advanced social class - the proletariat.

Cultural approach (K.Manheim) considers ideology, along with utopia, as a form of false (illusory) consciousness, implanted with the aim of misleading people and creating opportunities for manipulating them. At the same time, if ideology is a lie designed to justify the existing order of things in the eyes of people, then utopia is a false ideal of the future, false promises designed to lead people on the path of destroying the old and building a new world.

Critical approach (R. Aron and E. Shiels) considers ideology as a kind of "political religion", i.e. people's faith, little connected with reality, which arises during periods of deep social crises and mobilizes their joint efforts to overcome the crisis.

Synthesizing the main approaches, we can say that a political ideology is a certain doctrine that justifies the claims of a particular group of people to power (or its use), which, in accordance with these goals, achieves the subordination of public opinion to their own ideas.

Main goals political ideology are: mastery of public consciousness; introducing into it their value assessments, goals and ideals of political development; regulation of citizens' behavior on the basis of these assessments, goals and ideals.

In political ideology, it is customary to distinguish three levels of functioning: theoretical-conceptual, program-directive and behavioral.

As the most important key element of the political system, ideology performs a number of significant functions.

Among the general functions of ideology, political science usually includes:

- orientation- including the basic ideas about society and the political system, about politics and power, ideology 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 for their implementation;

- integration - formulating national and nationwide values ​​and goals, ideology, offering them to society, unites people;

- depreciation(i.e. mitigating) - explaining and justifying the existing political system and political reality in the eyes of people, ideology thereby helps to relieve social tension, mitigate and resolve crisis situations;

- cognitive- being a reflection of the society that gave birth to it, ideology inevitably carries the real contradictions of life, carries knowledge about society and its conflicts, problems associated with the nature of the social structure, the level of economic development, sociocultural tradition;

- the function of expressing and protecting the interests of a particular social group or class- for example, the Marxist ideology claims to defend the interests of the proletariat, the liberal one - a layer of entrepreneurs and owners, etc.

According to the socio-political paradigm, there are three types of ideologies: right, left and centrist. Right-wing ideologies (which range from ultra-right (fascism, racism) to liberal democratic) associate the idea of ​​progress with a society based on the ideals of free competition, the market, private property, and entrepreneurship. Leftist ideologies (including the spectrum: from socialists to communists) see social progress in the constant transformation of society in the direction of achieving equality, social justice, and creating conditions for the all-round development of the individual. Centrist ideologies are moderate views prone to political compromise, unification of right and left, striving to achieve balance and stability.

Thus, political ideology appears as a system of views and concepts in relation to the surrounding world, a certain world outlook and, at the same time, as a system of political orientations and attitudes. It is simultaneously a doctrine (doctrine), program and political practice.

Political ideologies of the modern world.

Political ideologies of the modern world

Anarchism

Liberalism

Conservatism

Socialism

Nationalism

Introduction. Political ideologies of the modern world

An important element of political consciousness is political ideology. The theory of ideology was created by the German thinkers K. Marx, F. Engels and K. Mannheim. In their opinion, ideology is a spiritual formation, manifested as a result of the emergence of classes and their various interests. Ideology expresses and defends the interests of various classes and social groups. Thus, ideology is a functional characteristic of social consciousness, reflecting social life from the standpoint of the interests of certain classes or social groups. This is a one-sided, socially-interested reality.

The basis of the ideological system of society is political ideology. That is, a doctrine that substantiates the claims of the ruling class to power or its retention by subordinating the public consciousness to its ideas. The ruling class considers the main goal of political ideology to be the introduction of their values ​​and ideals into the public consciousness and the regulation of the behavior of citizens on their basis.

There are three levels of ideological influence in political ideology: theoretical-conceptual, program-directive and behavioral.

Anarchism

Anarchism - a set of socio-political trends that deny the need for any power in human society, including in the state.

Anarchism as an ideological and political course developed in the middle of the 19th century eka. Its founders and theorists are: German philosopher Max Stirner, French philosopher Pierre Proudhon, Russian revolutionaries M.A. Bakunin and P.A. Kropotkin. The most famous figure in the anarchist movement in Russia was Nestor Makhno.

