【作者】 郭文；

【导师】 曹维安；

【作者基本信息】 陕西师范大学 ， 世界史， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 自由主义作为一种思想流派和社会思想政治运动，是从中世纪向近代社会过渡时期的全欧现象，而俄国的自由主义则是以欧洲自由主义的变异形态即“不充分的自由主义”存在并发挥作用的。18世纪初彼得大帝的改革为西方文化渗入俄国土壤提供了温床。作为正统的资产阶级文化，自由主义被认为是西方文明世俗形式的最高体现。对于一心欧化的俄国来说，不可避免地会受到这股浪潮的冲击。正是在法国大革命前后，西欧的自由主义东渐俄罗斯，成为俄国启蒙运动的一个重要组成部分，并对沙皇政权的国内政策产生了相当大的影响。在叶卡捷琳娜二世和亚历山大一世的推动下，自由主义思想在蒙上了一层官方的、贵族的色彩后被接受下来，“政府自由主义”逐渐成为俄国政治传统的一个组成部分。与此同时，自由主义的学说和精神在俄国贵族社会广为传播。到19世纪30～40年代，以斯拉夫派和西方派为中心聚集了一大批带有自由主义观点的知识分子，并由此奠定了俄国自由主义保守与激进的两翼格局。直到大改革之前不久，以齐切林为代表的俄国资产阶级自由主义派别才正式形成。在1861年大改革的浪潮中，俄国自由主义者以地方自治机关为中心，将自由主义理念付诸实践，从而与大改革相得益彰。亚历山大二世被刺杀后，在沙皇政府的高压之下，自由主义运动经过短暂的蛰伏便渐趋激进，并于世纪之交组建起了自己的政党组织，知识分子取代贵族成为自由主义运动的主体，立宪主义空前活跃，俄国自由主义也由此实现了从“旧”向“新”的转变。以立宪民主党的成立为界标，俄国自由主义变成了积极参与政治斗争的政党的思想体系，俄国自由主义运动也由此进入了其发展史上的黄金时期。二月革命后，自由主义政党短暂地执掌俄国政权，从而将俄国自由主义运动推向高潮。但盛极而衰，随着十月革命的到来和布尔什维克上台执政，俄国自由主义渐趋式微。1918年1月5日，自由主义者为之奋斗了一个多世纪的立宪会议终于召开，但不幸的是，这个立宪会议仅仅存活了一天。1月6日，布尔什维克宣布解散立宪会议，从而宣告俄国近代自由主义无论是作为一场政治运动还是作为一种思想流派都走向衰落。就方法论而言，本文立足于现代化的视野，把俄国近代自由主义的出现与演变看作是俄国近代化过程中的西方化与本土化相碰撞而出现的一个特殊的政治文化现象，并采用点面结合的方法对俄国近代自由主义发展的历史脉络和各个阶段思想演变的轨迹进行了考察。在内容方面，本文力图显示俄国近代自由主义发展的全貌。在充分利用前人研究成果的基础上，本文把重点放在剖析俄国近代自由主义的理论内核上，并就一些对于俄国近代自由主义研究来说至关重要但并未引起前人足够重视的一系列问题——比如俄国近代自由主义的界定、类型与分期、俄国古典自由主义的理论大师齐切林对自由主义的解读、古典自由主义与新自由主义之间的关系、立宪民主党的纲领、策略和它在俄国自由主义发展史上的作用、俄国自由主义失败的原因及其影响等——进行了查漏补缺和系统的分析，从而提出了自己的新见解：俄国自由主义的产生是俄国对西方的感应和国内的变迁共同作用的混合产物，俄国自由主义的总体模式具有互动性；俄国自由主义的内核是立宪主义；俄国近代自由主义起于叶卡捷琳娜二世的“政府自由主义”，止于1918年1月立宪会议的被解散，其间主要经历了萌芽阶段、扩散阶段、形成和完备阶段、继续发展和过渡阶段以及新自由主义阶段等五个发展阶段；俄国新自由主义在许多方面与古典自由主义“血肉相连”，但也表现出了许多差异和变化，这主要得益于社会主义思想及其运动的影响；如果说俄国古典自由主义的集大成者齐切林还没有脱离西欧自由主义的樊篱，那么俄国新自由主义则完全可以与当时西欧的自由主义并驾齐驱了；作为新自由主义的载体，以米留科夫和司徒卢威为代表的立宪民主党人的理论建树和政治实践对俄国的未来产生了深远的影响，尽管时人并没有充分地认识到这一点：俄国自由主义的先天不足是导致它失败的客观原因，但更值得反省的恐怕还是自由主义者及其流派的主观失误；尽管从短时段来说，俄国近代自由主义的影响主要体现在形式上而不是内容上，它随着1918年立宪会议的被解散而走向终结，但从长时段来看，自由主义是俄国近代化的产物，它随着俄国近代化的向前发展而逐渐融入俄国社会，成为俄国近代以来政治文化传统的重要组成部分，在潜移默化中影响着俄国的历史发展，并构成俄国当今自由主义思潮的重要历史渊源。本文的结论是：俄国的自由主义是以欧洲自由主义的变异形态即“不充分的自由主义”存在并发挥作用的。在经过上百年的发展后，它已经逐渐本土化了，成了推动俄国社会进步的一个重要因素。俄罗斯的政治文化传统尽管在近期与从西方嫁接来的自由主义表现出紧张与冲突的态势，但从长远来看，它们会相互融合的。更多还原

