In George Hegel's political philosophy, there is 1 very crucial thread in which the state is established (der Staat). Martin Heidegger in his Heglu lecture notes stops at this very terminology: Staat – stato – status.
Its basis is the origin old – stand, stand, establish. In Russian state (hospitality) comes from words gospodin and gosudar (Mr., ruler).
State in Slavic Tradition
In Latin and languages derived from it, the act of regulation is thus emphasized, indicating that the state is an (artificially) being established, established, constructed, created, erected. In Slavic languages, however, only the highest component of your power is indicated. A mention to court is besides present in the Russian word (go-sud-ar, clearly visible in a polite Russian word sudar), for in Slavic tradition the ruler was simultaneously and a judge.
Power judges, and he who judges is power. The State is the area of his power, what is under his authority; what he as self-employed maintain and keep (Substraint). Hence the deadline lease.
Former State
The difference between these concepts reflects the much deeper discrimination Hegel makes between the "old state" (unfinished – unvollkommene – a country), and “a fresh country”, i.e. a “real one”.
The erstwhile state is to be the rule, the rule, in a negative sense, the tyranny. It is based on the real core of power, the vertical axis of command—subordination. There are any nuances here too. Among the “old states” it distinguished respective types: the 1st East Model (hard despotism, rigidity); the 2nd Greek Model (first effort to give power to the Empire). Alexandra the unifying philosophical dimension, which, however, besides ended in despot); the 3rd Roman model (limited formalization of private law, division of authorities, and alternating occurrence of despotism of power and despotism of the crowd).
New country
Understanding Staat It's a small different. This is the fresh state. Its vocation, construction, construction are essential. Staat is a product of the Spirit, but 1 who is full conscious and self-conscious.
Another word is “state as the manifestation of God in the world” (der Gang Gottes in der Welt). The Hegelovian state is so a product of self-consciousness. Country Staat is an expression of the level of concentration of consciousness, thus being a philosophical phenomenon. You can see the analogy with State Plato. Staat It's Platonic. πολιτεία, not Res Publica, although this word besides has any meaning for Hegel. Only philosophers, or those whose self-consciousness of society reaches its climax, can appoint a state to life.
State in the center of the sequence
Philosophers express God's journey around the planet manifested in a series of dialectical chains, including moments of the nation's self-consciousness. The State according to Hegel is associated with the sphere of morality (Sittlichkeit). This area is divided into 2 dialectic lines (thesis – antithesis – synthesis): household – civilian society – state and state – global relations – the planet Empire. The State is simply a common component of these lines, located in their centre.
In the first, the state responds to synthesis and in the second – thesis. The synthesis of the second series is the superstate—the Empire, in which the Spirit reaches the phase of the Absolute (general human and global idea). This ends with the past of the manifestation of the Spirit and the self-being. The state in this series is 1 of the links between the household and the “end of history”.
Family and Spirit
W Legal Philosophy all this is preceded by 2 more sequences – abstract laws and morality. The law creates an thought of an individual, and the morality of a subject. But man becomes a Spirit only in the sphere of morality. A spiritual entity is realized through household explanation and practice. It is in the household that the conscious Spirit first becomes himself. A man in a household becomes an expression of a peculiar idea. It becomes more than an individual, and its morality (Hegel understands it as the ability to critically distance itself from formal law) expresses itself in practice with concern for the full that the household constitutes.
However, a family-based society (agrarian, patriarchal) is not yet a nation and a state within the Heglovsk meaning. A household cannot be the starting point for a larger household scale, that is, a state until it passes through the full dialectic route. household society exists only in the "old country" (not in Staat!). It usually represents the lower layers that function in the planet of existence. This planet of existence, however, is not an animal world, but a moral one, for the driving force of the household is the Spirit which expresses itself in it.
Family and power
However, the power belongs not to the projection of the household high, but to the representatives of the elite, which came to its position in a completely different logic. Louis Gumplovich This is seen as the consequence of a "race struggle", meaning "races" of vectors of various cultural cultures. The stronger ones are subject to the weaker ones. In this way old states, despots, tyrants, principalities (no Staat).
In the systems of these families and rulers they live in parallel worlds, not knowing each another and not realizing the nature and nature of the bond that unites them. In practice, specified a discrimination between families and power is peculiarly characteristic of east Europe and to the top degree for Tsarist Russia. Ernest Gellner gave specified a kind of society the name of the imaginary country "Agraria". This agreement began to change in modern Western Europe. Hegel defines these changes as ‘Enlightenment’ (Aufklärung). It's an essential part of his dialectics.