In their legal activities anarchists prefer to use forms of economic and social struggle - strikes, massspeeches in defense of labor and social rights of people. Anarchists also oppose the strengthening of state control over people's lives, against the establishment of a single world order, the globalization of Western society, the activities of the IMF and the European Community, etc.

At the same time, anarchists, in protest against the state authorities resort to terrorist actions, i.e. to forms of armed violence for political purposes. Acts of terror are used against officials and institutions with the aim of discrediting power structures and intimidating the population. Actions are often accompanied by specific political demands.

In the usual sense, the term "anarchy" means chaos, disorder, lack of any control. At the same time, in their understanding, the slogan "Anarchy is the mother of order" presupposes the formation of a social order based on free self-government and the interaction of various public associations. According to anarchists, the people can be happy and free if, organizing from the bottom up, in addition to states, parties, leaders, they themselves create and organize their own life.

There are certain contradictions and shortcomings in the theory and practice of anarchism. In particular, historically, individual terror against representatives of state power has not justified itself. The history of the Narodnaya Volya and Socialist-Revolutionary terror in Russia showed its complete political failure.

Anarchists have a rather vague idea of ​​the future social order, which leads to ideological and political uncertainty in their actions. The absence of an ideological strategy and tactics leads to deep contradictions within the anarchist movements, splitting them.

Liberalism

Liberalism is one of the most widespread ideological currents. It was formed at the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries as the ideology of the bourgeoisie on the basis of the ideas of the Enlightenment. Liberalism is based on the principle of freedom of the individual, his responsibility to himself and to society, recognition of the rights to individual freedom, self-realization of all people. Liberalism quite harmoniously combined in its ideology the principles of individualism and humanism. In public life, the principle of freedom is interpreted by liberals as freedom from restrictions, regulation by the state.

Considering the relationship between the state and civil society, the ideologists of liberalism put forward the idea of ​​the priority of society over the state. The ideology of liberalism is based on the identification of freedom and private property.

In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there were two main economic models that equally claim to be the heritage of the spirit of the Enlightenment - liberal capitalism and socialism.

In the 1930s, the ideology of neoliberalism was formed. The emergence of this ideology is associated with the economic course of US President F.D. Roosevelt. To get out of the crisis, the neoliberals formed a mobilization economy, the regulation of which took place through certain state structures. At the same time, an active social policy began to be pursued. The power of the monopolies was limited. Through the tax system, the material wealth of society to a greater extent began to be redistributed in favor of the people.

In the 1950s and 1960s, in the West, in an environment of significant economic growth, the neoliberal concept of the "welfare state" arose. In Western countries, the so-called "social market economy" operates, which involves the redistribution of national income through the state budget and social programs to improve the living standards of the people.

In modern conditions, the classical principle of liberalism in a market economy - unlimited consumerism cannot operate without restrictions. Modern industrial technologies are designed for the constant displacement of labor by machine production. Rising unemployment, which means a sharp decline in the well-being of workers, can lead to huge social upheavals. The French political scientist R. - J. Schwarzenberg believes that in order to maintain calm and peace in society, it is necessary to limit the effect of free competition, commodity-money fetishism, and unbridled consumerism.

Anarchism (from the Greek ἀ(ν) + ἄρχή - "without" + "power") is a system of views of people who advocate the absence of government, leadership. Rejection of the principle of power. A political and social system in which the individual is freed from state guardianship.

Anarchism is often understood in a pejorative sense as a synonym for disorder, chaos, and disorganization. And the antonyms of anarchism are dictatorship, order.

Who is an anarchist?

An anarchist is a member of an anarchist organization, an adherent of anarchism.

Sebastian Faure (French anarchist, educator and journalist) defined anarchists as follows:

Basic principles of anarchist ideology

Anarchists believe that society can be organized without the use of power. But for this, some important principles must be followed:

• lack of power (when one person or group imposes its opinion on others);
• an ideal society without coercion (participation in social activities should be motivated by individual interest, and not by external pressure from society);
• equality and brotherhood (lack of hierarchy, all people are equal among themselves);
• freedom of association (all associations have the right to independent existence with the same rights);
• the principle of mutual assistance (work in a team, and not individually, leads to the least effort);
• diversity (people interact more naturally and freely, and their activities are more difficult to control when their lives are built in a variety of ways).

difference between anarchism and anarchy

Anarchy is a state of life without the intervention of the government, the mechanisms and institutions of the state.

