Formation and creation of political parties in Russia at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century. Manifesto of October 17, 1905 And its significance in the creation of parties in Russia

At the turn of the 19th century. The political movement intensified. In the 90s of the XIX century. economic strikes prevailed, and at the beginning of the 20th century. At strikes and rallies, political slogans were more actively put forward: “Down with autocracy!”, “Long live political freedom!”

Speech of the Russian proletariat

In May 1901 in St. Petersburg, during a strike of workers at the Obukhov Military Plant, a bloody clash occurred between workers and the police and troops. In 1897, the government adopted the law “On the working day” lasting 11.5 hours. At the beginning of the 20th century. workers at strikes and rallies put forward demands for a 9 and 8 hour working day. The government sought to weaken the growing labor movement. The idea arose to create “workers’ mutual benefit societies,” professional and educational organizations that would seek some economic concessions from entrepreneurs and distract workers from the political struggle. These ideas were put forward by the head of the Moscow security department S.V. Zubatov. In St. Petersburg, priest Gapon created the organization “Meeting of Russian Factory Workers.”

The government also took up the “peasant issue.” Under the chairmanship of S.Yu. Witte created a “Special Meeting on the Needs of the Agricultural Industry” and local committees, which discussed the need to expand certain rights of the peasantry, offered “assistance in the transition of peasants from communal to household and farm ownership,” but in this moment the government considered these measures premature.

In the arena of political struggle in late XIX V. beginning of the 20th century Three camps emerged: government, liberal and revolutionary.

The first camp of government advocated the inviolability of autocracy, the preservation of which the Chief Prosecutor of the Synod Pobedonostsev and the Minister of Internal Affairs Plehve considered the guarantor of the strength of the state. In this camp in 1905, the “Union of the Russian People” arose, which united both large landowners and small shopkeepers and townspeople. The leader of this organization was a major official at the Ministry of Internal Affairs V.N. Pureshkevich, who adhered to the “Uvarov principles: Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality. In 1908, Purishkevich founded another Black Hundred organization, the Russian People's Union named after. Michael the Archangel."

The second liberal camp opposed both the revolution and the unlimited arbitrariness of the autocracy. And this camp demanded reforms, the introduction of political freedoms in the country, the expansion of the rights of zemstvos, including their representation in the State Council. This camp was not homogeneous. The leader of the “legal Marxists” Struve, using funds from the zemstvos, began publishing the magazine “Osvobozhdenie” in Stuttgart in 1902. In 1903-1904 Two organizations emerged: the Union of Liberation and the Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists. They held zemstvo congresses and “banquet companies,” at which they developed petitions to the tsar for reforms and the introduction of a constitution. In the spring of 1905, these organizations united into the “Union of Unions”, and then, in the fall of 1905, many figures from this association became part of the Cadets and Octobrists. The Cadet Party (“constitutional democratic party”) was headed by the historian Miliukov. This party was dominated by representatives of the intelligentsia, the middle bourgeoisie, as well as liberal landowners; Some of the artisans joined them. The main goal of the Cadets is the introduction of a democratic constitution in the country. Many cadets considered the creation of a constitutional monarchy as their ideal English type. The Cadets demanded the separation of the three branches of government (legislative, executive and judicial). They campaigned for universal suffrage, for political freedoms, for freedom of teaching and free education at school, for the introduction of an 8-hour working day. The Cadets demanded that state autonomy be granted to Finland and Poland, but within Russia. On the agrarian question, they proposed partial alienation of the landowners' land in favor of the peasants, but according to a fair assessment, i.e. at market price. They advocated private ownership of land. The Cadets recognized only peaceful methods of struggle.

