Russian doctrines and strategies. Dossier. See what “Doctrine” is in other dictionaries Name of doctrine
The word "doctrine" comes from the Latin "doctrina" - "teaching, science, teaching", it is used to designate a concept, theory, principle that defines a problem and a method for solving it. The term can be used in science, philosophy, religion, politics, but most often we hear it in relation to law. Let's look at what doctrine is in a little more detail.
Doctrine: scientific and official
According to the traditional classification, doctrines are distinguished:
- official - created and regulated at the national and supranational level;
- scientific - formulated in universities or other professorial associations.
Initially, doctrine was the only source of international law, but subsequently the meaning of doctrine in law was rethought. Today, however, the doctrine is still used in international law; it is a subsidiary source of law and is applied only in special conditions.
Known Doctrines
One of the most famous doctrines is The Doctrine of Fascism, a book on fascism written by Benito Mussolini, who coined the term fascism. The book was published in 1932 and became a source of national ideas for Italian youth. In the book, fascism appears as a new worldview, consisting in the struggle against everything old - communism, socialism, democracy, etc., the accomplishment of a spiritual and state revolution.
Another well-known doctrine is the “Doctrine of the European Union,” which contains a set of ideas about the goals of European integration.
Philosophy of fascism
Anti-individualism and freedom
Democracy and nation
Political and social doctrine
4. Racial doctrine
5. Military doctrine
Doctrine -This a scientific, philosophical, political, religious or legal theory, belief system, or guiding theoretical or political principle.
Doctrine as a source of law
As a general rule, any doctrine is divided into official, created at the national or supranational level (expert opinions given above), and scientific, created in universities and other professorial associations.
Initially, the doctrine was the only source of public international law; it was expressed in the works of Hugo Grotius and other jurists who substantiated the existence of international law from the point of view of the natural law school. The development of positivism ultimately led to the decline of the doctrine, and then to a rethinking of the role of doctrine in law. Currently, in public international law, doctrine is a subsidiary source of law, the application of which is possible only in special circumstances.
Private international law also recognizes doctrine as a source of law.
In national law, the role of doctrine depends on the characteristics of the legal system and national culture. In Russia, the doctrine is not officially recognized as a source of Russian law, but in fact it is.
In the scientific literature, completely opposite points of view are often expressed regarding the recognition of a legal doctrine as a source of law, and there is no consensus on this issue in Russian science.
Currently, references to the works of outstanding lawyers are found in court decisions, but rather as additional argumentation. The role of legal doctrine is manifested in the creation of structures, concepts, definitions used by the law-making body. Judges of higher or international courts, expressing their dissenting opinions, often refer to the works of famous jurists. And legal scholars are invited to court hearings to give expert opinions.
In particular, the case of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea “On the Fishing Vessel “Volga” (Russian Federation v. Australia). 2002. In the dissenting opinion of Deputy Chairman Budislav Vukas one can find references to the works of prominent theorists of international law: Rene-Jean Dupuis, Arvid Pardo.
The doctrine of the European Union is a conditional concept, representing a set of theoretical ideas about the goals, principles and legal forms of European integration. Traditionally, “...in states, the doctrine consists of the professional views of recognized authorities in the field of national law and, as a rule, is formed over many decades, then in the process of forming the European legal system, the function of the doctrine today is performed by expert opinions of leading European specialists invited to the EU commissions, with the purpose of analyzing current legislation and preparing recommendations to determine the principles and content of new EU acts.”
Doctrine in Islamic law
The special importance of the doctrine for the development of Islamic law is explained not only by the presence of many gaps, but also by the inconsistency of the Koran and the Sunnah. Most of the norms contained in them are of divine origin, which means they are considered eternal and unchangeable. Therefore, they cannot simply be discarded and replaced by state regulations. In these conditions, Muslim jurists, relying on fundamental sources, interpret them and formulate a solution to be applied in the current situation.
If in the VII-VIII centuries. The sources of Islamic law were indeed the Koran and the Sunnah, as well as ijma and “sayings of the Companions”; then, starting from the 9th-10th centuries, this role gradually transferred to doctrine. Essentially, the end of ijtihad meant the canonization of the conclusions of the main schools of Islamic law that had developed by the middle of the 11th century.
The doctrinal development of Islamic law, while making it difficult to systematize, at the same time gave it a certain flexibility and the opportunity to develop. Modern Muslim legal doctrine as a source of law should be considered in several aspects. In a number of countries (Saudi Arabia, Oman, some principalities of the Persian Gulf) it continues to play the role of a formal source of law, in others (Egypt, Turkey, Morocco) the subsidiary use of Islamic law is allowed if there are gaps in state regulations.
The doctrine of fascism
The Doctrine of Fascism (Italian: La dottrina del fascismo) is the seminal book on fascism, written by the originator of the term, Benito Mussolini.
