Social change. Types and forms of social revolution Social revolutions and their results

In social philosophy, the concepts of revolution and evolution are considered as forms of development of societies. But they are also forms of formational and other social conflicts, and in this capacity are the internal sources of the development of societies and humanity. They represent the forms of ideological, economic, political struggle of various formational communities for changing the formation of society, i.e. systems of its main spheres.

Social evolution and revolution as social conflict

Social evolutions and revolutions as a social conflict between the old and new formations of societies and their civilizations include changes:

1. their subjects, i.e. are associated with a conflict of interests of different social communities
2. social subjects of historical creativity, i.e. leading formational communities with a set of fundamental interests.

They differ precisely in the ways of development of social conflicts, the correlation in them of the stages of formation, deployment, resolution, in different forms of these stages and include:

1. Changing the world outlook and ideology of society, understanding instead of old ideals and goals - new ones. For example, in Soviet Russia the ideas of autocracy, Orthodoxy, nationality were replaced by ideas Soviet power, communist ideology, Soviet people... At the same time, in the West, instead of a society (Marxian capitalism) of universal competition and profit, the idea of ​​a "welfare society" arose. In social revolutions, this change occurs sharply, nihilistically in relation to the old (Peter I, Lenin, Yeltsin), and in social evolutions - slowly, with the preservation of continuity: the bourgeois-socialist ideology did not eliminate the forcibly old one, but simply stopped taking it into account.
2. Changes in the political sphere, redistribution of power between nations, classes, regions of the country in accordance with the changed positions of these subjects. The question of power, as Lenin pointed out during the October Revolution, is the main question. Only through obtaining (or diminishing) power is a particular subject (nation, class, region, etc.) able to express and realize its interests in society, to influence the economy, to the distribution of material wealth in its own interests. It must be borne in mind that society is developing, change is constantly taking place economic situation subjects, which requires a constant change in the representation of their interests in the political system. This is done in countries that have chosen the socio-evolutionary path of development. In countries where the political system lags behind the development of the economic and ideological systems, this leads to a social revolution.
3. Changes in the economic sphere (forms of ownership of the means of production, property and management relations in the management of the economy, etc.) in modern societies are carried out both by the owners of the means of production and by the state, which regulates relations between the owners, acting as a political mediator. Therefore, the role of the state in the implementation of social evolution and revolution is so great.
4. Change in the leading class of society. For example, during the French Revolution of 1789, the bourgeoisie came to power, overthrowing the nobility, led by the king. During the October Revolution of 1917, the Bolsheviks came to power, overthrowing the power of the bourgeoisie. In 1991, after overthrowing the power of the Bolsheviks, who expressed the interests of the Soviet workers, nomenklatura liberals came to power, expressing the interests of the new Russian bourgeoisie. Now the Russian security forces (military) have come to power, expressing the interests of the patriotic, sovereign and collectivist part of the Russian people, who want to restore patriotism, statehood, solidarity. We can re-enter the well-worn rut of the political formation.

Class Struggle

Social evolution and revolution take place in the form of ideological, economic, political struggle, but differ in the ratio and nature of these types of struggle.

Ideological the class struggle takes place at the level of worldview, ideology, political programs, in which the fundamental class interests are expressed. Each class, based on its economic, political, educational position, opens (formulates) its vision of society, its structure and development. This vision is developed by intellectuals who take the position of this class, i.e. considering everything that happens in the world from the point of view of this class. For example, from the point of view of the proletarian-Bolshevik intelligentsia (Lenin and others), the old society is worthy of destruction; as a result of the socialist revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat is established, a new proletarian society is created in place of the old bourgeois society, which is the direct opposite of the first, etc. The bourgeois intelligentsia comes up with a different perspective of society, its formation and development. Thus, the bourgeois-socialist intelligentsia (Bernstein and others) developed a bourgeois-socialist perspective, which was realized in the countries of Western Europe. This perspective was the direct opposite of the proletarian-socialist perspective. Then, as a result of propaganda, the consciousness of the representatives of their formational community implies “their own” ideology and criticism (as well as ridicule) of the opposite ideology.

Economic the struggle of classes is a struggle to improve their economic position: a change in the forms of ownership, the role in the social organization of labor, the forms and amounts of income received, etc. On the part of the bourgeoisie, for example, it is expressed in improving the tools and organization of labor, increasing its efficiency, increasing investment, etc., which objectively complicates the work, wages, employment of workers, causing protests from them. As a result of negotiations, strikes, demonstrations, political elections and other forms, a certain consensus arises, the arbiter of which is now the state acts between employers and trade unions. As a result, the economy, social sphere and society as a whole develop.