【Abstract】 Liberalism, as a school of thought and a social ideational campaign, is a Europeanizing phenomenon from middle ages to modern times. But Russian liberalism existed and played its role as a variance of European liberalism——"have-not" liberalism. At the beginning of 18th century, the reform of Peter the Great provided the soil for the western culture permeating through Russia. As the legitimate bourgeois culture, the liberalism was considered that it be the best embodiment of the western unreligious civilization. Because it hoped intently to be Europeanized, Russia would inevitably be impacted in these tidal waves.In the moment of the French Revolution, Western Europe’s liberalism permeated eastwardly through Russia, and launched the Russia Enlightenment, and had the quite tremendous influence on the home policies of the tsarist regime. Under the impulseof CatherineⅡand Alexander, the liberalism idea had been closed with an official, aristocrat’s tinct, and "the government liberalism" gradually turned into among the Russian politics tradition henceforth. At the same time, the liberalism theory and elementary spirit was widely disseminated in the Russian aristocrat societies. Between 30～40’s in 19th century, a group of the liberal intellectual encircled about Slav school and Western school, and from then it has established two wings of the Russia liberalism conservative and the radical pattern. Before the Great reform, a Russian formal liberalism faction that Chicherin was a representative was shaped indeed. In the reforms of Russian serfdom in 1861, Russia liberalists took the local self-government institution as a center, and carried out the liberalism idea. After AlexanderⅡwas assassinated, the liberalism movement transitorily passed through dormant, then got gradually much more radical, and set up own political parties in the turn of the century, and the constitutionalism went into active highly, and the Russia liberalism had also realized the transformation from "old" to "new". After the Constitutional Democratic Party was established, the Russia liberalism as political party’s ideology positively attached itself to the political struggle, and then the Russia liberalism movement entered gold time in its history. After the February revolution, the liberal political party held shortly the Russian political power, thus the Russia liberalism movement would pushed to the high tide.On January 5, 1918, the constitutional conferences that liberalism had more than centuries struggle to be finally convened, but it was very unfortunate that the conference merely survived one day. On January 6, Bolshevik announced to dismiss the constitutional conference. Regardless of a political activity or a kind of thought school, the Russian modern liberalism moved towards the end.The author of this paper, with a modern perspective, regards the appearance and development of liberalism in Russian as a special cultural and social phenomenon after a collision of westernization and localization, and studies the history of liberal development and the evolvement in different stages.In this paper, the author tries to display a full view of the development of modern liberalism in Russia. Based on the research findings of the others, the author focuses on analyzing the core of the theory of Russian liberalism, and provides systematic analysis on some matters which are important to the study of Russian liberalism but Researchers haven’t attach enough attention to, for example, the definition, type and different stages of Russian liberalism, the unscrambling of it, the relationship between classic liberalism and new liberalism, the causes and effects of the failure of Russian liberalism, etc. The author holds the view that the emerging of Russian liberalism is a product of Russia’s reaction to western world and domestic change; that the core of Russian liberalism is constitutionalism; that it started from the queen CatherineⅡ’s governmental liberalism and ended in January of 1918 when the constitutional meeting was dissolved; that it experienced six stages——embryonic stage, expanding stage, expanding stage, maturity stage, transitional stage, and new liberalism; that new liberalism and classic liberalism are as close as flesh and blood, though there were some differences and variance existing owing to the influence of socialist ideology and campaign. If Chicherin who was a great Russia’s classical liberalism master has not been separated from the fence of the Western Europe liberalism, Russia’s new liberalism definitely was regarded to keep pace with Western Europe’s liberalism at the same time. The constitutional Democrats in that Miliukov and Struve were treated as their representative were identified with Russia’s new liberalism, and their achieved theories and political practices had had the profound influence to Russia’s future, although the person of the day didn’t fully realize this point.The congenitally deficient of Russia liberalism was an objective reason which causes it to be defeated, but it is perhaps better for the liberalism and its schools to engaging their subjective faults in introspection. Being established in the short interval, the influence of Russian modern liberalism mainly manifested in the form, not in the content, but from a long-range interval of view that, as the product of Russian modernization, the liberalism moved forward along with the Russian modernization, and gradually melted into the Russian societies, and has become an important part of the Russian modem political culture tradition, and has been affecting Russia’s historical development in influencing subtly, and it is constituting an important historical origin of Russia liberalism ideological trends now.更多还原