This line of ideas was developed by another theorist of liberalism, one of the brightest and most important thinkers in the history of Russian legal thought - Boris Nikolaevich Chicherin (1828-1904), professor of state law at Moscow University. It is noteworthy that Chicherin was a student of Granovsky. During the reign of Alexander II, Chicherin actively participated in political activity. Since 1883, with the beginning of the counter-reforms of Alexander III, he was not even allowed to teaching activities. This did not stop Chicherin from writing a number of interesting political and legal scientific works, among which we can especially note “Property and the State” (1881-1883), “Course state science"(1894-1898), "Philosophy of Law" (1900).
To understand Chicherin’s legal concept, it is important to take into account that he, like many other Russian thinkers of that time, was influenced by the ideas of the German philosopher Hegel. Chicherin developed and supplemented these ideas, which allowed him to create a coherent and deep concept of law as a formal restriction of individual freedom. The thinker’s goal was to search for a harmonious agreement “ public interactions» four basic unions of human society - families, civil society, church and state.
the main problem public life for Chicherin, as well as for his mentor T.N. Granovsky - a combination of two opposing elements: individuals and society. This task is not an easy one, since the spiritual nature of the individual is freedom, and social principle expressed in law as a restriction of freedom, its regulation, introduction into a socially acceptable framework. The essence of man is his inner freedom, striving for realization absolute law V human activity. In the traditions of Russian religious and moral philosophy and Hegelian dialectics, Chicherin considers this legal freedom as the revelation human personality, the essence of which is conscience, which in its essence is not subject to any external restrictions. In relation to legal regulation, we are simply talking about another facet of human freedom - about external freedom, the boundary of which is “law, as the restriction of freedom by law.” Thus, for Chicherin, the two sides of freedom were morality (“internal” freedom) and law (“external” freedom).
But there is a significant difference between morality and law. Unlike law, morality does not have a coercive nature; its source lies in inner freedom. Therefore, what is moral is what is done out of one’s own inner impulse, and not out of fear of punishment. You cannot force love, make self-sacrifice. Compulsion to morality is immorality. On this basis, the famous dispute described above arose between Boris Chicherin and Vladimir Solovyov - the latter defined law as a minimum of morality and saw no obstacles to the merging of the abstract principle of law with a living sense of justice, with moral consciousness personality.
According to Chicherin’s definition, law is a mutual restriction of freedom common law and therefore law as a heteronomous regulation must be distinguished from morality as a strictly autonomous regulation. Along with the division of freedom into moral and legal, in the concept of personal freedom, Chicherin distinguished two sides - negative (independence from the will of others) and positive (the ability to act according to one’s own impulse, and not according to external command). Accordingly, two types of law are distinguished. Objective law is a set of norms that defines freedom and fixes the subjective rights and obligations of participants in legal relations; and subjective right - the freedom of a person to do or demand something, formalized through objective right. Both of these meanings are inextricably linked, since freedom is expressed in the form of law, while the law aims to recognize and define freedom. Therefore, Chicherin puts forward the statement that “the source of law is not in law, but in freedom,” without contradicting his division between law and morality.
When studying state power, Chicherin proceeded from the generally accepted principle of liberalism of that era - the inadmissibility of interference in privacy. The state has the responsibility to protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, and it itself, according to
Chicherin, arises as a result general will based on one of three types of public unions: family, civil and church. According to the tradition dating back to Aristotle, Chicherin emphasizes the public principle of power and its content - the idea of the common good. In this aspect, for Chicherin, the state is “ supreme union, which is designed to restrain private forces, and does not allow one to subjugate others... Any private enslavement is contrary to state principles.”
Chicherin defines the state as a union of free people, bound by law into one legal whole and managed supreme power for the common good. He is trying to find a middle ground between two extreme opinions about the boundaries of state activity: either to reduce state participation in public life to the protection of law and order, and leave everything else to the free activity of citizens, or to completely subordinate all private activities to the state. The latter unilateralism is incomparably worse and more dangerous than the first: all-encompassing regulation private activities leads to complete suppression of freedom. But the first theory also cannot be accepted: the state cannot limit itself only to maintaining security; it itself is the guiding force that leads citizens to the common good.