The Octobrist Party arose in November 1905. Main organization party was the "Union of October 17". The leader of the party is a major industrialist Guchkov. This party united representatives of the upper ranks of the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie and large landowners, who considered it necessary to assist the government in carrying out reforms. The Octobrists advocated a constitutional monarchy with a State Duma (while maintaining strong monarchical power). They demanded reforms that would create freedom for bourgeois entrepreneurship. Their program put forward demands for political freedoms and the right of workers to strike of an economic nature. The Octobrists advocated for a united and indivisible Russia and agreed to autonomy only for Finland. In the field of the agrarian question, the Octobrists advocated the abolition of the rural community, proposed returning “cuts” to the peasants, and sometimes alienating part of the landowners’ lands, but for compensation to the landowners by the state. In 1912, the “Progressive Party” arose in the liberal camp, which occupied an intermediate position between the Cadets and the Octobrists. The leaders are large Moscow manufacturers Konovalov and Ryabushinsky. Progressives advocated a constitutional-monarchical system, elected bicameral representation, and a high property qualification for deputies. Later, in 1915, in the 4th State Duma, progressives raised the question of the need to carry out at least some reforms.

Russia was formed as multinational state. By the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th century. There were about 100 nations living in the empire. The autocracy built its national policy on great power principles. Since the 90s. XIX century, it pursued an active policy aimed at destroying the autonomy of Finland. After the uprising of 1863, the remnants of the autonomy of the Kingdom of Poland were eliminated. National contradictions also manifested themselves in the Baltic states, Ukraine, Central Asia, in the Caucasus.

At Alexandra III Great Russian chauvinism became the basis of the national policy of the autocracy. Nicholas II, in principle, did not change the approaches to the national policy of the imperial government. In line with the general national policy, tsarism pursued a Russification policy. The Russian language was not just the state language, it was forcibly imposed on national minorities in their Everyday life(in national regions, all office work in government agencies was conducted in Russian, the use of the native language in schools, the publication of newspapers, magazines, and books in the national language were prohibited; the Lithuanian alphabet, based on the Latin alphabet, was replaced by the Cyrillic alphabet, etc.). The manifestations of the Russification policy of the autocracy were different, but their goal was the same - to impose Russian state culture on foreign ethnic groups, to unify the entire empire in the Orthodox-Great Russian image and thus unite the country.

The Russification policy of the autocracy on the national issue was not just the official policy of the authoritarian regime, but also a manifestation of Great Russian nationalism at the state level. This sowed the seeds of national discord and placed a time bomb under the state integrity of the Russian Empire, which sooner or later was bound to explode. Therefore, it is not surprising that ill-considered destructive national policy autocracy entailed a response from national minorities.

Spokesmen national interests small nations at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. became national parties. Their national “character” was manifested in the fact that they placed the decision at the forefront of the system of party priorities national question as the first and necessary condition for the future state reorganization of the empire. The idea of ​​national revival played a crucial, if not decisive, role in the formation of national political parties in Russia.

Thanks to this pattern in the history of the formation of national political parties in Russia, a number of characteristic features. Firstly, all national liberal parties came from the bosom of cultural and educational societies, the majority of national parties with a socialist orientation came from pre-existing conspiratorial circles. Secondly, national political parties were formed under the direct influence, on the one hand, of European, and on the other hand, Russian liberal and socialist traditions, ideas and views. Depending on the sociocultural traditions of peoples, the level economic development national regions and the degree of modernization of the life of ethnic groups, European or Russian influence played a greater or lesser role in the process of formation of national political parties. Thus, in Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states, European influence was decisive, while in Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and the Caucasus, Russian influence turned out to be significant. Thirdly, at the end of the 19th century. In Russia, the ideology of Marxism became widespread. She influenced the minds of the national intelligentsia, showing them an alternative to the liberal model of development of their ethnic group. The process of dividing the national movement into two ideological camps stimulated a more dynamic development of national political parties, which, despite the difference in their orientation (socialism or capitalism), were united on the national issue. Subsequently, such a solidary approach to the national question allowed the majority of ideologically opposing national parties after February and especially October 1917, when the process of the emergence of new national parties actively began on the outskirts of the former Russian Empire. state entities, find a common language, temporarily forgetting about ideological contradictions.

The first national political parties began to form, primarily in those regions where the liberation movement had long-standing traditions. In these regions, on the northwestern outskirts of the empire and in Transcaucasia (in the provinces inhabited by Armenians), the formation of parties began 10-15 years earlier than in the empire as a whole. Previously, there was also a demarcation along ideological lines. Thus, the process of national party building was marked by great unevenness.