Political the class struggle is a struggle for state power, for power over the state apparatus. This power allows the development of society (within certain limits) in the direction necessary for this class. For example, the Russian proletariat Under the leadership of the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia, created a proletarian state, with the help of which it organized an unprecedented social system (Soviet), which collapsed at the end of the 20th century. V modern conditions political struggle most often It occurs during elections of government bodies, this is a struggle between different political parties, which, within the framework of the law, are fighting for their political interests. For example, as a result of the class struggle in Russia, a new parliament was elected, in which there are three main factions of the left (the Communist Party of the Russian Federation), the centrists ("Unity" - "Bear"), and the right (SPS, OVR, "Yabloko").

An analysis of history shows that in political societies (USSR, China, etc.) social revolutions are a typical phenomenon, which is associated with the lag of the political basis behind the economic and worldview changes taking place in society. For political societies, social revolutions are a pattern, as evidenced, in particular, by the history of Russia. In economic societies (USA, Germany, etc.), social revolutions become random: there social evolution is a regularity, a relatively democratic transfer of power from one political party and the social community behind it to another.

Therefore, one of the most important advantages of economic societies, a democratic and legal state is temporary, but the disappearance of the social revolution as a form of development of society, and, consequently, the destruction, sacrifice and suffering caused by it. This is due to a significant change in the consciousness of the subjective factor, as well as an increase in the general level of education and intelligence of the people. Russia's transition from a political society to an economic one, and then to a mixed and industrial one, will allow our people to avoid social revolutions and upheavals in the future.

Social evolution and revolution as qualitative changes

In Soviet and Western social studies, social evolution and revolution were defined in different ways. In Soviet social science, evolution was understood as a slow, quantitative change in a phenomenon, and by revolution, its radical, qualitative change.

This definition makes it possible to justify the proletarian-socialist revolution in our country and other revolutions in the world, to remove the historical responsibility of political elites and classes for what they have done, to belittle the role of the subjective factor in history in favor of objective conditions and the automatism of the historical process.

In Western literature, these concepts are interpreted in a slightly different way. First of all, both evolution and revolution are considered as qualitative changes that occur in leaps and bounds, i.e. with a break in continuity, but differing in the ways, pace, cost, strength of the implemented changes. In the further presentation, we will adhere to this point of view when assessing the development of people, communities, institutions, societies and humanity.

Social evolution uses peaceful (democratic) means, is slow, accompanied by relatively minor destruction of the old and sacrifices (social and human), its results are quite durable.

Social revolution uses violent methods of transformation, occurs relatively quickly, is accompanied by significant destruction (to the ground) of the former society, victims and suffering of people, its results are fragile and short-lived. But both social evolution and social revolution represent a qualitative change in the development of societies.

The choice of an evolutionary or revolutionary path depends on the maturity of the subjective factor, its ability to assess in time the state of opposition of classes, ethnic groups, elite and bureaucracy and to make appropriate decisions in time. This point of view is the opposite of the point of view of the Soviet historical materialists, set forth in many, including modern textbooks.

As an example, consider the proletarian-socialist revolution in Russia and the bourgeois-socialist evolution in Europe. The first took place in Russia from October 1917 to 1937 (the year of building the foundations of socialism) and was accompanied by the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the destruction "to the ground" old Russia, colossal sacrifices, the creation of a Soviet society with social equality and poverty. This society collapsed almost to its foundations during 1901-2000. to the surprise of her supporters and opponents.

Bourgeois-socialist evolution in Western Europe took place throughout the first half of the 20th century, without military violence, in a democratic way. It led to the establishment of bourgeois and legal democracies, a sharp improvement in the quality of life of the people, and preserved the possibility of further transformation into a post-industrial society.

Social revolution and social evolution represent a qualitative transition of societies and humanity from one formation and civilization to another, caused by objective social contradictions that underlie social life. Therefore, these processes are objectively conditioned (and natural). But evolution does not bring social conflict to the stage of deployment (and violence) between opposite classes, while revolution does. And the blame for what happened in the latter case lies with the ruling classes, which allowed such a development of events, i.e. On the subjective factor. Thus, W. Churchill believed that the reason for the French Revolution of 1789 was the inability of the royal government to regulate relations between classes, i.e. wrong (and criminal) government.