In this regard, Chicherin distinguished three types of liberalism: street, opposition and protective. Only the last, protective type of liberalism, which includes certain important elements conservatism. Chicherin explained his proposed division this way. “Street” liberalism is the freedom of the crowd, prone to political scandals, which is characterized by a lack of tolerance and respect for other people’s opinions, admiring one’s own excitement - “a perversion, not a manifestation of freedom.” “Oppositional” liberalism, which accompanies any reform undertakings, constantly denounces the authorities of both real and imaginary mistakes, “enjoying the very brilliance of its appositional position,” criticizing for the sake of criticism and understanding freedom from a purely negative side.
Conservation liberalism is focused on implementing reforms taking into account all social strata based on their mutual concessions and compromises, relying on strong power, in accordance with the natural course of history. In other words, the essence of protective liberalism consists in reconciling the beginning of freedom with the beginning of power and law. IN political life the slogan of protective liberalism: “liberal measures and strong power.” Liberal measures provide society independent activity, ensure the rights and personality of citizens: a strong government is the guarantor of state unity, binds and restrains society, protects order, and strictly supervises the implementation of laws. Positive meaning According to Chicherin, only this protective liberalism can give freedom. From here comes the justification and political position thinker: it is necessary to act, understanding the conditions of power, without systematically becoming involved in it hostility without making reckless or premature demands.
In this sense, when we talk about this thinker as a liberal, we must take into account that this was no longer classical liberalism with the ideology of laisser faire, laisser passer. Chicherin Special attention paid attention to “protective principles”, which reveal the content of tradition, continuity, connecting two trends in the development of society - the tendency of preservation (stabilization) and the tendency of transformation (reform). Such protective principles, according to the scientist, are: “the unconscious instinct of the masses,” their immediate feelings and habits; the presence of a protective party that defends those general principles, on which society is based, namely power, court, law; " historical beginnings» people: for Russia they have always been a strong government - a guarantor of consent and unity of society. Thus, the thinker’s position involves a combination of political liberalism with a strong state power, with the possibility of state intervention in social and spiritual life, with recognition of the partial correctness of the philosophy of traditionalism.
Chicherin’s “protective” liberalism is based on the trinity of the three main principles of community life - freedom, power and law, equal and inseparable. From here follows the thesis about the need for strong power, since the harmonious agreement of the above principles presupposes social unity, and for this it is necessary to have unity in state life; the latter is possible with the unity of power, and not its division. This is best achieved with such a “mixed” form of government as a constitutional monarchy, which is a political ideal for a thinker. Chicherin recognized property as a necessary manifestation of freedom. In his writings, especially in the essay “Property and the State,” he challenged the socialist theory of transferring all production and distribution into the hands of the state, “the worst master that can be imagined.” The right of ownership, according to Chicherin, is a fundamental legal principle arising from human freedom and establishing the sovereignty of a person over a thing, being a natural continuation of the human personality in things. The intrusion of the state into the area of property and the restriction of the owner’s right to dispose of his property is the threshold that the thinker considered the unconditional limit for state interventionism.
Regarding the issue of political reforms in Russia, Chicherin opposed egalitarianism, that is, against the equalization of the property status of citizens and the destruction of class division. He allowed formal equality as equality before the law, which constitutes a requirement of freedom, but not material and spiritual equality (equality of property and qualifications), which contradicts freedom. Freedom, the thinker argued, necessarily leads to inequality of conditions. The task of law, according to his teaching, is not to destroy diversity, but to contain it within proper limits. The political principle “liberal measures and strong power” formulated by Chicherin with the rationale for a gradual transition through reforms from autocracy to a constitutional monarchy met with support in liberal-minded government circles of the early 20th century.