Thus, in the Caucasus, from the Armenokan party in the early 1880s. the Armenian Social Democratic Party Hunchak (Bell) arose, and somewhat later the Armenian Revolutionary Union Dashnaktsutyun; in Finland in the 1850-1860s. proto-parties arose (Finnish and Swedish). In Poland, where the sociocultural level of the ethnic group was higher than in other regions of the empire, the process of party formation in the modern sense of the word (the presence of a membership program, party structure, etc.) advanced much further than in the empire as a whole. In the 1880s and 1890s, several socialist parties and the largest liberal-conservative party in the Kingdom of Poland, the People's Democratic Party, took shape there. In Lithuania, the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party was created in 1896. There (in Vilna), a year later, the General Jewish Workers' Union in Lithuania, Poland and Russia (Bund) took shape.

In regions where the level of national identity was lower, ideological and organizational differentiation occurred later than in the Kingdom of Poland. For example, from the bosom of the Revolutionary Ukrainian Party (RUP). created in 1900 and at first representing a bloc of ideologically heterogeneous elements (social democrats, populists, etc.), subsequently there appeared: the Ukrainian People's Party (UNP), the first circles of the Ukrainian Socialist Revolutionaries, the Ukrainian Democratic Party (UDP). In turn, the latter became the core of the Ukrainian Radical Party (URP). And in the Central Asian region, this process gained momentum only after February 1917, when the Shura-i-Islamiya (Council of the Imam) movement was formed. The First Russian Revolution had a decisive influence on the formation of national parties. In 1905-1907 On the far outskirts of the state, many new parties, unions, and movements are making themselves known. Most of them were few in number, organizationally weak, ideologically vague and did not last long.

Before the first revolution in Russia, there were only 9 national organizations of liberal and conservative directions; in 1905-1907. their number increased to 42, and by February 1917 reached 52.

After February 1917, the process of formation of national parties and movements continued, and short term in the pre-October period, about two dozen more appeared. Finally, from the end of 1917 to 1925 inclusive, 12 more party organizations of liberal and conservative directions were formed.

It would seem that such a huge number of liberal-conservative national formations is impressive. But practice turned out to be different. 60-75 political entities existed for a short time and left behind a small fraction program documents, and most importantly, a few adherents. And the peculiarities of the national-political development of the Russian Empire, and later Soviet Russia, left behind the political formations of Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states, which took the path of independent development.

Both liberal and socialist national parties have made it their main goal carrying out systemic reforms that would affect all spheres of public life without exception. National liberal parties saw the future of Russia in modifying the autocratic regime. Liberal-Conservative parties The persuasion and the liberal center (there were a minority of them) assumed that the autocracy itself, “from above,” would carry out a radical reform and evolve towards a constitutional-parliamentary system. Left liberals assumed that pressure was possible on the government “from below” in order for it to reform more successfully. National socialist parties took positions of revolutionary radicalism and saw the future of Russia not just in a democratic republic, like left liberals, but also in socialism. Here the national parties were ideologically identical to their Russian counterparts. However, the national question did not allow them to find a common language and unite with the RSDLP or the Cadets.

Despite ideological differences, both liberals and socialists believed that ethnic groups needed their own national-state structure. According to the ideas of the ideologists of national parties, it could be twofold. Firstly, in the form of autonomy (cultural-national autonomy, national-territorial autonomy, federation); secondly, in the form of independent nation states. Ideologists of some national parties also proposed the creation of a federation of independent states based on geographical or historical and cultural community. Moreover, according to their plan, there was not always a place for a new, democratic Russia in this federation. Such a federation was supposed to act as a kind of counterbalance to possible revanchist actions by Russia.

After February 1917, national parties observed a shift in emphasis on the national issue towards greater national independence, which led to confrontation between national and all-Russian parties, further strengthening centrifugal tendencies in the social development of the country.

October 1917 evoked a sharply negative response from liberal and some members of socialist national parties, which stimulated the process of creating independent national states and the transition of national parties that stood on positions of autonomy to positions of separatism. Only a small part of the left in national socialist parties remained in the position of internationalism and saw the future of their homeland together with Bolshevik Russia.