The same can be said about the proletarian-socialist revolution, which took place through the fault of the Russian tsar, the nobility and the bourgeoisie, who turned out to be unable to understand and express in political decisions the interests of the Russian peasantry and workers. Therefore, the blame for the destruction of Russia and the establishment of Soviet power lies not with the proletariat and the Bolsheviks, but with the nobility and bourgeoisie of Russia, headed by the tsar and the State Duma. And the revolution of 1991 in the USSR could have been avoided by carrying out social evolution in the direction of bourgeois socialism, continuing either the NEP or the economic reforms (undertaken by Kosygin in 1963). But the inability of the ruling party, the CPSU, for social evolution led to the collapse of the CPSU, the USSR and the Soviet people. It is not American imperialism that is to blame for the coming to power in 1991 of the nomenklatura liberals headed by Yeltsin, but Soviet communists, who became stiff in Leninism-Stalinism, which, in particular, is expressed in their understanding of the social revolution.

War as a form of social conflict

War is just as destructive a form of social conflict as a social revolution. It is conducted between countries (societies) and states because of national ideas, territory, allies, communication routes, etc. For example, in the First world war Russia entered under pressure from the church, the nobility, the bourgeoisie almost because of all the listed interests. And as a result, she received two revolutions, the death of all old classes, the formation of the USSR, etc.

I would like to characterize the war in the words of the heroine of the famous novel by B. Pasternak "Doctor Zhivago" by Lara:

We got married before the war itself (1914 - CW), two years before it began. And only we healed with our minds, built a house, declared war. I am now sure that she was to blame for everything, all the subsequent misfortunes that have befallen our generation to this day. I remember my childhood well. I still found the time when the concepts of reason were in force. What the conscience suggested was considered natural and necessary. The death of a person by the hand of another was a rarity, an extraordinary, extraordinary phenomenon. Murders were believed to occur only in tragedies, detective novels and newspaper incident diaries, but not in ordinary life.

And suddenly this leap from a serene life, innocent regularity into blood and screams, the general madness and savagery of everyday and hourly, legalized and praised murder ... Probably, it never goes in vain. You probably remember better than me how everything began to fall into ruin at once. The movement of trains, the supply of food to cities, the foundations of the household, the moral foundations of consciousness ...

Then a lie came to the Russian land. The main misfortune, the root of future evil was the loss of faith in the price own opinion... They imagined that the time when they followed the suggestions of moral intuition had passed, that now we had to sing from a common voice and live by other people's, all imposed representations. The dominance of the phrase began to grow, first monarchist - then revolutionary.

In the further presentation of social revolution and evolution as formational conflicts, the main attention will be paid. It is the formation structure and its development that make it possible to consider various conflicts of interests and social subjects in their relationship within the framework of a social organism. Formation conflicts in their various forms are characteristic of Russia throughout the entire XX century.

Social revolution means a deep revolution in the socio-political, economic and spiritual life of society, when, first of all, the transition from one socio-economic formation to another, more progressive one... The revolution is the engine of social progress: it is and destruction and creativity, it marks the beginning of a new period in history, which requires new thoughts, feelings, songs and singers. It is a historical necessity rooted in the economic life of society. The deepest cause of social revolutions is the conflict between productive forces and relations of production. It constitutes the so-called economic basis of the revolution.

The fact that social revolutions are not accidental, but a natural phenomenon, with objective necessity arising from the development

production does not mean that they happen automatically. Objective and subjective prerequisites are required for their accomplishment. Objective contradictions in the mode of production are manifested in a fierce struggle between the progressive and reactionary classes. The class struggle is the political basis of the revolution. Subjective the form of expression of this struggle is the clash of class interests, aspirations, ideas. Social revolution - higher form the class struggle of the oppressed. The totality of objective conditions expressing the economic and political crisis of society creates revolutionary situation... The following signs are characteristic of a revolutionary situation: “The impossibility for the ruling classes to preserve their rule unchanged; this or that crisis of the "top", a crisis in the politics of the ruling class, which creates a crack into which the discontent and indignation of the oppressed classes breaks through. For the onset of a revolution, it is usually not enough that "the lower classes do not want", but it is also required that the "upper classes" cannot "live in the old way ... The exacerbation, higher than usual, of the needs and calamities of the oppressed classes ... A significant increase ... the activity of the masses, in" peaceful "era of those who allow themselves to be plundered calmly, and in turbulent times, attracted, and by the very "top", to an independent historical performance. Without these objective changes, independent of the will of not only individual groups and parties, but also individual classes, revolution - as a general rule - is impossible ”1.