Anarchism is a political philosophy whose goal is anarchy; it is a political theory whose goal is to create anarchy.

Anarchy is a way of being, while anarchism is what happens when people who consider themselves anarchists get together and start talking.

Types of anarchism

Anarcho-individualism

Followers of individualist anarchism have advocated movements since the mid-19th century: anti-authoritarian, pro-worker, and anti-collectivist.

Traditionally, individualist anarchism has seen itself as part of left-wing anarchism (though not social anarchism), a broader movement that opposes both capitalism and the state, and sees them as dual forces of oppression.

Individualist anarchists, however, have always held a much more positive view of private property than any other on the left. They accepted the market economy and rejected full-blown capitalism.

Anarcho-communism

Anarchist communism, also known as anarcho communism, communist anarchism, or sometimes libertarian communism. He advocates the abolition of government, which he calls the state, private property, especially the means and assets of mass production, and capitalism itself.

Instead of these institutions and systems, he calls, like his ideological rival Marxism, for common ownership or at least control over the means of production.

Anarcho-communism claims that only through such collective control can people become free from state domination and economic, that is, capitalist, exploitation.

Under anarchist communism, the real tasks of government and production will be carried out directly through a horizontal network of voluntary associations, workers' councils, and a gift economy.

The gift economy (gift economy) is a system in which valuable goods and services are not exchanged, there is no "quid pro quo", they are given free of charge.

Under anarcho-communism, everyone involved will do something solely to satisfy their real needs. However, unlike Marxism, which advocates the dictatorship of the proletariat, anarchist communism opposes all leadership, hierarchy, and domination.

Anarcho-capitalism (ancap)

A political system in which the state is replaced by private companies that compete to provide social services and infrastructure that would normally be provided by the government.

This view is also called free market anarchism, also libertarian anarchism, market anarchism, or private property anarchism.

It is based on the idea that a free market can provide services and maintain order better than an "imposed" tax-financed government.

Minarchism

Minarchism is a libertarian capitalist political philosophy that claims that the state is necessary, but that its only legitimate function is to protect the people from aggression, violations of contracts and agreements, fraud, etc.

The only legitimate government agencies are the military, the police, and the courts (also included are fire departments, prisons, the executive branch, and the legislature as legitimate government functions).

Anarcho-pacifism

Anarcho-pacifism is a fusion between anarchism and pacifism. Anarcho-pacifists may emphasize either the potential for a conflict-free future world without government, or (more often) the importance of adopting anarchist and non-hierarchical structures within pacifist movements in order to achieve world peace.

This form of pacifist expression tends to emerge from the work of creative or experimental pacifists such as Leo Tolstoy, Bertrand Russell, John Lennon, Yoko Ono, Allen Ginsberg, and others.

Green anarchism (eco-anarchism)

Ecoanarchism is a political doctrine that takes some of its key components from anarchist thought and applies them to human interactions with the non-human world (animals and plants).

Green anarchism proposes to destroy all hierarchies that are the result of human activity, whether they are contained in our own society or not, i.e. to free all forms of life from hierarchical domination.

The main themes of green anarchist thinking are considered to be animal rights and social ecology (an ideology that is designed to reconstruct and transform current views on both social problems and environmental factors).

Other types of anarchism are more specific, they are aimed at the destruction of hierarchical human relations. Whereas green anarchism is more general because it seeks to remove the entire hierarchy as a whole (in the world of humans and nonhumans).

Anarchism symbol

Anarchism has had different symbolism at different times and in different societies. Here we will consider only some of them, the most striking examples.

Letter "A" in a circle

This symbol of anarchy is one of the most famous at the moment. This mark was created by interlacing a capital "A" and a capital "O" (around the first).
The letter "A" was taken from the word "anarchy" (it looks the same in most European languages ​​and in Cyrillic). And the letter "O" came from the word "order" (from the French ordre).

Since 1880, the black flag has become a symbol of anarchism. However, there are several explanations for this symbol. First, the black flag is explained as opposed to the traditional white color of the monarchy, or (also) the white color of the capitulation flag (when the white flag was shown as a symbol of surrender to the mercy of the victor).