Distinctive feature The national parties operating in Tsarist Russia had a desire to express the interests of their nations, often to the detriment of the declared ideological paradigms. The Russification policy of the autocracy only intensified this trend. However, it would be inappropriate to say that the national parties were ideologically bankrupt and that the national question practical activities parties dominated ideology. National factor in the activities of national political parties was strong, but not decisive. National parties are classified according to ideology as follows:

1. Conservative parties.

2. Liberal parties.

3. Socialist-oriented parties.

The result of many years of straightforward, and sometimes rude, Russification policies of the autocracy that offended the feelings of national minorities was the allocation by national political parties of national priorities to the detriment of all-Russian ones, and as the events of February-October 1917 showed, the party ideologists turned out to be right: the most socio-culturally developed peoples saw their the future is beyond borders new Russia, while Russian national parties showed a clear lack of understanding of the importance of the national question for the future of Russia.

Factors that influenced the emergence of political parties in Europe and Russia in the 20th century

Turning to the issue of considering the evolution of various political parties and movements in the 20th century, it is necessary to note the change in the social and civil climate, expressed in the influence of the media and the rise general level culture of society and its civic responsibility.

The main directions of political parties of the 20th century
Despite the differences in the positions and programs of political parties, global political commitment has been formed in several dominant directions:

1. Conservatism.
Conservative parties adhere to the position of bringing together the aristocratic and bourgeois stratum of the population, which is the embodiment of a political compromise between the top of the ruling bourgeoisie and supporters of the monarchy. The main difference is the commitment to traditional principles of attitude towards family, property and religion, but in the middle of the 20th century, conservatism was forced to accept liberal ideas of freedom and rights of the social and civil strata of the population. Representatives of conservative parties are the Conservative parties of Great Britain, the USA, and Germany.

2. Liberalism.
Liberal parties take as their basis the concept of the priority of freedom and personal rights, but most strikingly from others political movements, is a factor in the separation of public administration from civil society and the complete non-interference of the state in a person’s personal life. However, at the end of the 20th century, the concept of liberalism underwent a change, and subsequently began to be called “neoliberalism” or “social liberalism”, with its inherent ideas of social participation in political processes and the provision of social rights to education, work and pensions. Representatives of liberalism are the Liberals of Great Britain and the Republican Party of the USA.

3. Democracy.
Democratic parties base their program on the principles of popular sovereignty, citizen participation in the political governance of the state, legal equality before the law and the constitution, as well as political pluralism. Along with liberal principles, democratic parties recognize the right of the opposition to legally carry out its activities, nominate candidates for elections and participate in government. In the middle of the 20th century, democratic parties became more widespread, and under the influence of the emerging right of participation of the civil masses in political governance, democracy revealed an additional political movement mixed type- “liberal democratic party”.

4. Socialism.
The socialist party's program was based on the concept of social equality and justice. The principles in the party program are:
A) Collectivism as a management principle.
B) Elimination of the facts of inequality and class society.
C) Maintaining a planned economy and economy strictly under the control of the state.
At the very beginning of the 20th century, a social democratic party emerged in Europe, based on equality, including justice, law and freedom of choice.

5. Communism.
It is noteworthy that communism, like socialism, are branches of Marxism that emerged as a result of the industrial revolution. The communist party is based on the principles of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the principles of egalitarianism and labor for the common good of the people and the state. Moreover, unlike socialism, the tactics of communism are carried out using revolutionary methods of struggle against the bourgeois class.
The main period of the development of communism in colonial countries began in the 20s of the 20th century and represented national liberation movements, with the obligatory implementation of a revolution of class affiliation.
Party functions as an influence on the management structure

Absolutely all political parties operating in the 20th century throughout Europe and Russia in particular had various programs and tasks characteristic of a particular political party, but it was the functions of the party that were of great importance. The main functions are:
1. An inextricable link between the managed and the managers.
The party is an uninterrupted channel of communication and information transfer with a specific “top-down” or “bottom-up” circulation.
2. Analysis and accumulation of public interests.
Parties are forced to consider social interests in order to identify the most significant interests in the direction of the political trend of the party.
3. A collective goal, as an element of inspiration for the party masses of society.
4. Recruitment and socialization of elite representatives, as selection of personnel for the promotion of a political party.
As a rule, all political parties of the 20th century, regardless of territorial and geographical location, used the above functions to have the greatest influence on the party composition and structure of government.