It was first published in 1932 in volume 14 of the Enciclopedia Italiana di scienze, lettere ed arti, as an introduction to the article "Fascismo" (Fascism). In the same year, the article was published as a separate 16-page book in the series “The Ideology of Fascism” (“L’ideologija fascista”). Mussolini wrote extensive notes for the first chapter for the book.
The greatest phenomenon in the life of the peoples of the post-war period is fascism, which is currently making its victorious journey throughout the world, conquering the minds of the active forces of mankind and prompting a revision and restructuring of the entire social order.
Fascism originated in Italy and its creator is the brilliant leader of the fascist party and head of the Italian government, Benito Mussolini.
In the struggle of the Italian people against the nightmare of Red Communism looming over the country, fascism gave the Italian youth, the foremost fighters for national revival, the ideological basis for this struggle.
The communist ideology was opposed by the new ideology of the nation state, national solidarity, and national pathos.
Thanks to this, fascism created a powerful organization of an active minority, which, in the name of the national ideal, entered into a decisive war with the entire old world of communism, socialism, liberalism, democracy and, with its selfless feat, carried out a spiritual and state revolution that transformed modern Italy and marked the beginning of the Italian fascist statehood.
Having made a campaign against Rome in October 1922, fascism seized state power and began to re-educate the people and organize the state, in the order of fundamental laws that finally consolidated the form of the fascist state.
During this struggle, the doctrine of fascism was developed. In the charter of the fascist party, in the resolutions of party and trade union congresses, in the resolutions of the Great Fascist Council, in the speeches and articles of Benito Mussolini, the main provisions of fascism were gradually formulated.
In 1932, Mussolini considered it timely to give his teaching a complete formulation, which he did in his work “The Doctrine of Fascism,” placed in the 14th volume of the Italian Encyclopedia. For a separate edition of this work, he supplemented it with notes.
It is very important for the Russian reader to get acquainted with this work of B. Mussolini. Fascism is a new worldview, a new philosophy, a new corporate economy, a new government doctrine.
Thus, answering all the questions of human society, fascism went beyond the boundaries of national Italy. In it, general provisions were developed and found their formulation that define the emerging social structure of the 20th century, and why they acquired universal significance. In other words, the ideological content of fascism has become common property.
Every people has its own nationalism and creates the forms of its own existence; no imitation of even the best examples is acceptable. But the basic ideas of Italian fascism fertilize state building throughout the world.
Currently, the ideas of fascism are widespread among the Russian emigration.
Careful study of fascism began around 1924, when an attempt was made to organize a Russian fascist party in Serbia. This movement was led by Prof. D. P. Ruzsky and gene. P. V. Chersky.
In 1927, this so-called “National Organization of Russian Fascists” published its program, which, based on the general provisions of Italian fascism, but according to Russian conditions, outlined the path of the revolutionary struggle against Bolshevism and the future course of restoration of Russia liberated from communism.
However, this movement did not receive organizational development.
But the ideas of fascism spread to the Far East, where the Russian emigration was able to use them, creating in 1931 the Russian Fascist Party, headed by a young and talented man V.K. Rodzaevsky.
Until now, R.F.P. developed extensive organizational and propaganda work, publishing the daily newspaper “Our Way” and the monthly magazine “Nation”.
At the 3rd Congress in 1935, a new party program was adopted, which represents an attempt to adapt the principles of universal fascism to Russian reality in matters of the future structure of the Russian state.
It should be noted, however, that the ideology of Russian fascism in the Far East is strongly influenced by German National Socialism and has recently been veering towards old Russian nationalism.
But in Europe, Russian fascist thought continues to develop and its representative is the magazine “Cry,” published in Belgium.
The editors of the magazine “Cry” have joined the program of the national organization of Russian fascists and are preaching fascist ideology as the only real counterbalance to communism, while recognizing in the Italian statehood, created by the genius of B. Mussolini, the real resolution of the crisis experienced by modern society.
In development of the 1927 program, “Cry” published a brochure by its employee Verista (pseudonym): “The Basic Principles of Russian Fascism.” In it, the author, under the slogan of Russian fascism “God, Nation and Labor,” establishes the general provisions of Russian fascism, which is a doctrine of the national revival of Russia on the basis of a new national statehood, formulated and approved on the experience of the Italian Empire, the creator of the fascist doctrine and the leader of Italian fascism B Mussolini.
Philosophy of fascism
Like any integral political concept, fascism is both action and thought: action, which is characterized by a doctrine, and a doctrine, which, having arisen on the basis of a given system of historical forces, is included in the latter and then acts as an internal force.
Therefore, this concept has a form corresponding to the circumstances of place and time, but at the same time it has an ideological content that elevates it to the significance of truth in the history of higher thought.
It is impossible to act spiritually on the outer world in the field of the dictates of the human will, without understanding the transitory and partial reality that is subject to influence, and the eternal and universal reality, in which the former has its being and life.