Secondly, there is a theory about the black color of the flag as opposed to the multi-colored flags of various states, as the "anti-flag" of a state. There are a variety of explanations for this symbol, and it remains to this day one of the most famous personifications of anarchism.

Also, this flag "evolved" into several variations. Thus, you can find a black flag with other colors (red, yellow, green, white and others) that symbolize varieties of anarchism (for example, a black and white flag for anarcho-pacifism, black and yellow for anarcho-capitalism, etc.) .

The origin of anarchism and "Anarchy is the mother of order"

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809–1865), one of the founders of anarchism, a French philosopher and politician, was the first to introduce the idea of ​​an "anarchist order" against the traditional "state order". One of the most respected anarchist theorists, is considered the first to call himself an anarchist.

In his opinion, the "state order" is the cause of the impoverishment of the population, increased crime and many other problems of society, as it is built on violence.

While "anarchist" makes it possible to obtain a harmony of personal and social interests, justice in politics and economics.

Proudhon's famous phrase "Anarchy is the mother of order" has been somewhat paraphrased. In the original, it sounds like "Freedom is not the daughter, but the mother of order" ("la liberté non pas fille de l" ordre, mais MÈRE de l "ordre"). This phrase was posted in the following context:

"The Republic is an organization through which all opinions and all activities, being free, the people, by virtue of divergence of opinions and will, think and act as a single person.

In a republic, every citizen, doing what he wants and nothing else, he directly participates in legislation and government, just as he participates in the production and circulation of wealth.

There, every citizen is a king, for he has full power, he rules and governs. The Republic is positive anarchy. This is not freedom subject to order, as in a constitutional monarchy, and not freedom imprisoned in the prison of order, as would be the case with a provisional government.

It is freedom, freed from all its obstacles, superstitions, prejudices, sophism, speculation, authority; it is mutual freedom, not self-limitation of freedom; freedom is not the daughter, but the mother of order."
Pierre Joseph Proudhon

The main representatives of anarchism

• Emma Goldman (writer);
• Noam Chomsky (linguist);
• Mikhail Alexandrovich Bakunin (philosopher and revolutionary);
• Pyotr Alekseevich Kropotkin (anarchist revolutionary and scientist);
• Rudolf Rocker (publicist);
• Errico Malatesta (activist and writer);
• Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (politician and philosopher);
• Nestor Ivanovich Makhno (revolutionary);
• Varlaam Aslanovich Cherkezishvili (revolutionary);
• Max Stirner (real name - Johann Kaspar Schmidt; philosopher);
• Pyotr Nikitich Tkachev (publicist);
• Maria Isidorovna Goldsmith (physiologist and psychologist);
• William Godwin (journalist, writer and philosopher).

Differences between anarchism, communism and anarcho-communism

Anarchism is a rather comprehensive concept. Anarchism seeks to abandon the state, and this can be done using different strategies. This is why anarchism has so many variations.

Communism is an ideology and social order that fights against the class division of society and private property, and promotes social equality. In communism, a person works for the well-being of the whole society.
In practice, the introduction of communism meant strengthening the role of the state in people's lives.

It can be said that the state even took control of a huge part of human life. And in anarchism, the main idea is to give the reins of government to the people.

Anarcho-communism, on the other hand, advocated the elimination of the state, private property and capitalism, against any leaders or hierarchy. He called for control over the means of production. Management and production should be carried out through a horizontal network of voluntary associations, workers' councils, etc.

Difference Between Anarchism and Nihilism

Anarchism is also often compared to nihilism. Nihilism means the rejection of all existing doctrines and beliefs.

Anarchism believes that the current political situation is not conducive to the development of the qualities of the individual and for this reason it should be rejected.

Anarchism in Russia

Anarchism was an influential movement abroad and appeared in Russia with Russian emigrants at the end of the 19th century. In total, there were three most prominent currents: Bakuninists, Lavrovites and Tkachevites.

Bakunism associated with the name of the famous anarchist M. A. Bakunin. The main characteristics of this direction are: absolute freedom of the individual and independence of communities of small producers, the elimination of private property, the destruction of any state; they fought against the Marxist doctrine of socialist revolution and the formation of political parties.

For Lavrovites the priority was serious and long-term propaganda, they thought that the social revolution would take place only in the distant future.