Chicherin's creativity is multifaceted. He left behind a number of remarkable works, where he clearly and consistently outlined his legal doctrine. His concepts were also some shortcomings, criticized by his contemporaries. Basically, these are the shortcomings that were characteristic of the entire movement of Hegelianism: rationalism, that is, an emphasis on the role of reason in historical development(although history shows that not everything happens according to man’s rational plans), an attempt to find in social development some immutable laws, the emphasis is on individual freedom, without taking into account the necessary distinction social forms And cultural background freedom.
In general, Chicherin, like most Russian liberals, was characterized by closeness to the ideas of Westerners, although the thinkers of that era showed a tendency to smooth out the contradictions of these two trends. It should be noted that by the 60s of the 19th century, the distinction between Slavophiles and Westerners had been erased, and among the supporters of the liberal doctrine of that era we find important elements of both Slavophilism (recognition of the unique development of Russia) and Westernism (the idea of cooperation with Europe). Therefore, it seems unsuccessful to introduce the categories “late Westerners” or “late Slavophiles” for the representatives of liberalism and conservatism we studied.
The goal of the liberals was, as we have seen, the liberation of the human personality. And they wanted to achieve this goal through legal reforms- adoption of new, more advanced laws, gradual reform of public life. The same goal - the liberation of the individual - was also pursued by representatives of the third current of Russian legal thought, the second half of the 19th century century - revolutionary radicals. But they considered it necessary to go to this goal through social revolution, through revolution.
One of the talented philosophers of the 19th century was Boris Nikolaevich Chicherin. Its origin was from the ancient noble family, in the family of a rich and noble landowner. From an early age, Boris Nikolaevich showed a thirst for knowledge. His primary education took place at home on the Tambov estate of his father Karaul, where one of the teachers was K. N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin.
Subsequently, in 1845, Boris Nikolaevich Chicherin entered the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, where he studied with such teachers as T. N. Granovsky, S. M. Solovyov, K. D. Kavelin, which subsequently greatly influenced the formation of Boris Chicherin’s views Nikolaevich.
In 1840, he became interested in studying the works of Hegel, one of the creators of German classical philosophy and the philosophy of romanticism, and also became acquainted with such outstanding personalities, like P. V. Annenkov, A. I. Hertseno, K. D. Kavelin, I. S. Turgenev.
In 1857 he defended his master's thesis " Regional institutions Russia in the 17th century",
In 1857 he met L.N. Tolstoy, with whom he established a close relationship for several years.
In 1858 in London he met with A. I. Herzen, who published " Modern challenges Russian life" Chicherin Boris Nikolaevich in "Voices from Russia". Chicherin Boris Nikolaevich already in his early years had a reputation as a conservative. In connection with this, he was invited as a teacher to the heir under Alexander II; in 1863 he began teaching Nikolai Alexandrovich a course in public law , but in 1865 the heir unexpectedly died.
In 1861-1867, Boris Nikolaevich Chicherin became an extraordinary professor at Moscow University in the department of state law; in its fundamental work"On People's Representation" (Chicherin's doctoral dissertation, published in 1866 and republished in 1899) for the first time in Russian legal literature traced the development of parliamentary institutions among European peoples. Regarding their applicability to the Russia of that time, Boris Nikolaevich Chicherin wrote: “I will not hide the fact that I love free institutions; but I do not consider them applicable always and everywhere, and I prefer honest autocracy to insolvent representation.” In 1868, together with a number of other professors, he resigned in protest against the course of the Ministry public education.
At the beginning of 1882 he was elected Moscow mayor. Participated in events on the occasion of the coronation of Emperor Alexander III (May 15, 1883); On May 16, speaking at a gala dinner for city mayors, he spoke out for “the unity of all zemstvo forces for the good of the fatherland” and expressed hope that the authorities would recognize the need for cooperation with the zemstvo movement. The speech was regarded by circles close to the emperor as a requirement of the constitution and served as the reason for his resignation.
In September 1883, the Moscow City Duma made B. N. Chicherin an honorary citizen of Moscow “for his work for the benefit of the Moscow City Society in the rank of Moscow City Mayor.”
Returning to the Guard, Chicherin Boris Nikolaevich again took up scientific activity, wrote a number of works on philosophy, as well as on chemistry and biology, which gave reason to D.I. Mendeleev to recommend Chicherin for election as an honorary member of the Russian Physicochemical Society. Chicherin Boris Nikolaevich takes an active and fruitful part in the work of the Tambov zemstvo.