To know people you need to know a person, and to know a person you need to know reality and its laws. There is no concept of the state, which, at its core, would not be the concept of life. It is philosophy or intuition, an ideological system developing into a logical construction or expressed in vision or faith, but it is always, at least in possibility, an organic teaching about the world.
Spiritual life concept
Thus, fascism cannot be understood in its many practical manifestations, as a party organization, as an educational system, as a discipline, unless it is considered in the light of a general understanding of life, that is, an understanding of the spiritual.
The world for fascism is not only a material world, manifesting itself only externally, in which a person, who is an independent individual, separate from all others, is guided by a natural law that instinctively draws him to an egoistic life and momentary pleasure.
For fascism, a person is an individual, united with the nation, the Fatherland, subject to a moral law that binds individuals through tradition, historical mission, and paralyzes the life instinct, limited by the circle of fleeting pleasure, in order, in the consciousness of duty, to create a higher life, free from the boundaries of time and space. In this life, the individual, through self-denial, sacrifice of private interests, even the feat of death, realizes a purely spiritual existence, which is where his human value lies.
Positive concept of life as a struggle
So, fascism is a spiritual concept, which also arose from the general reaction of the century against the weakening materialist positivism of the 19th century. The concept is anti-positivist, but positive; not skeptical, not agnostic, not pessimistic, not passively optimistic, which are generally doctrines (all negative), which place the center of life outside of man, who can and should create his own world with his free will.
Fascism desires an active person, devoting himself to action with all his energy, courageously aware of the difficulties ahead of him and ready to overcome them. He understands life as a struggle, remembering that a person should win a decent life for himself, first of all creating from himself an instrument (physical, moral, intellectual) for its organization. This is true both for the individual and for the nation and for humanity in general.
Hence the high appreciation of culture in all its forms (art, religion, science) and the greatest importance of education. Hence the basic value of labor, with which man conquers nature and creates his own world (economic, political, moral, intellectual)
Moral concept of life
This positive understanding of life is obviously an ethical understanding. It embraces all of reality, and not just the person who rules over it. There is no action that is not subject to moral evaluation; there is nothing in the world that could be devoid of its moral value.
Therefore, the fascist imagines life as serious, austere, religious, completely included in the world of moral and spiritual forces. The fascist despises the “comfortable life”
Religious life concept
Fascism is a religious concept; in it, a person is considered in his immanent relation to the highest law, to the objective Will, which exceeds the individual and makes him a conscious participant in spiritual communication. Anyone who dwells on purely opportunistic considerations in the religious policy of the fascist regime has not understood that fascism, being a system of government, is also and first of all a system of thought.
Ethical and realistic concept of life
Fascism is a historical concept in which man is considered exclusively as an active participant in the spiritual process in the family and social group, in the nation and in history, where all nations cooperate. Hence the enormous importance of tradition in memories, language, customs, and rules of social life.
Outside of history, man is nothing. Therefore, fascism opposes all individualistic, materialist-based abstractions of the 19th century; he is against all utopias and Jacobin innovations. He does not believe in the possibility of "happiness" on earth, as was the aspiration of the economic literature of the 18th century, and therefore he rejects all teleological teachings according to which the final dispensation of the human race is possible at a certain period of history. The latter is tantamount to placing oneself outside of history and life, which is a continuous flow and development.
Politically, fascism strives to be a realistic doctrine; in practice, he wants to solve only problems that are posed by history itself, which outlines or predicts their solution. To act among people, as in nature, you need to delve into the real process and master the operating forces.
Anti-individualism and freedom
The fascist concept of the state is anti-individualistic; fascism recognizes the individual insofar as he coincides with the state, which represents the universal consciousness and will of man in his historical existence.
Fascism is against classical liberalism, which arose from the need for reaction against absolutism and exhausted its task when the state turned into the people's consciousness and will. Liberalism rejected the state in the interests of the individual; fascism affirms the state as the true reality of the individual.
If freedom should be an integral property of a real person, and not an abstract puppet, as individualistic liberalism imagined him, then fascism is for freedom. He is for the only freedom that can be a serious fact, namely the freedom of the state and the freedom of the individual in the state. And this is because for a fascist everything is in the state and nothing human or spiritual exists, much less has value, outside the state. In this sense, fascism is totalitarian and the fascist state, as the synthesis and unity of all values, interprets and develops all national life, and also strengthens its rhythm.
Antisocialism and corporatism
Outside the state there is no individual, and there are no groups (political parties, societies, trade unions, classes). Therefore, fascism is against socialism, which reduces historical development to the struggle of classes and does not recognize state unity, merging classes into a single economic and moral reality; likewise fascism versus class syndicalism.
But within the ruling state, fascism recognizes the real demands from which the socialist and trade union movements originate, and realizes them in a corporate system of interests agreed upon in the unity of the state.
Democracy and nation
Individuals constitute: classes according to categories of interests, trade unions according to various spheres of economic activity united by a common interest; but first and foremost they constitute the state. The latter is not a number in the form of the sum of individuals who form the majority of the people. Therefore, fascism is against democracy, which equates the people with the majority and reduces them to the level of the many.
