Russian liberals of the XIX century on the interaction of national and universal in the historical progress

One of the most controversial issues in social thought of the XIX century was the problem of therelation of national and universal, defined the format of participation of ethnic groups in human progress. The founder of the liberal traditionin the study of this problem is to Belinsky. Belinsky views on the relationship of national and universal can be summarized as follows. Theprogress of humanity was considered by him as the supreme value, meaning and content of the historical development and implementednationally. All the peoples of Belinsky in accordance with the Hegelian gradation divided by the «historical», developing in line with progressand being its engine. These nations became nations, were able to create their own national state. Peoples 'unhistorical' could not besubjects of the progressive development and were «tribes» were in the orbit of influence of the «historic» nations included in their state. Humanityis a collection of «historical» nations. Every «historical» people is a party, the idea of humanity. Historical nation do not change theirsubstance when dealing with other nations. Nationality them expressed more vividly, the greater their development. Interpretation of Russianliberal thinkers of the relationship between national and universal transformed in the 1850s - 1880s. from the classic Hegelian with its doctrineof historical progress as a personification of nations to recognize the value of any people as a subject of world progress. The most contrastingpositions were V.S. Soloviev, A.D. Gradovsky. First, while recognizing certain self-sufficiency of national existence, meaning it isstill considered part of the basic human process, and the gradual universalization of moral values based on Christianity. Preservation of nationalcharacteristics and differences perceived by them as an obstacle to unity, which should specifically be overcome. A.D. Gradovskii seenin nations not only the main force of human development, but the basic form of human unity. He insisted on the need to protect the uniquenational characteristics, and intended to preserve the national organization in the future, seeing no alternative to it. At the same time in thewritings of Russian-Western liberal tradition is preserved only find in Europe has focused innovative ideas and processes, representing theEast bastion of conservatism and stagnation. Here, perhaps, only the B.N. Chicherin could foresee the imminent «awakening» of the Asiancountries and their output on the scene as an independent and active force.

Keywords

Authors

References