But not every revolutionary situation leads to revolution. Revolutions break out only when subjective conditions join the objective ones. The subjective factor includes the will to fight, the skillful organization of this struggle, the consciousness of its participants, the understanding of the goals and objectives of the struggle, the determination of the fighting classes to bring the struggle to the end. In the presence of objective prerequisites, the subjective factor acquires decisive importance: the old government itself will not "fall if it is not dropped."

Driving forces revolutions are those social groups and classes that are vitally interested in breaking the old order, in building new ones and who are making a revolution. One of these classes plays a particularly active role: it carries along with it all the other classes and social groups participating in the revolution.

If in relatively peaceful periods of history, the masses are, as it were, behind the scenes of politics, being in

1 Lenin V.I... Full collection cit., v. 26, p. 218-219.

During the period of "historical hibernation", then in the midst of revolutionary events the people rise to the forefront of world history and act as the creator of the new.

The main question of any revolution is the question of state power. When the fire of the revolution flares up, its flame is primarily directed against the main guardian of the old world - the state. "The transfer of state power from one person to the other class there is the first, main, main sign revolution both in the strictly scientific and in the practical-political meaning of this concept ”1. Taking political power into their own hands, the new classes carrying out the revolution are reorganizing the entire mechanism of the socio-political life of society: new organs of the revolution are born in its own fire. The seizure of power by revolutionary forces is an act of bringing about a political revolution. This is a revolution in the narrow sense of the word. The concept of a social revolution in a broad sense is, as already mentioned, a fundamental transformation of all spheres of social life.

Social revolutions are characterized by different measures of spontaneity and consciousness. In the process of the transition from the primitive communal system to the slave-owning, and from it to the feudal system, revolutions were carried out mainly spontaneously and were expressed in separate, as a rule, local mass movements and uprisings. The bourgeois revolutions, which broke the foundations of feudalism, are acquiring a more conscious, organized character: here the conscious activity of political parties and organizations, which have a certain ideology among their prerequisites, plays an increasing role. The conscientiousness principle rises to highest level in the era of socialist revolutions occurring as a theoretically, tactically and strategically grounded, natural social process of transition from capitalism to socialism.

Social revolution is fundamentally different from social reform: the latter is aimed, as a rule, at only partial transformations within the framework of the existence of a given system. "But this opposition is not absolute, this facet is not dead, but a living, movable facet, which must be able to determine in each individual case" 2. The experience of history shows that reforms are by no means contraindicated to social progress.

1 Lenin V.I... Full collection cit., v. 31, p. 133.

2 Ibid., V. 20, p. 167.

Types of social revolutions

The type of social revolution is determined by what socio-political contradictions it resolves, what social system it overthrows and what it creates anew. This content expresses the understanding of the revolution in the broad sense of the word - as a transition from one qualitative state of society to another (which is accomplished both through armed actions of the masses, and not necessarily this way, but as the cumulative result of the action of many different factors of social life). This type of revolution can include, for example, the transition of society from slavery to feudalism, from feudalism to capitalism, that is, in general, the transition from one socio-economic formation to another. Thus, the social revolution was the transition from slavery to feudalism as a result of the resolution of the internal contradictions of the slave-owning mode of production, although it did not have the character of a political revolution.

Revolutions in which socio-political motives play a leading role are a fundamentally different type. These revolutions also contribute to the replacement of one socio-economic formation by another, but they are carried out through the violent actions of one class against another. And these actions are carried out on the basis of a theoretical program that puts forward certain socio-political goals and ideals. This type includes the bourgeois and socialist revolutions. TO special type social revolutions that ultimately contribute to the implementation of both named revolutions should include revolutions affecting one or another particular sphere of public life. This includes scientific, technical, cultural revolutions, etc. All of them are necessary constituent parts of the indicated types of revolution.