But it itself is a true form of democracy, if the people are understood as they should be, qualitatively and not quantitatively, that is, as the most powerful, moral, true and consistent idea. This idea is realized among the people through the consciousness and will of a few, even one, and, as an ideal, strives to be realized in the consciousness and will of all.
It is those who, in accordance with their ethnic nature and history, form a nation, being guided by a single consciousness and will along the same line of development and spiritual make-up.
A nation is not a race, or a specific geographical area, but a group lasting in history, that is, a multitude united by one idea, which is the will to existence and domination, that is, self-consciousness, and therefore personality.
Concept of state
This supreme personality is the nation because it is the state. It is not the nation that creates the state, as the old naturalistic understanding that formed the basis of the nation states of the 19th century proclaims. On the contrary, the state creates a nation by giving freedom, and therefore effective existence, to a people conscious of its own moral unity.
The right of a nation to independence stems not from a literary and ideological consciousness of its own existence, much less from an actual more or less unconscious and inactive state, but from an active consciousness, from an active political will capable of proving its right, that is, from a kind of state already at the initial stage (in process). The state, precisely as a universal ethical will, is the creator of law.
Ethical State
The nation, in the form of the state, is an ethical reality, existing and living as it develops. Stopping development is death. Therefore, the state is not only a ruling power that gives individual wills the form of law and creates the value of spiritual life, it is also a force that carries out its will externally and forces recognition and respect for itself, that is, it actually proves its universality in all necessary manifestations of its development. Hence the organization and expansion, at least in possibility. Thus, the state will is equal in nature with the human will, which knows no limits in its development and proves its own infinity by its implementation.
The fascist state, the highest and most powerful form of personality, is a force, but a spiritual force. It synthesizes all forms of human moral and intellectual life. Therefore, the state cannot be limited to the tasks of order and protection, as liberalism wanted. This is not a simple mechanism delimiting the spheres of supposed individual freedoms.
The state is an internal form and norm that disciplines the entire personality and embraces both its will and reason. Its basic principle, the main inspiration of the human personality living in civil society, penetrates into the depths, takes root in the heart of the active person, be he a thinker, an artist or a scientist: it is the soul of the soul.
As a result, fascism is not only a legislator and creator of institutions, but an educator and engine of spiritual life. He seeks to remake not the form of human life, but its content, the person himself, character, faith.
For this purpose, he strives for discipline and authority, penetrating the spirit of man and indisputably ruling over him. Therefore, his emblem is the lictor's bundle, a symbol of unity, strength and justice.
Political and social doctrine
Reformism, revolutionism, centrism - there are no echoes left of all this terminology, while in the powerful stream of fascism you will find currents originating from Sorel, Peguy, Lagardelle from the Mouvement Socialiste, and from which the cohorts of Italian syndicalists who, between 1904 and 1914 with Pagani Libere - Olivetti, La Lupa - Orano, Divenire Sociale - Heinrich Leone brought a new note into the everyday life of Italian socialism, already weakened and chloroformed by the fornication of Giollitti.
At the end of the war in 1919, socialism as a doctrine was dead; it existed only in the form of hatred and had another opportunity, especially in Italy, to take revenge on those who wanted war and who must “atone” for it.
The years leading up to the march on Rome were years when the necessity of action did not allow for research and detailed doctrinal development. There were battles in cities and villages. They argued, but, what is more sacred and significant, they died. They knew how to die. Elaborated with division into chapters and paragraphs and with careful justification, the doctrine could be missing; to replace it there was something more definite: faith...
However, whoever reconstructs the past from the mass of books, articles, resolutions of congresses, large and small speeches, who knows how to research and select, will find that in the heat of the struggle the foundations of the doctrine were sketched out. It was during these years that fascist thought was armed, sharpened and formed.
The problems of the individual and the state were resolved; problems of authority and freedom; political, social and especially national problems; the struggle against liberal, democratic, social, Masonic, and popular Catholic (popolari) doctrines was carried out simultaneously with “punitive expeditions.”
But since there was no “system,” the opponents unscrupulously denied any doctrinal ability of fascism, and meanwhile, the doctrine was created, perhaps, violently, first under the guise of violent and dogmatic denial, as happens with all emerging ideas, and then in form of a positive construction, which was embodied successively in 1926, 1927 and 1928 in the laws and institutions of the regime.
Nowadays fascism is clearly isolated not only as a regime, but also as a doctrine. This position should be interpreted in the sense that now fascism, criticizing itself and others, has its own independent point of view, and therefore a line of direction, in all problems that materially or spiritually torment the peoples of the world.
Against pacifism: war and life as a duty
First of all, fascism does not believe in the possibility and benefit of permanent peace, since in general the matter concerns the future development of mankind, and considerations of current politics are left aside. Therefore, he rejects pacifism, which covers up the refusal to fight and the fear of sacrifice.