Leader Tkachevites- Pyotr Nikitich Tkachev (1844-1886) - argued that through a well-planned large-scale terrorist conspiracy, a social revolution could be achieved. Tkachev's supporters believed that people would establish a socialist stateless system through a revolutionary dictatorship.

After these movements, anarchism wanes until the beginning of the 20th century. In 1903, in Europe, P. A. Kropotkin, V. N. Cherkezov (Cherkezishvili), M. Goldsmith and others began to publish a magazine with anarchist and communist ideas, Bread and Freedom.

Most active anarchists in 1904–1905 supported P. A. Kropotkin. "Khlebovoltsy" (from "the name of the magazine" Khleb i Volya ") became the leading group of anarchist-communists at that time in Russia.

Pyotr Alekseevich Kropotkin (1842–1921)

However, they advocated uncompromising class struggle as well as violent revolution to realize socialism.

Ultimately, because of this inconsistency with the truths of the anarchist ideology, the masses were dissatisfied, and in April 1905 a new anarchist organization was born called " startless". They also began to print their principles and ideas ("Leaf of the Beznachalie group", Paris, N. Romanov, M. Sushchinsky, E. Litvin).

The beginningless already believed that anarchism had to fulfill these principles:

• anarchy;
• communism;
• struggle with classes;
• social revolution;
• international solidarity;
• uprising with weapons;
• nihilism (the overthrow of "bourgeois morality", family and culture);
• agitation of the "rabble" (the unemployed, vagabonds, etc.);
• refusal to interact with political parties.

Then the latest form of anarchism was formed - anarcho-syndicalism(or revolutionary syndicalism). For them, the priority was to unite all workers in syndicates (in revolutionary workers' unions).

They supported the class struggle. And unlike social democracy, in their opinion, any political organization, political clash or involvement in bourgeois parliaments had a detrimental effect on the working class.
The main ideas of anarcho-syndicalism were taken from the works of Pierre Joseph Proudhon and Mikhail Bakunin.

Russian anarchist M. A. Bakunin

Mikhail Alexandrovich Bakunin (1814–1876)

Mikhail Alexandrovich Bakunin was a famous revolutionary and founder of anarchism. In Russia, he was the brightest representative of anarchism.

Mikhail Alexandrovich was born into the family of a wealthy nobleman in the Tver province. In 1840 he moved to Europe, where in 1844 (in Paris) he met with Karl Marx. He constantly moves from country to country, gets acquainted with revolutionary ideas, is interested in political economy and communism.

But the ideas of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (considered the first to call himself an anarchist) have a great influence on the formation of Bakunin's worldview.

In 1847, after his first public speech against the Russian autocracy, Bakunin was expelled from Paris and moved to Brussels. But the very next year he returned to Paris and took an active part in the French Revolution of 1848.

Then Bakunin participates in the uprisings in Prague and Dresden. And in 1851 he was arrested by the Russian gendarmerie. In Russia, Bakunin was imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress (where he stayed until 1857), where he wrote his famous Confession.

Bakunin roams Siberia and the Far East over the following years. But in 1861 he manages to escape, and he ends up in San Francisco.

In the same year, he is already in London and continues his activities as a revolutionary, obsessed with his idea - to unite the Slavs in the struggle against the Ottoman, Austrian and Russian empires in order to create a federal Slavic state.

He created a secret revolutionary organization, which he called the "International Secret Revolutionary Society for the Liberation of Mankind." Then it was renamed the "International Brotherhood".

The main goals of this organization were:

• the exercise of individual freedom with the equality of all members of society;
• abolition of property rights and inheritance rights;
• introduction of freedom of marriage;
• proclaiming the equality of men and women;
• organization of public education of children;
• the producer of wealth is only the labor of society.

These and other ideas were included in his State and Anarchy, published in 1873. In this work, Bakunin called on the youth to revolution.

In his opinion, the disunity of the peasant communities was the main problem of all unsuccessful attempts at peasant riots, so he called for "going to the people" in order to establish a "living rebellious connection between the disunited communities." This appeal did not go unanswered and gave rise to a phenomenon called "populism".

Bakunin tried to abolish the monarchy and establish a republic, to abolish classes, privileges and any differences, to equalize the political rights of men and women, he tried to achieve "an internal reorganization of every country with the unconditional freedom of individuals."