In addition to the direction in the functions of political parties, the subject of politics is of particular importance, having a serious impact on the structure and object of power. It can be a political individual, any public organization, social group or class. Political scientists have proposed classifying political subjects according to the following criteria:
A) Social subjects - any type of ethnic groups, electorate, criminal communities, social individual or the merchant bourgeoisie.
B) Institutional subjects - president, parliament, party, trade union.
C) Functional subjects - media, church, army, lobby.
The role of a political object is decisive, because the success of political success and influence on internal structures authorities. All of the above factors influenced the formation of leading European political parties in the 20th century, which led to the process of strengthening parties in the structure of public administration.

Political parties and trends in European countries, the USA and Russia

In the 20th century, the following trends and parties emerged in the political vector:
Austria - Social Democrats of Austria, Austrian People's Party;
Great Britain - Conservatives, Democrats, Labor Party, Liberal Democrats;
Germany - Christian Democratic Union, Christian Socialist Union, Free Democratic Party, Social Democratic Party;
Greece - communist party, coalition of leftists and progressives, new democracy (conservative party);
Spain - Socialist Workers' Party, People's Party, coalition of five parties;
Italy – center-left coalition, left democrats, communists;
Norway - Christian People's Party, Labor Party, Socialist Party, Conservatives and Liberals;
Portugal – social democratic party, communists and socialists;
Finland – Christian Union, Left Communist Union, Social Democrats, National Conservative Party;
France – communists, radical socialist party, republicans and national front;
Sweden - Christian Democratic Party, Communist Workers' Party, Moderate Conservative Party, Liberal People's Party;
USA – Democratic Party and Republican Party.
Political parties of Russia in the 20th century
Political parties in Russia appeared at the beginning of the 20th century after the bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1905-1907 and had a socialist orientation. It is noteworthy that the multi-party system existed only until the 20th year of the 20th century, then, until 1991, the monopoly of the CPSU existed.
By decision of the Congress of People's Deputies in 1991, the one-party system ceased to exist. From this moment on, multi-party system became characteristic feature a new era of political government. The following entered the political arena: the Democratic Party, the Liberal Democratic Party and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. The emergence of a multi-party system subsequently had a huge impact on the development and formation of other political parties and unions.

At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. 100-150 Russian political parties were formed. All parties can be divided into 3 groups: revolutionary, bourgeois-liberal, monarchical (conservative).

In 1902, on the basis of populist groups and circles, one of the largest revolutionary parties took shape - the party of socialist revolutionaries - Socialist Revolutionaries (AKP). Initially, it was small (2.5 thousand people by 1905) and consisted mainly of intellectuals (peasants and workers made up a quarter of the party members). The most effective was its relatively centralized and independent Combat Organization (CO), created by G. Gershuni. To conduct party work among the masses, the Socialist Revolutionaries created the Peasant Union (1902), the Union of People's Teachers (1903), and several Workers' Unions (1903-1904). The party's program documents were officially adopted in 1905 at the first congress. Party leaders: V.M. Chernov, A.R. Gots, N.D. Avksentiev, B.V. Savinkov and others. Printed organs: newspaper “Revolutionary Russia”, magazine “Bulletin of the Revolution”.

The Social Revolutionaries used the concept of “working class,” referring to workers, peasants and intellectuals. The peasantry was considered the main force of the revolution, and the main issue of the revolution was the land question. To solve it they proposed socialization of the land based on the denial of private property. The land was to be transferred on an equal basis for the use of peasants according to labor and consumer standards. The tactics of the Social Revolutionaries combined propaganda and individual terror.