Only war strains all human forces to the highest degree and imposes a stamp of nobility on peoples who have the courage to undertake it. All other tests are secondary, since they do not put a person before himself in choosing life or death. Therefore, the doctrine based on the premise of peace is alien to fascism
Also alien to the spirit of fascism are all international organizations of a public nature, although they can be accepted for the sake of benefit under certain political conditions. As history shows, such organizations can be scattered to the winds when ideological and practical feelings stir up the hearts of peoples.
Fascism carries this anti-pacifist spirit into the lives of individuals. The proud word of a warrior, “I will not be intimidated” (me ne frego), inscribed on a wound bandage, is not only an act of Stoic philosophy, not only a conclusion from political doctrine; this is education for struggle, taking risks associated with it; this is a new style of Italian life
Thus the fascist accepts and loves life; he denies and considers suicide cowardice; he understands life as a duty of improvement, of conquest. Life should be sublime and fulfilling, experienced for oneself, but most importantly for others, close and distant, present and future.
The regime's demographic policy is a conclusion from these premises.
The fascist loves his neighbor, but this “neighbor” is not for him a vague and elusive idea; love for one's neighbor does not eliminate the necessary educational severity, much less pickiness and restraint in relationships.
The fascist rejects the embrace of the world and, living in communion with civilized peoples, he does not allow himself to be deceived by a changeable and deceptive appearance; vigilant and distrustful, he looks into their eyes and monitors their state of mind and the changes in their interests.
Against historical materialism and class struggle
Such an understanding of life leads fascism to a decisive denial of the doctrine that forms the basis of Marx’s so-called scientific socialism; the doctrine of historical materialism, according to which the history of human civilization is explained solely by the struggle of interests of various social groups and changes in the means and instruments of production.
No one denies that economic factors - the discovery of raw materials, new methods of work, scientific inventions - have their significance, but it is absurd to assume that they are sufficient to explain human history without taking into account other factors.
Now and always, fascism believes in holiness and heroism, i.e. actions in which there is no economic motive, remote or close.
Having rejected historical materialism, according to which people are represented only as extras in history, appearing and hiding on the surface of life, while directing forces move and work inside, fascism denies the constant and inevitable class struggle, a natural outgrowth of such an economic understanding of history, and above all it denies that class struggle is the predominant element of social change.
After the collapse of these two pillars of doctrine, nothing remains of socialism except sensitive dreams - as old as humanity - about a social existence in which the suffering and sorrow of the common people will be alleviated. But even here, fascism rejects the concept of economic “happiness”, which is realized at the given moment of economic evolution socialistically, as if automatically providing everyone with the highest measure of well-being. Fascism denies the possibility of a materialistic understanding of “happiness” and leaves it to the economists of the first half of the 18th century, i.e. it denies equality: - “well-being-happiness”, which would turn people into cattle thinking about one thing: to be satisfied and satiated, i.e. that is, limited to simple and purely plant life.
After socialism, fascism fights against the entire complex of democratic ideologies, rejecting them either in their theoretical premises or in their practical applications and constructions.
Fascism denies that numbers, simply as such, can govern human society; he denies that this number, by periodic consultation, can rule; he argues that inequality is inevitable, beneficial and beneficial to people, which cannot be equalized by the mechanical and external fact that is universal suffrage.
Democratic regimes can be defined by the fact that under them, from time to time, the people are given the illusion of their own sovereignty, while real, real sovereignty rests on other forces, often irresponsible and secret. Democracy is a regime without a king, but with very numerous, often more absolute, tyrannical and ruinous kings than a single king, even if he is a tyrant.
That is why fascism, which until 1922, in view of passing considerations, occupied a republican, in tendency, position, abandoned it before the March on Rome in the conviction that now the question of the political form of the state is not significant and that when studying the examples of past and present monarchies or republics, it is clear that monarchy and republic should not be discussed under the sign of eternity, but represent forms in which the political evolution, history, tradition and psychology of a particular country are revealed.
Now fascism has overcome the opposition “monarchy - republic”, in which democracy was stuck, burdening the former with all its shortcomings and praising the latter as a perfect system. Now it is clear that there are essentially reactionary and absolute republics and monarchies that accept the most daring political and social experiments.
In relation to liberal doctrines, fascism is in unconditional opposition, both in the field of politics and economics. For the purposes of the present controversy, the importance of liberalism in the last century should not be exaggerated and one of the many doctrines that blossomed in that century should not be made the religion of mankind for all times, present and future.
Liberalism flourished only for 15 years. It was born in 1830, as a reaction against the Holy Alliance, which wanted to push Europe back to the 1789s, and had its own year of special brilliance, namely 1848, when even Pope Pius the 9th was liberal.