In 1888-1894 he worked on “Memoirs”, a significant part of which is dedicated to Moscow and Moscow University in the 1840s.
Biography
B. N. Chicherin came from an old noble family. He spent his childhood on his father's Tambov estate, Karaul. Received home education. Among the teachers was K. N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, later an academician St. Petersburg Academy Sciences and founder of the Higher Women's Courses. In December 1844, he lived with his mother in Moscow and was preparing for university exams.
In the late 1840s - early 1850s. meets P.V. Annenkov, A.I. Herzen, K.D. Kavelin, I.S. Turgenev. He studied the works of Hegel and was significantly influenced by the ideas of French political thinkers. After graduating from university, he lives in his family village.
In 1853, he submitted his master’s thesis “Regional Institutions of Russia in the 17th Century” for defense, which was rejected with the conclusion that it misrepresented the activities of the old administration of Russia. The dissertation was defended only in 1857 after some easing of censorship.
In 1857 he met L.N. Tolstoy, with whom he established a close relationship for several years. In 1858-61, Chicherin traveled abroad, during which he became acquainted with European political teachings. In 1858, in London, he met with A. I. Herzen, who published Chicherin’s “Modern tasks of Russian life” in “Voices from Russia”. Chicherin already had a reputation as a conservative in Russian society in his early years. He was invited to be a teacher to the heir under Alexander II; in 1863 he began teaching Nikolai Alexandrovich a course in state law, but in 1865 the heir died.
In 1861-1867, Chicherin was an extraordinary professor at Moscow University in the department of state law; in his fundamental work “On People's Representation” (Chicherin's doctoral dissertation, published in 1866 and republished in 1899), for the first time in Russian legal literature he traced the development of parliamentary institutions among European peoples. Regarding their applicability to the Russia of that time, Chicherin wrote: “I will not hide the fact that I love free institutions; but I do not consider them applicable always and everywhere, and I prefer honest autocracy to insolvent representation.” In 1868, together with a number of other professors, he resigned in protest against the course of the Ministry of Public Education.
After a trip to Paris, he again settled in the family estate Karaul. Engaged in zemstvo activities; was a comrade (deputy) chairman of the Commission established to study the railway business in Russia. During these years, he wrote and published in Moscow “History political doctrines"(parts 1-2, 1869-1872), "Science and Religion" (1879).
I visited Moscow on short visits. At the beginning of 1882, he was elected Moscow mayor, replacing S. M. Tretyakov, who retired early, from this post. Chicherin managed to achieve some improvements in the urban economy of Moscow, in particular, to ensure the flow of Mytishchi water into the Moscow water supply system. Participated in events on the occasion of the coronation of Emperor Alexander III (May 15, 1883); On May 16, speaking at a gala dinner of city mayors, he spoke out for “the unity of all zemstvo forces for the good of the fatherland” and expressed hope that the authorities would recognize the need for cooperation with the zemstvo movement. The speech was regarded by circles close to the emperor as a requirement of the constitution and served as the reason for his resignation.
In September 1883, the Moscow City Duma made B. N. Chicherin an honorary citizen of Moscow “for his work for the benefit of the Moscow city society in the rank of Moscow City Mayor.”
Returning to Karaul, Chicherin again took up scientific activity, wrote a number of works on philosophy, as well as chemistry and biology, which gave reason to D.I. Mendeleev to recommend Chicherin for election as an honorary member of the Russian Physical and Chemical Society. Chicherin takes an active and fruitful part in the work of the Tambov zemstvo.
In 1888-1894 he worked on “Memoirs”, a significant part of which is dedicated to Moscow and Moscow University in the 1840s.
Scientific and political views
Sherwood V. S. Portrait of B. N. Chicherin.