Modern civilian Society
In the Age of Enlightenment in Western Europe, a fresh form is emerging – civilian society (bürgerliche Gesellschaft). This phenomenon is identical to bourgeois democracy and capitalism. Gellner describes them as a hypothetical State of Industry. According to Hegel, the basis of this phenomenon is the breakdown of the family, individualism and the attainment of clear social self-awareness.
It is simply a phase of antithesis, household negation. civilian society itself is evil but essential in the dialectical structure of the dissemination of the Spirit. The ghost must go through this phase to go to the next. The household as a community unit breaks down to give way to the citizen. It is the embodiment of abstract law and at the same time of an ethical entity, as well as of a denied household man. But they don't give it shape. It is defined by its rights and social and political freedoms. That's liberalism. Only now do we come to a “new state” that is Staat within the meaning of Hegel.
Storm Overcome
The most crucial thing, according to Hegel, is that the state is simply a phase of overcoming and negating civilian society. The real state cannot be bourgeois, but it must be super bourgeois. Its task should not be to service civilian society entities, to warrant them protection, prosperity and freedoms.
Hegel argues: in freedom, 1 does not request to leave the individuality, individual self-consciousness, but only from being, due to the fact that this being, whether man realizes it or not, manifests itself in the form of a self-power for which individuals are only moments. The state becomes itself erstwhile civilian society is completely overcome (it is denied) and the citizen (Bürger) undergoes final and irreversible liquidation, transforms into something else. Historically, the states were not appointed by families and bourgeoisie (industrial, commercial or its rightful), but by a peculiar layer—the condition of the brave (der Stand der Tapferkeit), as Hegel called it.
State of the Spirit
Unlike the formation of erstwhile states, this is not due to the fact that a stronger and more militant nation submits to another, weaker and peaceful nation; either as a consequence of any another kind of usurpation of power by a tyrant or an oligarchic group; but as a consequence of the fact that members of civilian society, in which the improvement of the self-conscious Spirit takes place, are aware of the self-conscious liberalism, but do not decide to simply return to the household (thesis), but to overcome the antithesis (of themselves as liberals through synthesis. This synthesis is the establishment of the State – Staat.
As in the family, man sacrifices his formal and ethical freedom here in the name of a higher strategy of values. But now it is united, not with the family, but with the state that becomes its mission, being and destiny. At this phase civilian society is becoming a nation (Volk). A collection of families is not a nation yet. It is besides not a civilian society unit (this demos). Society becomes a nation erstwhile the Spirit reaches its phase of overcoming liberalism and is ready to form a state (Staat).
State of the Future
It is crucial that, in this sense of Hegel, the category of the nation (Volk) is close to the deadline λαόςwhich I compose about in Ethnosiology. Volk It's a nation in an organized way. It's not a crowd, it's an army. That's where the Slavic word "soldier" comes from. Volk. civilian society is no longer a chaotic movement of bourgeois people seeking individual benefits. The commercial society is transformed into a society of heroes (according to Werner Sombart), in a ‘dare state’. It is the nation as a society of heroes that creates the state.
Hegel peculiarly emphasises “the right of heroes to establish a state” (das Heroenrecht zur Stiftung von Staaten). If we stick to his thoughts rigidly, we will find an interesting conclusion that the state has not yet been created – Staat in his understanding. We've only dealt with different forms in history. Staatand with tyranny and despots, or on the contrary, with chaotic republics divorced by civilian society, demos, not saying anything about the spiritual nature of power. This means that the state is simply a substance of the future.
Enlightenment Expansion in Russia
Let us apply this model to the past of Russia. It is apparent that the Russians never had a state (Staat) in a strictly Hegelian sense. Historically there was a Slavic “world of families” on the 1 hand, and on the another hand political elites (almost always abroad – Sarmatian, Scythian, Varesian, Mongolian, European, Jewish, etc.) who ruled over the Slavs’ “family”.
Nor did the Russians decently make civilian society. Although, since the 19th century, any attempts have been made to make specified a society. This task emerged as a consequence of the penetration of the European Enlightenment into Russia, but only reached the elite by the 19th century. In the 19th century they joined him trap And the Slavic Philly. Slavinophiles were greatly inspired by Heglem, as was trap Marxists and Liberals. Hence the concept of "citizenship". At the same time Russian translation of the German concept Bürgerlichkeit it has ceased to be so closely associated with conceptually and etymologically close bourgeoisie, obtaining a more "high" but not entirely correct sense. The intent of Enlightenment was to negate the planet of families and replace it with a planet of alienated, individualistic capitalists building a commercial society.