Immediately after this, the decline began. If 1848 was a year of light and poetry, then 1849 was a year of darkness and tragedy. The Roman Republic was killed by another, namely the French Republic. That same year, Marx released the gospel of the socialist religion in the form of the famous Communist Manifesto. In 1851, Napoleon III carried out an illiberal coup d'état and reigned over France until 1870, when he was overthrown by a popular uprising, but due to a military defeat considered one of the largest in history. Bismarck won, never knowing where the religion of freedom reigned and which prophets served it.
It is symptomatic that the German people, a people of supreme culture, were completely ignorant of the religion of freedom during the 19th century. It appeared only during the transition period, in the form of the so-called “ridiculous parliament” in Frankfurt, which lasted one season.
Germany achieved its national unity without liberalism, against liberalism, a doctrine alien to the German soul, an exclusively monarchical soul, while liberalism is logically and historically the threshold of anarchy. The stages of German unification were the three wars of 1864, 1866 and 1870, led by liberals such as Moltke and Bismarck.
As for the Italian unification, liberalism contributed absolutely less to it than Mazzini and Garibaldi, who were not liberals. Without the intervention of the illiberal Napoleon we would not have had Lombardy; and without the help of the illiberal Bismarck under Sadowa and Sedan, it is quite possible that we would not have had Venice in 1866 and would not have entered Rome in 1870.
From 1870 to 1915 there is a period when the priests of the new confession themselves recognize the onset of twilight of their religion - beaten in literature by decadence, in practice by activism; i.e. nationalism, futurism, fascism.
Having accumulated an infinite number of Gordian knots, the liberal age is trying to extricate itself through the hecatomb of world war. Never has any religion imposed such a tremendous sacrifice. Are the gods of liberalism out for blood? Now liberalism is closing its empty temples, since the people feel that its agnosticism in economics, its indifferentism in politics and morality are leading the state to certain destruction, as has happened before.
This explains that all political experiences of the modern world are illiberal, and it is therefore extremely ridiculous to exclude them from the course of history. It is as if history were a hunting park reserved for liberalism and its professors, and liberalism is the final immutable word of civilization.
The fascist denial of socialism, democracy, and liberalism does not, however, give the right to think that fascism wants to push the world back to the time before 1789, which is considered the beginning of the demo-liberal age.
There is no going back to the past! Fascist doctrine did not choose de Maistre as its prophet. Monarchical absolutism has outlived its usefulness, and so has, perhaps, any theocracy. Thus, feudal privileges and division into “closed” castes that did not communicate with each other became obsolete. The fascist concept of power has nothing to do with a police state. A party ruling a nation in a totalitarian manner is a new fact in history. Any correlations and comparisons are impossible.
From the wreckage of liberal, socialist and democratic doctrines, fascism still extracts valuable and vital elements. He preserves the so-called gains of history and rejects everything else, i.e., the concept of a doctrine suitable for all times and peoples. Let's say that the 19th century was the century of socialism, democracy and liberalism; however, this does not mean that the 20th century will become the century of socialism, democracy and liberalism. Political doctrines pass, but peoples remain. It can be assumed that this century will be the century of authority, the century of the “right” direction, the fascist century. If the 19th century was the century of the individual (liberalism is equivalent to individualism), then we can assume that this century will be the century of the “collective”, therefore the century of the state.
It is entirely logical that a new doctrine can use still vital elements of other doctrines. No doctrine is born entirely new, never seen or unheard of. No doctrine can boast of absolute originality. Each one, at least historically, is connected with other former and future doctrines. Thus, the scientific socialism of Marx is connected with the utopian socialism of Fourier, Owen, and Saint-Simon. Thus 19th century liberalism is related to 18th century illuminism. This is how democratic doctrines are related to the Encyclopedia.
Every doctrine strives to direct human activity towards a specific goal, but human activity, in turn, influences the doctrine, changes it, adapts it to new needs, or overcomes it. Therefore, the doctrine itself should not be a verbal exercise, but a vital act. This is the pragmatic coloring of fascism, its will to power, the desire for being, its attitude to the fact of “violence” and the meaning of the latter.
Value and mission of the state
The main position of the fascist doctrine is the doctrine of the state, its essence, tasks and goals. For fascism, the state appears to be an absolute, in comparison with which individuals and groups are only “relative.” Individuals and groups are “thinkable” only in the state. The liberal state does not control the game and the material and spiritual development of the team, but is limited to taking into account the results.
Unity of the state and the contradictions of capitalism
From 1929 to the present day, general economic and political evolution has further strengthened the significance of these doctrinal principles. The state is becoming a giant. Only the state is capable of resolving the dramatic contradictions of capitalism. The so-called crisis can only be resolved by the state and within the state.
In the face of the continuously demanded inevitable intervention of the state in economic relations, what would the Englishman Bentham now say, according to whom industry should ask the state for one thing: to leave it alone; or the German Humboldt, in whose opinion the “idle” state should be considered the best?
It is true that the second wave of liberal economists was not as extreme as the first, and Adam Smith himself, albeit very cautiously, opened the door to government intervention in the economy.