Firmly and uncompromisingly defending individual rights, Chicherin associated with this the idea of “order” - he very consciously stood for firm power, resolutely and sharply condemned all manifestations of the revolutionary spirit. This repelled Chicherin Russian society and, on the contrary, made it valuable in the eyes of the government. Chicherin's letters to his brother, who served in St. Petersburg, were reported to Alexander II, so much were they valued by the conservative circles that were then grouped around the young Tsar. It is therefore no coincidence that Chicherin, who had just received a chair at Moscow University, was invited to teach the heir Nikolai Alexandrovich (the eldest son of Alexander II, who died very early, as a result of which the second son of Alexander II, Alexander III, became the heir and later the tsar). But the reputation of a conservative, which had developed very early in relation to Chicherin, was, of course, only partly true: just as it was no coincidence that Chicherin had harsh condemnations revolutionary movement, it was also no coincidence that he appeared at Moscow University as the leader of the (then small) group of liberal professors.
Chicherin is a representative and one of the founders (along with S. M. Solovyov and K. D. Kavelin) " public school"in Russian historiography. In his master's thesis and in a number of other works (“Essays on the history of Russian law”, “Essays on England and France” (both 1858)) he substantiated decisive role states in Russian history. Grade historical significance state substantially corresponded to the principles of Hegel’s philosophy of history. At the same time, Chicherin was a supporter of the liberalization of public life in Russia: he advocated the abolition of serfdom, believed necessary introduction representative forms of government, advocated for the expansion and guarantee of civil liberties of all classes and every person. Chicherin's liberal views found expression in his works of the 1860s - early 1880s: “On People's Representation”, “Course of State Science”, “Property and the State”, etc.
In the spirit of Hegelianism, he believed that the Absolute directs the process of development of the world and humanity. Wherein human freedom retains its meaning, since man is initially involved in the Absolute, being at the same time a finite and infinite being. The “absoluteness” and “infinity” of a person are determined primarily by his mind as a form of absolute spirit. According to Chicherin, the “supreme science” that comprehends the meaning of what is happening in the world turns out to be the metaphysics of history. IN historical process the metaphysical philosopher discovers the logic of the development of ideas, therefore special meaning among historical disciplines has a history human thought, history of philosophy.
Notes
Literature
List of works
- Regional institutions of Russia in the 17th century. - M., 1856. - 594 p.
- Experiments on the history of Russian law. - M., 1858. - 389 p.
- Essays on England and France. (1859)
- Several contemporary issues. - M., 1862. - 265 p.
- On popular representation. - M., 1866. - 553 p.
- History of political doctrines.
- Part 1: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. - M., 1869.
- Part 2: New time. - M., 1872.
- Part 3: New time. - M., 1874.
- Part 4: XIX century. - M., 1877.
- Part 5: . - M., 1902.
- The constitutional question in Russia. - St. Petersburg, 1906. - 84 p. (Manuscript 1878).
- Gerye V. I., Chicherin B. N. Russian amateurism and communal land ownership: Analysis of the book by Prince A. Vasilchikov “Land Ownership and Agriculture.” - M., 1878. - 250 p.
- Science and religion. (1879)
- Positive philosophy and the unity of science. (1892)
- Foundations of logic and metaphysics. (1894)
- Essays on the philosophy of law. (1901)
- Questions of philosophy and psychology. (1904)
- Property and the state.
- Part 1 . - M., 1882. - 469 p.
- Part 2 . - M., 1883. - 459 p.
- Modern ed.: Chicherin, B. N. Property and the state. - St. Petersburg: Russian Christian Publishing House Humanitarian Academy, 2005. - 824 p. - ISBN 5-88812-202-5.
- Positive philosophy and the unity of science. M., 1892; Foundations of logic and metaphysics. - M., 1894.
- Government science course. Parts 1-3. - M., 1894-98.
- Questions of philosophy. - M., 1904.
- System chemical elements. - M., 1911.
- Memories. T. 1-4. - M., 1929-34.
- On the principles of ethics. Justification of good, moral philosophy of Vl. Solovyova. - Law and morality, essays from applied ethics // Philosophical Sciences. - 1989. - № 9.
Bibliography
- // Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: In 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional ones). - St. Petersburg. , 1890-1907.