Heglovsk 19th Century
Families, communities and their territories had to be destroyed by turning them into a tom-tom proletariat. That's what the Helicists thought – Marxists. Russian Liberals thought that the liberation of peasants would transform Russian society into a mediate class. Slavinophiles claimed that the Russian people should declare their unity and spiritual-moral self-awareness. It would besides be Enlightenment, only Russian.
According to the Hegel scheme: Russian Marxists sought civilian society with respect to class interpretation; Russian liberals – simply to civilian society; and the glossary – immediately to the next stage, the position of the nation (Volk) in which the state was to be established, Staat (with any of them—like Paul Golochwastov is Ivan Axakov proposed for this intent Alexander IIand later Alexander III, renewal of the Russian state by convening the Earth Council). Liberals called for the classical antithesis of Hegel – the breakdown of families (communities) and the transition to capitalism. Marxists believed that capitalism is already there and must be overcome by the proletarian revolution. And the Slavophiles claimed that antithesis should be immediately supplemented with synthesis and the Russian people, who are already sufficiently influenced by the thought of Enlightenment, should decision on to phase 3 as shortly as possible – vocation Staat.
Revolution Without Proletariat
We know what happened in Russian history. Liberal ideas in pure form did not last long, but alternatively of overcoming them in the nation (Volk) the October Revolution broke out, which was initially considered the first phase on the way to planet communism, or “the end of history” in Marxist (left-Hegel) meaning – without a state but with purely proletarian internationalism. erstwhile it turned out that the revolution had only happened in 1 country, besides in agricultural and not entirely capitalist Russia (with minimally developed civilian society), Vladimir Lenin and Lew Trocki They have accepted it, unlike Western Marxists trying to orthodoxly stick to it Karl Marx.
Then comes an interesting return. 1 thing is to carry out a proletarian revolution in a country where there was small proletariat, and then, on the basis of its victory, to start supporting the labour movement in Europe and around the world, as Lenin and Trotsky wanted; and rather another thing is to build socialism in 1 country, completely contrary to whatever Marxism is understood. However, Josif Stalin He chose this way. And thus he followed Hegle himself, not his Marxist interpretation.
Staat Stalin
In practice, Stalin started building a Russian state on the basis of overcoming civilian society (although only nominally existing). This phase of past coincides with the emergence of a new, non-rural-based families and communities of form – a russian nation closely linked to the state. According to Marx, the fresh Hegel state (Staat) there should not be at all, and if it does, then only as a byproduct of early capitalist societies, forming temporary nations within the framework of ‘Industria’ (Gellnera). Lenin besides felt that bourgeois states were going to the phase of imperialism and were doomed to extinction.
Capitalism is simply a human and global phenomenon. The end of past as a triumph for communism will take place despite the emergence of states and the emergence of global relations between them, which do not substance much and are simply meaningless details. In this case, the communists agreed with the liberals only the difference that liberals were convinced that everything would end at the phase of planet capitalism, while the communists claimed that the planet proletarian revolution would follow, which would replace the global bourgeois proletarian revolution. Meanwhile, Stalin and his russian state did not fit in this model (both communist and liberal).
Different Hegel interpretations
The USSR was actually something like a Hegelovian Staat, and the russian nation (just russian alternatively than Russian as a planet of families) – Helgovian Volk. In the russian Union, it was truly believed that civilian society (the bourgeois identity) was overcome. global relations so actually gained a Hegel character; after all, it was the consequence of the russian Union's clash with Western countries that depended on what the planet Empire would be (Reich) – communist, Nazi or liberal.
The Hegel inspirations are even more visible in Italian fascism, in which 1 of his theorists relied on them. Giovanni Gentile, as well as in German national socialism (Julius Binder, Karl Larenz, Gerhard Dulckeit). It's the prism. Legal doctrine Hegel interpreted the national socialism of Heidegger. In the liberal world, the state appears with the influence of ideas John Maynard Keynes and policy experiences New DealFranklin Delano Roosevelt, but no theoretical improvement occurs (we do not consider British fascists Oswald Mosley). Later, in the “cold war” era about the “end of history” as a triumph for planet civilian society, he wrote from a theoretical point of view a liberal heglist, Alexandre Kojève. After the dissolution of the USSR, his ideas were developed by the American political philosopher, Francis Fukuyama, in his programme manifesto about the "end of history" and the global triumph of liberalism. This, however, has nothing to do with the State of Hegel, which had to do with overcoming civilian society, or capitalism.