Whoever says liberalism says “individual”; whoever says “fascism” says “state”. But the fascist state is unique and appears to be an original creation. It is not reactionary, but revolutionary, since it anticipates the solution of certain universal problems posed in all areas: in the political sphere by the fragmentation of parties, the arbitrariness of parliament, the irresponsibility of legislative assemblies; in the economic sphere - by increasingly extensive and powerful trade union activities, both in the working sector and in the industrial sector, their conflicts and agreements; - in the moral sphere - the need for order, discipline, obedience to the moral commandments of the fatherland.
Fascism desires a state that is strong, organic, and at the same time based on a broad popular base. The fascist state also claimed the economy within its purview, therefore the sense of statehood, through the corporate, social and educational institutions created by it, penetrated to the extreme ramifications, and in the state all the political, economic and spiritual forces of the nation are revealed, being introduced into the corresponding organizations. A state that relies on millions of individuals who recognize it, feel it, and are ready to serve it cannot be the tyrannical state of a medieval ruler. It has nothing to do with the absolute states before or after 1789.
In a fascist state the individual is not destroyed, but rather strengthened in his importance, just as a soldier in the ranks is not diminished, but strengthened by the number of his comrades. The fascist state organizes the nation but leaves sufficient space for individuals; it limited useless and harmful freedoms and preserved essential ones. It is not the individual who can judge in this area, but only the state.
Fascist state and religion
The fascist state does not remain indifferent to religious phenomena in general and to positive religion, in particular, which in Italy is Catholicism. The state does not have its own theology, but it has morality. In a fascist state, religion is considered one of the most profound manifestations of the spirit, therefore it is not only revered, but enjoys protection and patronage.
The fascist state did not create its own “God,” as Robespierre did at the moment of extreme delirium of the Convention; it does not strive in vain, like Bolshevism, to eradicate religion from the souls of the people. Fascism honors the God of ascetics, saints, heroes, as well as God, as the naive and primitive heart of the people contemplates him and appeals to him.
Empire and discipline
The fascist state is the will to power and domination. The Roman tradition in this regard is the idea of force. In fascist doctrine, the empire is not only a territorial, military or commercial institution, but also a spiritual and moral one. One can think of an empire, that is, a nation ruling directly or indirectly over other nations, without the need to conquer even one kilometer of territory.
For fascism, the desire for empire, that is, for national expansion, is a vital manifestation; the opposite, “staying at home,” shows signs of decline. Nations that rise and regenerate are imperialists; dying peoples renounce all claims.
Fascism is the doctrine best suited to express the aspirations and state of mind of the Italian people, rising after many centuries of abandonment and foreign slavery. But power requires discipline, coordination of forces, a sense of duty and sacrifice; this explains many manifestations of the practical activities of the system, the orientation of state efforts, the necessary severity against those who would like to counteract this fatal movement of Italy in the 20th century; To counteract, shaking the overcome ideologies of the 19th century, rejected wherever grandiose experiments in political and social change are boldly accomplished.
Never before have peoples craved so much authority, direction, and order as now. If every age has its own doctrine of life, then from a thousand signs it is clear that the doctrine of the present age is fascism. That it is a living doctrine is evident from the fact that it excites faith; that this faith embraces souls is proven by the fact that fascism had its heroes, its martyrs. From now on, fascism has the universality of those doctrines which, in their implementation, represent a stage in the history of the human spirit.
Racial doctrine
An integral part of the Nazi worldview, which played a key role in the history of the Third Reich. It received theoretical justification in the mid-19th century in the wake of growing nationalism and accompanying romanticism, when German racism acquired political and cultural significance. Not content with claiming the superiority of the white race over people of color, the proponents of racial doctrine created a hierarchy within the white race itself. Faced with this need, they created the myth of Aryan superiority. This in turn became the source for subsequent myths such as the Teutonic, Anglo-Saxon and Celtic. The first step was the mixing of the Indo-European group of languages with the so-called Indo-European race.
The concept of "Indo-European" was soon replaced by the concept of "Indo-German". And then, with the light hand of Friedrich Max Müller, it turned into “Aryan” - to denote belonging to a language group. Müller rejected the equation between race and language, but the damage had already been done. From these positions, racists insistently argued that "Aryan" meant nobility of blood, unparalleled beauty of form and mind, and superiority of breed. Every significant achievement in history, they argued, was made by representatives of the Aryan race. The entire civilization, in their opinion, was the result of a struggle between Aryan creators and non-Aryan destroyers.
Racism in Germany rested on fertilized soil because it was identified with nationalism. The German romantics of the early 19th century, emphasizing uncertainty, mystery, emotionality and imagery - as the opposite of rationality - had a profound impact on the German intelligentsia. Herder, Fichte, and other German romantics diverged sharply from Enlightenment philosophers who viewed reason as the fulcrum. The Germans believed that each people has its own specific genius (spirit), which, although imprinted deep in the past, must ultimately express itself in the national spirit (Volksgeist). The Volksgeist was implied to be an undeniable superpower and possess its own spiritual universe, whose outer form manifested itself in a specific national culture.