The highest type of revolution is the socialist revolution, which has as its goal a radical transformation of society in the interests of the working people. It differs from previous social revolutions in that if the previous revolutions were limited to a change in political power, bringing it in line with the new economic relations that have already arisen, then the socialist revolution is characterized primarily by a creative principle: its highest purpose is to assert social ownership of the means of production, socialist production relationships. If previous revolutions led to the establishment of private property in one form or another, without striving for the complete abolition of exploitation, then the socialist reform

volition is directed primarily against any exploitation of man by man, against all forms of private ownership of the means of production. The Great October Socialist Revolution became such a radical turning point in the history of mankind. A socialist revolution, like no other, presupposes not a one-time act of overthrowing the old and establishing a new political power, but a very long period of revolutionary transformations in all spheres of society.

Restructuring as special form revolutionary transformation of our society

The revolution in itself does not create a new society, but only creates the possibility of building it. The embodiment of these possibilities in reality depends on real forces, means, both objective and subjective factors, therefore, the implementation of the outlined plans does not mean their automatic implementation.

The principles of socialism themselves contain not formal, but real opportunities for further social progress. Since any social possibilities can turn into reality only through the socio-historical practice of people, insofar as they turn out to be extremely sensitive to the influence of the subjective factor. It is precisely because of this factor, first of all, that the full use of the possibilities available to us, inherent in the very nature of socialism, was not realized. In the conditions of socialist construction, the lack of timely transformation real opportunities in reality leads to the fact that the possibilities, so to speak, change their status: they turn from real to formal. As a result, an unfavorable mechanism of inhibition is formed in social development, which leads both to various kinds of negative phenomena in various spheres of public life, and to deformation of social psychology, the moral climate in society, to the appearance of elements of social degradation. Thus, the dialectic of possibility and reality turns out to be not abstract theoretical law, and specifically the acting principle of the development of society. Accumulated quantitatively phenomena and tendencies unfavorable and destructive for society have led in the end to such quality the state of the entire social organism, which turned out to be unsatisfactory and partly even destructive.

Under these conditions, it became necessary to restructure social life, which, since we are talking about a qualitative transformation of society, is equated in nature with a revolutionary process. And there is no alternative to this revolutionary process.

It would seem that at the current stage we can only talk about some kind of reforms, and not about a revolution. Of course, the current stage of transformations does not represent such a socio-political revolution when the foundations of the economic relations of the old system are destroyed and a new political power is established. In this case, we are not talking about the destruction of public ownership of the means of production, but about its all-round strengthening and effective use, not about breaking state power, but about further strengthening socialist democracy and developing people's self-government. In other words, in this case, revolutionary transformations are mainly associated with strengthening and creation.

A revolution, as already mentioned, is not a one-time act, but a long-term process of fundamental transformations in all spheres of social life. A specific feature of the socialist revolution is that it contains in itself a deep critical the beginning, allowing at one stage or another of the development of society to critically evaluate what has been created and, if necessary, eliminate all undesirable, remake or strengthen certain aspects of the new. This specific feature of the socialist revolution, associated precisely with its positive, creative force, was described by K. Marx in his work "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte", describing socialist revolutions as those that "constantly criticize themselves ... return to what seems to have already been accomplished, in order to start it all over again, with merciless thoroughness they ridicule the half-heartedness, weaknesses and worthlessness of their first attempts ... "1.

We have already repeatedly said that a person is the subject of history, and a specific subject, that is, one that at the same time acts as its object. Therefore, when it comes to perestroika, it is clear that none other than man himself is moving to the very center of it. Therefore, everyone should realize this with maximum clarity and distinctness and approach this extremely delicate and complex matter with the maximum degree of responsibility. Objectively, a person's life is contradictory in the sense that he always strives for something new, but at the same time he is in captivity of the prevailing outdated stereotypes. And therefore, the difficulty lies in the conscious rejection of these stereotypes, that is, in a constant struggle with oneself, which requires the development of dialectically flexible thinking, independence and impartiality of mind and concentration of will. For there is no revolution without revolutionaries.

1 Marks K., Engels F... Works, v. 8, p. 123.

Chapter XII
SOCIAL SPHERE OF PUBLIC LIFE

Social revolutions

P. Sztompka calls revolutions the “peak” of social change.

Revolutions differ from other forms of social change in five characteristics:

1. complexity: they cover all spheres and levels of social life;

2. radicalism: revolutionary changes are fundamental in nature, they penetrate the foundations of the social structure;

3. speed: revolutionary changes happen very quickly;

4. exclusivity: revolutions remain indelibly in the memory of people;

5. emotionality: revolutions cause a rise in mass feelings, unusual reactions and expectations, utopian enthusiasm.