Reflection From Liberal Bottom
It is crucial to look at the destiny of the russian society in which, according to Stalin, civilian society was to be overcome. This was the point of the russian state (if we consider it from a Hegel angle). The collapse of the USSR and the abandonment of communist ideology have shown that this overcoming was simply an illusion. Stalin, on the 1 hand, truly favoured the creation in the russian Union of civilian society in a proletarian package (the peasant planet and the household ecumen were torn out with roots, and the majority of the population was moved to cities where people became "placed" and "citizens", while on the another hand civilian society, which, before the revolution in Tsar's Russia, was virtually non-existent, was not overcome in his country. This should happen (according to Hegel) at the next stage.
Meanwhile, russian society fell into capitalism, the state clearly weakened and practically disappeared in 1990, and liberal ideas prevailed in post-Soviet Russia. Just due to the fact that the Stalinist state was not a real overcoming of capitalism, it was inevitable to return to the previous, completely nihilistic, liberal phase, so that it became possible to reflect from the liberal bottom and start all over again. This is very crucial – including Russia in a liberal, globalistic context and transforming it into a post-missive civilian society are the most crucial part of the implementation of the Hegel script.
Germany – failure of the Hegel perspective
It is only now that Russian society has become truly bourgeois, which means that the historical minute is coming to overcome bourgeoisie and creation Staat. At the same time, in spite of everything, Russia retained its political sovereignty, which had lost, for example, Germany after planet War II, with more serious grounds to establish a full Helgian state. This analysis shows that in the future, to which we have clearly approached, the Russian people in the sense of Heglowski Volk It can become a reality. interior spiritual energy is added to the Russians' opposition to the liberal West, which does not intend to become (at least for now) a state and a nation, spreading to the household in the utmost version of globalist civilian society.
Hegel thought that, at the end of history, the mission to express the thought of the planet empire would be German. He was delighted with the future uprising of the German constitutional monarchy on the basis of Prussia, which occurred soon, during the times Otto von Bismarck And the Hohenzollers. Then, as a consequence of global relations with others Staat and most likely besides with the aid of the metaphysics of war, the German destiny was to become a "world-historical nation", closing a string of 4 historical empires (as mentioned – Eastern, Greek and Roman). This thought of the world-historical importance of Germany and their spirit, their geographical and anthropological place in the past of the world, developed conservative revolutionaries in the 20th century – Arthur Moeller van den Bruck and Friedrich Hielscher. After the defeat of Nazi Germany in planet War II, this possible ceased to exist, or was postponed indefinitely. After 1945, Germany returned to civilian society again, virtually deprived of the right to prosecute politics. There could have been no more talk of heroic state establishment in their case. Thus the Germans left the Hegelow visible ellipse of conflict for a world-historical sense, about God's walking around the world.
Overcoming Liberalism in Russia and China
It is clear that Western liberal countries, radically attached to bourgeois ideology, capitalism and civilian society, besides have no predisposition to vocation Staat and the embodiment of the Spirit. That is why only Russia and China can be candidates for specified a global function today. Both Russia, peculiarly in fresh years and China, have already taken certain steps in this direction. Their will to overcome civilian society completely, their awareness of the request for a fresh establishment (Staat), as well as the ability to do so and the emergence of a critical mass of "the brave."
Society becomes a nation, rising beyond bourgeois norms and the structure of universal consciousness, transforming into an army, into a regiment (Volk). In Chinese society, the thought foundation can become the Confucian tradition of an ethical state and maoism with its negation of capitalism. In Russia, the metaphysics of the catechonic Empire and the experience of russian Stalinism, the construction of a solidarity-free and non-liberal state can be a prerequisite for building a large nation. He who succeeds will have a unique historical chance to become a vessel of the worldwide Spirit. The Russians have always believed that they are part of “God's way around the world.” Hence the concept of a "nation – godIt’s okay. ” It is advanced time we realized this and acted accordingly.
Prof. Aleksandr Dugin
Source: https://dzen.ru/a/ZYK6ZUgUSzG6i9Ky? Experiment=931375
The Middles come from Editorial.