- Gulbinsky, I. B. N. Chicherin. - M., 1914.
- Evlampiev I. I. Philosophical and socio-political views of B. N. Chicherin. - In the book: Chicherin B. N. Property and the state. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house RKhGA, 2005. - P. 3-30. - ISBN 5-88812-202-5.
- Zorkin V. D. From the history of bourgeois-liberal political thought in Russia in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries: B. N. Chicherin. - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1975. - 173 p.
- Zorkin V. D. Chicherin / Answer. ed. P. S. Gratsiansky. - M.: Legal literature, 1984. - 112 p. - (From the history of political and legal thought).
- Vereshchagin A. N. Boris Chicherin - Russian political scientist // Herald Russian Academy Sciences. - 1995. - T. 65. - No. 12. - P. 1085-1093.
Categories:
- Personalities in alphabetical order
- Scientists by alphabet
- Born on June 7
- Born in 1828
- Died on February 17
- Died in 1904
- Writers in the public domain
- Lawyers of the Russian Empire
- Lawyers of the Russian Empire
- Historians of the Russian Empire
- Philosophers of Russia
- Philosophers in alphabetical order
- 19th century philosophers
- Hegelians
- Heads of Moscow
- Honorary citizens of Moscow
- Members of the Moscow English club before 1917
- Memoirists of the Russian Empire
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
See what “Chicherin, Boris Nikolaevich” is in other dictionaries:
- (1828 1904) philosopher, lawyer, publicist. He graduated from the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, in 1861-1868 he headed the Department of Law at Moscow University, and resigned for political reasons. In 1882 1883 he held the position of Moscow City... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia
1828-1904) - an outstanding Russian lawyer, philosopher, historian, one of the founders of the “state school”, ideologist of liberalism, critic of Marxism. Works « Constitutional question in Russia" (1878) and "Tasks of the new reign" (1881) played a decisive role in the development of Russian liberalism. Prepared fundamental works By philosophical problems: “Science and Religion” (1879); "Philosophy of Law" (1900); "Questions of Philosophy" (1904). Author of "Memoirs", which are a valuable source on the history of Russia in the 40-80s. XIX century Other the most important works- “On popular representation” (1866), “History of political doctrines” (1869-1902).
Excellent definition
CHICHERIN Boris Nikolaevich
1828-1904) - an outstanding Russian. lawyer, philosopher, historian. Ch. is called one of the founders of Russian. "state school", one of the first Russian. ideologists of liberalism. Ch. was an extremely versatile scientist, his area scientific interests extended far beyond social sciences- this includes chemistry, zoology, and physics. Suffice it to mention that on the initiative of D.I. Mendeleev for his work on theoretical chemistry Ch. was elected an honorary member of the Russian Federation. Physicochemical Society. Ch. graduated from the Faculty of Law of Moscow University. In 1853, he submitted a dissertation to the faculty for the scientific degree master's degree However, it was not allowed to be defended, since it contained provisions condemning autocracy. Two years after the failure that befell him, Ch. joins liberal trend rus. intelligentsia and becomes its prominent representative. Articles by Ch., directed against serfdom, are published by A. I. Herzen abroad in such publications as “Voices from Russia” and “Historical Collection”. However, Ch.'s cooperation with Herzen turned out to be short-lived; ideological differences led them to break up. During the reign of Alexander II, Ch. taught at the Faculty of Law of Moscow University, from where he was forced to leave in the late 60s. in protest against the policies of the faculty leadership. After leaving the university, Ch. continued his research in the field of history, state and law. Ch.'s focus is on the idea of freedom, which he divided into civil, social and political freedom. In society there must be a balance between civil and political freedom. The State expresses common interests people common good, but if he gains an advantage over public sphere and absorbs the latter, it completely destroys both the foundations of personal freedom and the foundations of its own existence. However, political freedom can lead not only to good, but also to discord. If the unity necessary for the state cannot be established by the consent of citizens, it is necessary to resort to power. The general political rule formulated by Ch. states: the less unity in society, the more concentrated the power should be and, conversely, the stronger National unity, the more divided power should be. “On this law,” wrote Ch., “the possibility or impossibility is based political freedom" Where a people does not have a long tradition of freedom, it must be introduced carefully and gradually, since failure to use it can lead to serious social complications. This position, Ch. believed, is also true for Russia. Her movement towards freedom should be gradual and calm - only after mastering what she has acquired can she move forward. Ch. advocated phased evolutionary reforms“from above” for Russia. Delay in reforms, he warned, leads to a revolutionary explosion. The most important task on the path of reform - limiting autocracy in Russia, rallying reform forces on the platform of “liberal-conservatism” under the slogan “liberal measures and strong power.” The combination of liberal measures - providing freedom of activity (and above all economic freedom), press, speech, etc. with the functions of strong power - maintaining state unity, maintaining order, monitoring compliance with laws can be ensured by a constitutional monarchy, - believed Ch.