Definitions of revolution focus on the scale and depth of the transformations being made (in this, revolutions are opposed to reforms), on the elements of violence and struggle, as well as on the combination of these factors. Here are examples of synthetic definitions:

- “Rapid, fundamental violent internal changes in the values ​​and myths prevailing in societies, in its political institutions, social structure, leadership and government policy” (S. Huntington).

- “Rapid, basic transformations of the social and class structures of society through coups from below” (T. Skokpol).

- “The seizure of state power by violent methods by the leaders of mass movements and its subsequent use to carry out large-scale social reforms” (E. Giddens).

Thus, the main distinguishing features of revolutions are the complexity and fundamental nature of the ongoing transformations and the involvement of the broad masses of the people. The use of violence does not necessarily accompany revolutionary transformations: for example, the socio-economic transformations of the last decade in Eastern Europe have been virtually bloodless and non-violent.

There are the following types of social revolutions: anti-imperialist (national liberation, anti-colonial), bourgeois, bourgeois democratic, popular, people's democratic and socialist.

Anti-imperialist - revolutions that took place in colonies and dependent countries and aimed at achieving national independence (they were directed against the economic and military-political domination of foreign capital and the comprador or bureaucratic bourgeoisie, feudal clans, etc.)

The main task of bourgeois revolutions is the elimination of the feudal system and the establishment of capitalist production relations, the overthrow of absolute monarchies and the rule of the landed aristocracy, the establishment of private property, the political domination of the bourgeoisie. The driving forces of bourgeois revolutions are the industrial, financial, commercial bourgeoisie, the mass base is the peasantry, the urban strata (for example, the Great French revolution).

The bourgeois democratic revolution is a kind of bourgeois revolution. Its course is decisively influenced by the active participation of broad masses of the people who rose up to fight for their interests and rights (the European revolutions of 1848-1849, the Russian revolution of 1905).

The socialist revolution was interpreted (according to the Marxist-Leninist concept) as the highest type of social revolution, during which the transition from capitalism to socialism and communism is carried out.

The people's revolution is a broad and mass movement as opposed to "top", "palace", military or political coups. They can have different socio-economic and political content.

The People's Democratic Revolution is an anti-fascist, democratic, national liberation revolution that unfolded in a large group of Eastern European countries during the fight against fascism during the Second World War. In the course of this struggle, a broad alliance of national and patriotic forces was formed.

The “gentle” (velvet) revolution is the democratic revolution of the end of 1989 in Czechoslovakia. During the revolution, as a result of powerful social uprisings, the previously existing state and political structures"Real socialism" and the communist party was removed from power. The revolutionary processes that took place a little earlier or simultaneously with it in other countries were close to the "gentle" revolution. of Eastern Europe.

Social reforms- this is:

1. a change in any significant aspect of the life of society while maintaining the foundations of its economic and state system;

2. one of the forms of social and political changes corresponding to the evolutionary development of society and characterized by the comparative gradualness, smoothness, and slowness of such changes;

3. innovations carried out "from above", using legal means, although this does not exclude measures of coercion.

Formally, social reforms are understood as innovations of any content; this is a change in any aspect of social life (order, institutions, institutions) that does not destroy the foundations of the existing socio-political system.

The need to implement social reforms is on the agenda of political life in the context of growing social tension in society. Social reforms are developed and implemented by dominant social groups , who in this way seek to weaken the pressure of the opposition forces and thereby maintain their dominance. Social reforms are always aimed at preserving the socio-political system as a whole, changing its individual parts.

The course of the policy of social reforms is determined by a complex interweaving of objective and subjective factors. The success or failure of reforms largely depends on the readiness of the ruling elite to accept such innovations that really remove obstacles to the normal development of society.

Much also depends on the timeliness of the necessary reforms. As a rule, overdue reforms do not lead to the desired results. Therefore, reforms should be carried out at the right time and very skillfully, because otherwise they not only cannot but reduce the existing tension, but also lead to revolutionary processes, which the ruling elite was trying to avoid. According to P. Sorokin, reforms should not trample on human nature and contradict its basic instincts; social reforms must be preceded by a thorough scientific study of specific social conditions; each reform should first be tested on a small social scale; reforms must be carried out by legal, constitutional means.