In March 1898, 9 delegates representing Marxists of various directions held their first congress in Minsk, which announced the creation of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP). Its organizational development began with the publication of the newspaper Iskra in Geneva (1900). The Iskrists organized the Second Congress (London-Brussels, 1903), at which the Party Charter and its program were adopted, which were recognized by all factions until 1917. The first part of the program - minimum program- formulated the tasks at the stage of the bourgeois-democratic revolution: the overthrow of the autocracy, the establishment of civil liberties, the establishment of a democratic republic, the recognition of the rights of nations to self-determination, improving the situation of workers up to the introduction of an 8-hour working day, returning the peasants' free-cuts. In the second part of the program ( maximum program) it was supposed to carry out a socialist revolution and establish dictatorship of the proletariat.

At the Second Congress of the RSDLP the party was divided into two factions - Bolsheviks And Mensheviks. The division was based on the party's organizational principles. The Bolsheviks, led by V.I. Lenin, considered the party as an organizational whole, where the unity of action of all its members and high discipline were ensured. The Mensheviks, led by Yu.O. Martov, proposed to accept everyone into the party, without requiring them to work in one of the party organizations and without burdening them with party discipline. Lenin's supporters received a majority in the elections of leading party bodies.

Organizational and political formation began liberal movement. Since June 1902, the magazine “Liberation” began to be published in Stuttgart (editor P.B. Struve). Significant social forces united around the magazine, pursuing the goal of establishing a constitutional monarchy in Russia. In 1903, the “Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists” was created, and in 1904, the “Union of Liberation”, which demanded the introduction of a constitutional monarchy, universal, equal, secret, direct suffrage, forced alienation of landowners’ lands, and the right of nations to self-determination.

The success of these organizations was the holding of a “private meeting” in November 1904 in St. Petersburg, in which more than 100 representatives of zemstvos from 33 provinces took part. Then a general zemstvo congress met in Moscow, speaking in favor of the abolition of emergency laws, political amnesty, the elimination of class restrictions and the introduction of a legislative representative body. In May 1905, the Liberation Union, the Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists and a number of socio-political organizations of a liberal orientation created the Union of Unions, headed by P.N. Milyukov.

After publication Manifesto October 17, 1905 the bourgeoisie created large liberal parties - constitutional-democratic(cadets) and Union October 17(Octobrists). The leaders of the cadets were P.N. Miliukov, P.D. Dolgorukov, S.A. Muromtsev. The leaders of the Octobrists were A.I. Guchkov, D.N. Shipov. Both parties set as their goal the implementation of the provisions of the Manifesto of October 17, the establishment of a bourgeois social system and a parliamentary monarchy. On the agrarian question, the need to destroy the community and partially confiscate the landowners' land was recognized. On the labor issue, recognition of trade unions and economic strikes was proposed. Only legal, primarily parliamentary, means of struggle could be used.

Of the monarchist parties, the largest was Union of the Russian People, formed in November 1905 and headed by A.I. Dubrovin and V.M. Purishkevich. The right opposed democracy to the original Russian conciliarity, which is combined with the absolute power of a wise autocrat. They stood for the preservation of landownership, demanded to free the country from foreign capital and monopolies, to introduce privileges and benefits (including free education) for Russians, which also meant Ukrainians and Belarusians.

At the end of the 19th century Russian empire was considered a powerful state in the world with a strong economy and a stable political system. However, in the new century, the country faced a revolution and a long struggle to establish a specific model of statehood.

At the beginning of the 20th century, the country witnessed the dominance of various parties with completely different programs and political leaders. Who led the future revolutionary movement, and which parties waged the most intense and lengthy struggle for power?

The main political parties of the country at the beginning of the 20th century

Availability of various state parties, both with sharply revolutionary and liberal views on the future of the country, directly testified to the crisis of power. At the beginning of the 20th century, Nicholas II could still change the course of history by ensuring that all the named parties ceased to exist. However, the inaction of the monarch only further spurred political activists.

As a result, the country experienced two revolutions and literally being torn apart by the Mensheviks, Bolsheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries. In the end, the Bolsheviks managed to win, but only at the cost of thousands of losses, a sharp deterioration in the economic situation and a decrease in the international authority of the country.

By the beginning of the 20th century, political activity in Russia reached its maximum. All social party organizations that existed at that time were divided into three main branches: socialist movements, liberal and monarchical. Each of the movements reflected the mood of the main segments of the population.