CHICHERIN Boris Nikolaevich
(1828, village Karaul, Tambov province - 1904, Moscow)
one of the ideologists of liberalism. Born into a noble family of a landowner. Having received a thorough home training, in 1845 he entered legal department Moscow University, where he became one of the best students of T.N. Granovsky, S.M. Solovyova, K.D. Kavelina; was left at the university to prepare for a professorship. From ser. 50s Chicherin actively participated in social and political life. His first historical and legal works were “Experiments on the History of Russian Law”, “Regional Institutions of Russia in the 17th Century”, “Essays on England and France”, publication in “Voices from Russia” by A. I. Herzen of the article “Modern Problems of Russian Life” ( 1858) brought him fame as one of the main ideologists of liberalism in Russia.
considered autocracy a force capable of rallying around itself supporters of reforms, among whom there should be neither reactionaries nor radicals. This idea was the basis of his program of “liberal conservatism.” He welcomed the abolition of serfdom and had a sharply negative attitude towards the revolutionary democrats and their assessments of the reform.
In 1861, Chicherin began teaching at the Department of State Law at the Law Faculty of Moscow University. The program for transforming Russia “from above” developed by Chicherin met with the support of A.M. Gorchakov, who had a great influence on Alexander II. From 1863, Chicherin began teaching a course in state law to the heir to the throne, Nikolai Alexandrovich, hoping for the reformist course of the future emperor. However, in 1865 the heir died, and the future Alexander III was the complete opposite of his brother. In 1866 Chicherin defended his doctoral dissertation "On People's Representation." In 1868 he resigned in protest against the violation of the university charter (“Where there is lawlessness, there must be protest. It may be practically useless, but it is always morally necessary,” Chicherin later explained his behavior).
He was engaged in science, wrote works that were important in the development of Russian culture. liberalism ("The Constitutional Question in Russia", 1878; "Tasks of the New Reign", 1881), participated in the work of the Tambov zemstvo. After the assassination of Alexander II, Chicherin made a last attempt to influence the formation of the policy of the new reign and was elected Moscow mayor
He called for Russia to abandon “slaves and masters” and begin moving towards a civilized society, but could not find public recognition and was watered down. Chicherin's fate did not materialize. Living on his estate, he studied mathematics and natural sciences
prepared fundamental works on philosophical problems ("Science and Religion", 1879; "Philosophy of Law", 1900; "Questions of Philosophy", 1904, etc.). Chicherin is the author of "Memoirs", which are a valuable source on the history of Russia from the 40s to the 80s. XIX century
Chicherin about law author of the five-volume "History of Political Doctrines" (1869 - 1902), as well as a number of fundamental works in the field of state science and philosophy of law - "On National Representation" (1866), "Course of State Science" (3 parts, 1894 - 1898), "Philosophy rights" (1900). Hegelian philosophy was one of the main factors in the formation of Chicherin’s views
He attaches extremely great importance to the role of the state in the historical process.
The structure of the Russian state, in his opinion, was organized “from above.”
His specific program for Russia consisted of demanding freedom of conscience, freedom from serfdom, freedom of public opinion, freedom of printing, freedom of teaching, publicity of all government actions, publicity and openness of legal proceedings. He considered the ideal of government (at least for Russia) to be a constitutional monarchy.