SOCIAL REVOLUTION (lat. Revolutio - turn, change) - a radical revolution in the life of society, meaning the overthrow of an obsolete and the establishment of a new, progressive social system; a form of transition from one socio-economic formation to another. The experience of history shows that it would be wrong to consider the social and economic formation. as an accident. R. is a necessary, natural result of the natural-historical development of antagonistic formations. R. s. completes the process of evolution, the gradual ripening in the depths of the old society of the elements or preconditions of the new social order; resolves the contradiction between the new productive forces and the old relations of production, breaks down the obsolete production relations and the political superstructure that consolidates these relations, opens up space further development productive forces. The old industrial relations are supported by their carriers - the ruling classes, which protect the outmoded order by the force of state power. Therefore, in order to clear the way for social development, advanced forces must overthrow the existing political system... The main question of any R. of page. is the question of political power. “The transfer of state power from one class to the other is the first, main, basic sign of revolution both in the strictly scientific and in the practical political meaning of this concept” (V.I.T. Lenin, 31, p. 133). R. is the highest form of class struggle. In revolutionary epochs, the broad masses of the people, who previously stood aloof from political life, rise to a conscious struggle. That is why revolutionary epochs mean a tremendous acceleration of social development. R. cannot be confused with the so-called. palace coups, coups, etc. The latter are only a violent change in the government elite, a change in power of individuals or groups that does not change its essence. The question of power does not exhaust the content of R. s. In the broadest sense of the word, it includes all those social transformations carried out by the revolutionary class. R.'s character with. is determined by what tasks they carry out and what social forces are involved in them. In each individual country, the possibilities for the emergence and development of R. depend on a number of objective conditions, as well as on the degree of maturity of the subjective factor. A qualitatively unique type of R. of page. represents the socialist revolution. The exacerbation of the unevenness of the economic and political development of the capitalist countries leads to the difference in the timing of socialist R. in different countries. This implies the inevitability of an entire historical era of revolutions, which began with the Great October Socialist R. in Russia. After World War II, socialist revolutions took place in Europe, Asia, and Lat. America. Along with the international workers' movement, national liberation R. and various kinds of mass democratic movements acquired great importance in this era. All these forces, in their unity, constitute the world revolutionary process. Under the conditions of socialism, revolutionary transformations of all aspects of social life are possible in the interests of its qualitative renewal, an example of which is the perestroika taking place in the USSR. Perestroika in our country has the characteristics of a peaceful, non-violent R. It also includes radical reforms, demonstrating their dialectical unity.

Philosophical Dictionary. Ed. I.T. Frolov. M., 1991, p. 386-387.

The theory of social revolution is extremely important in the sociology of management, as will be shown in this chapter. For this purpose, the methodological problems of the social revolution, its essence, the reasons for its occurrence, the laws of development and the role in social life will be considered.

Characteristics of the social revolution

At the dawn of the development of bourgeois society, its ideologists, enthusiastically welcoming revolutionary shifts, tried to consider the problem of revolution, its necessity and reasons. And although they did not understand the true reasons for the revolution, they explained them by the highest principles of justice, given by nature by the rights of people (freedom, equality and brotherhood between people), their teachings for their time played a progressive role.

To understand the ideas of social revolution, categories such as socio-economic formation, as well as the basis and superstructure, are important. What are they? A socio-economic formation is a social system that is formed on the basis of a specific type of industrial relations. The economic basis is the totality of production relations of a particular mode of production. And the social superstructure includes the totality of social ideas and their corresponding organizations and institutions, generated by the prevailing economic relations. The base and superstructure constitute the defining elements of the socio-economic formation

The concept of "social revolution" is used in literature in two ways: in a broad sense – to designate the entire era of transition to a new socio-economic formation, and in a narrow – to indicate qualitative changes in any area of ​​public life - in economics, politics, culture, etc. In this chapter, we will talk about revolution in the broad sense of the word.

Social development is always a natural-historical process of the emergence, development and destruction of socio-economic formations. The change of socio-economic formations is a complex and multifaceted process, during which the material and technical base of society, its economic system, changes in political life, ideology, and culture. These transformations in the aggregate form the social phenomenon that is usually called revolution.

That is, social revolution – it is the law of the change of socio-economic formations. At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production, or, which is only a legal expression of the latter, with the property relations, within which they have been developing so far. From forms of development of the productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then the era of social revolution begins, in the process of which the old production relations are destroyed. With the change in the economic basis, a revolution takes place more or less rapidly in the entire enormous social superstructure.

To destroy the old state power, the old superstructure as a whole, the revolutionary class uses social violence. No revolution is possible without such violence. According to some sociologists, violence is an absolutely negative phenomenon. However, it also plays a progressive role in history. According to Karl Marx, violence is the midwife of any old society when it is pregnant with a new one. And therefore it is the instrument through which social movement blazes a path for itself and breaks down petrified, politically dead forms.

In a word, when the necessary material prerequisites for the transition to a new social system are ripe, then the revolutionary class is objectively forced to use violence, which can be carried out in various forms. It is not necessarily associated with an armed struggle, but can be carried out peacefully - in the hall of the parliamentary struggle, agrarian reform, the nationalization of industry, through the application of legal sanctions, etc. Social revolution is the highest, most acute form of the class struggle.

This form is used only when the class struggle has escalated to the limit, when relations between the struggling classes have reached their social climax. Social revolution is not the fruit of a conspiracy of individuals or the arbitrary actions of a minority isolated from the masses. It can only arise as a result of deep social change that set in motion large sections of the population.

As a result of the social revolution, political power is transferred from the old reactionary class to the progressive democratic class. Only by wresting state power from the hands of the ruling class and suppressing its resistance can the democratic forces achieve the victory of the new over the old. That's why the question of political power is the main issue of the social revolution.

Why, among all the questions of the social revolution, the question of power is the main one? The point is that the state is a powerful tool in the hands of the ruling class, i.e. public power with all its organs of violence (army, police) and means of ideological influence. The state, which is in the hands of the ruling class, seeks to preserve the economic basis and the corresponding elements of the social superstructure, suppresses the actions of the advanced class against the foundations of the old society. Therefore, in order to break the power of the ruling class, it is necessary to take away political power from it.

Consequently, the social revolution is called upon to carry out fundamental transformations, first of all, in the main spheres of public life - in the economy, politics, as well as in the field of the spiritual life of society, in its culture.

In the economic field, the main purpose of the social revolution is to resolve the conflict between the developing productive forces and obsolete production relations, to replace the old economic system with a new, higher one. The prerequisite for this is, first of all, a revolution in the relations of ownership of the means of production.

In the political field, the revolution resolves the conflict between the obsolete political superstructure and the emerging new economic relations or urgent needs economic development... It will create a new political and legal superstructure necessary for the consolidation and development of the emerging socio-economic formation.

It should also be said here that one should not confuse political revolution and coup d'état In a political revolution, power passes from the hands of the old reactionary class to the hands of the advanced class, the class essence of power changes, and the ruling class is replaced. And with a coup d'état, the class essence of power does not change; power is transferred from one grouping of the ruling class to another.

In the field of culture, the revolution is called upon to replace old social attitudes with new ones, including material and cultural values ​​accumulated by mankind throughout its development. The new culture does not stand aside from the main road of development of world civilization, but is a natural successor to the old cultural heritage... At the same time, the creation of such a culture requires a critical assimilation of the old, and not a simple borrowing of it.

So, the social revolution in historical process acts as a set of economic, political and cultural upheavals. Depending on the nature of the formation and specific conditions, the content and sequence of these three events in the course of a social revolution may be different. There may be a discrepancy between the constituent parts of a social revolution in time. While some processes are already being completed, others are just beginning, and still others are taking place simultaneously in many of its constituent parts.

Therefore, a social revolution is not a short-term explosion, but a long historical period, spanning years and decades, a period when the fundamental contradictions of social life are resolved. V. I. Lenin wrote: "The social revolution is not one battle, but the era of a whole series of battles on all and every questions of economic and democratic transformations ...".

In its development, the revolution goes through a number of stages, each of which prepares the conditions for the next. In the most general form, seven main stages can be distinguished here: 1) the conflict between the new productive forces and the old production relations, 2) a significant increase in the revolutionary activity of the masses, 3) the crisis of the “upper classes”, 4) the crisis of the “lower classes,” 5) the development of a revolutionary theory and its spread among the masses, 6) the creation of a revolutionary party (organization) and its leadership by the masses, 7) the consolidation of the results of the revolution (Fig. 18.1).

Of course, in a particular revolution, various kinds of deviations from this scheme are possible (large fractional periods, indistinct transitions, their incompleteness, etc.). Seven stages characterize the logic of the revolutionary process in the most generalized form. For a social revolution to ripen, objective and subjective prerequisites are required. What do they represent?

Rice. 18.1.

• Lenin V.I. Full collection op. Vol. 27.P. 62.