The state, according to Chicherin, appears in history as a union of the people, bound by law into one legal whole and governed by the supreme authority for the common good. Private good is the goal not of the state, but of civil society. The state ensures security and the implementation of moral order, it also defines and protects rights and freedoms. At the same time, the state determines civil rights, and not so-called natural rights. The very area of natural law - in contrast to positive law - is the area of demands for truth, justice, it is “a system of general legal norms arising from the human mind that should serve as a measure and guide for positive legislation.” justice as a common rational principle is the measure by which the area of freedom is delimited individuals and legal requirements are established.
The goal of socio-political development is to avoid the extremes of individualistic anarchism and mechanical statism and to be able to harmoniously combine personal and state principles, individual freedom and general law.
Law is the external freedom of a person, determined by external laws. Since the law defines rights and obligations, that is, “freedom with its boundaries” and the ensuing relations, these boundaries are the basic principle of law as an idea, as a norm of freedom.
Freedom in his interpretation appears in the following stages of development - external (law), internal (moral) and social freedom.
Chicherin on the concept and essence of the state he viewed the state as the highest development of the idea of human society and the embodiment of morality.
The Russian thinker reduces being to four principles, or causes: productive, formal, material and final. In society, these reasons correspond to: productive - power, formal - law, material - freedom, final - goal or idea (common benefit, common good).
Authority, law, freedom and the common good are inherent in every union, but in each of them one of these elements predominates.
And since, Chicherin argues, there are four social elements, then they correspond to four unions: family, civil society, church and state. According to Chicherin’s theory, the state is not a means of exploiting workers, a direct result of the irreconcilable contradictions of “civil society,” but an arbiter between the legal and moral areas of life, designed to prevent them from being absorbed by each other, to establish peace and the common good. Chicherin’s understanding of the state as a legal union is similar to the legal theories of the state; a certain exaggeration of the legal aspect of the state. However, in general it goes beyond these theories. The concept of the state, according to Chicherin, is multifaceted. The state is, firstly, a manifestation of the Absolute (the influence of Hegel’s philosophy of law); secondly, a legal union (a reflection of the legal worldview of the bourgeoisie); thirdly - an experimental fact, real subjects of power (sociological approach). Chicherin distinguished the following sciences about the state: philosophy of law (knowledge of the a priori principles of state and law), state law(the study of the state as a legal union), sociology (the state in connection with other unions, primarily with civil society), politics (the science of the actions of the state in connection with the struggle for power of various parties and groups). Chicherin views the state primarily as a union of the people, and not just an institution or apparatus.
The idea of the state is to establish the highest unity of social life and the agreement of all its constituent elements. These are two different tasks. the first leads to the consolidation of private dependencies and the strengthening of the dominant elements, the second leads to the protection of the lower from oppression by the higher. the first is an urgent need of the state at the lower stages of development, where it is necessary to create social unity.
An emerging state. Naturally, it relies on the strongest elements, subordinating the rest to them and thereby trying to strengthen the social bond. When this state organism has become stronger, the second task emerges with particular force.
Here two characteristic features of Chicherin’s views on the state appeared: firstly, a view of the development of the state as a movement towards a predetermined goal, secondly, the absolutization of the relative independence of the state, the view of it as a non-class institution that develops and exists on its own, only adapting to the needs of society, maneuvering between different groups and classes.
Chicherin identifies the centralized feudal monarchy and the bourgeois state. Therefore, he is not talking about the state of the period of the estate system and the state of the general civil period (as would follow from his thesis that each citizen strictly corresponds to the system of politics), but only about a single “state of modern times”, which only changes its forms.
The class compromise largely predetermined the inconsistency of Chicherin's theory of the state: on the one hand, the Hegelian position about the state as an end in itself and a manifestation of the Absolute Spirit, about a state endowed with unlimited rights in relation to citizens; on the other hand, the natural law concept of the state as an association of all citizens, an insurance organization to ensure freedom and property, rooted in human nature and which are sacred and inviolable principles for the state, which it has no right to violate.