This type of irrationalism, which took a strong place in the German mind, gave meaning to such vague concepts as the doctrine of descent. Two non-German ideologues made significant contributions to such thinking: the Frenchman Arthur de Gobineau and the Englishman Huston Stuart Chamberlain. The German composer Richard Wagner had a certain influence in the spread of this kind of racism, who believed that the heroic German spirit was carried along with Nordic blood. German racists claimed that the Nordic race was the best Aryan race. From this it followed that lower cultures could not dominate the biologically fixed combination of the Nordic mind, spirit and body.
Adolf Hitler, who idolized Wagner, made racial doctrine the cultural core of the Third Reich. In the pages of Mein Kampf, he furiously denounced all those who held a different opinion on racial issues, calling them “liars and traitors to civilization.” History, he declared, had convincingly proven that whenever Aryan blood mixed with the blood of lower peoples, the end of the “culture-bearing” race came. The Germans must not fall into the sin of incest, Hitler warned. He spoke passionately of the future German order, which he saw as a brotherhood of the Templars around the Holy Grail of pure blood. It is necessary to avoid the degeneration of the Germanic race. And the main task of the state is to preserve the original racial elements. The Nordic Aryans, Hitler argued, became the creators and guardians of civilization, and the Jews became its destroyers. Therefore, the Germans are obliged to unite to fight the Jews.
Hitler's racial ideas were embodied in the Nuremberg Citizenship and Race Laws, passed in 1935, which granted citizenship to "all bearers of German or similar blood" and denied it to anyone considered a member of the Jewish race. Thanks to these laws, which now seem very vague, racism received legal justification in the Third Reich and was eventually embodied in the “Final Solution” - the physical extermination of the Jewish population of Europe. With the support of Hitler, the racial research program - Rassenforschung - became widespread in Germany. The results of the “works” of Nazi scientists became mandatory for study in all educational institutions of the Third Reich, from primary schools to universities. Little importance was attached to the fact that the “scientific works” of German scientists at world anthropological congresses caused laughter from their foreign colleagues.
In such an atmosphere, Nazi racism emerged as a concept of racial purity. It was argued that the decay of any nation is always the result of racial mixing: the fate of a nation depends on its ability to maintain its racial purity. Such ideas, which were passionately and decisively defended, had no scientific basis. The peoples of the world turned out to be so mixed that it was hardly possible to find a pure race anywhere. Leading ethnologists and anthropologists of the world, without any reservations, agreed that the historical contact of races resulted in a complex interweaving in which it is impossible to distinguish a pure race. Most scientists were of the opinion that the world community is an ethnological crucible filled with energetic, impure-blooded subjects. They viewed every cultural group that could be characterized as mixed as a virtual refutation of the thesis that mixed peoples were inferior to pure peoples. Jean Finot expressed this in one phrase: “The purity of blood is nothing more than a myth.”
Equally scientifically unacceptable is the Nazi notion of racial superiority. The idea of a master race is as old as time, but until the 19th century it was based on cultural rather than racial differences. Modern ideas about racial superiority stem from psychological premises: fear and contempt for the rootless. This feeling is based on the instinct of self-preservation. Individuals and nations, like animals, tend to see every stranger as a natural enemy. This becomes an important prerequisite for the development of a sense of racial superiority.
Competent biologists, ethnologists, and anthropologists agree that arbitrary interpretation of the term “race” leads to confusion. A clear example is the use of this concept to satisfy Hitler's national ambitions. Indeed, there never was a Germanic race, but there was a Germanic nation. There was no Aryan race, but Aryan languages did exist. There was no Jewish race, but there was and is a Jewish religion and culture. The tendency to explain the concept of “race” in biological terms does not stand up to criticism. The concept of “race” expresses the integrity of the physical type, which represents the essence of biological formation, and has nothing to do with nationality, language or customs of the historical development of social groups. In the biological aspect, a race is a group of related individuals, a population that differs from other populations in related similarity by certain hereditary traits, of which skin color is only one of the characteristics. In the political aspect, such an interpretation takes the form of deliberate fraud.
Even in its original sense, the concept of “race” still retains nuances that are difficult to comprehend. Scientists have repeatedly tried to classify the peoples of the world in a certain order, but difficulties have always arisen with this, for the reason that there is simply no clear line in demarcation between races. Any such classifications turn out to be subjective and controversial.
Early attempts to classify races based on simple biological differences were inconclusive. Equally unsatisfactory was classification on a geographical basis (when considering the population of a given region and studying general characteristics), as well as on a historical basis (the study of migration flows) or cultural principles ("racial mentality"). Examples of the above-mentioned approach are characteristic of Carl Gustav Carus, who identified four races: European, African, Mongoloid and American, figuratively formulating them as “day, night, eastern dawn and western dawn.” A similar approach was characteristic of Gustav Friedrich Klemm, who proposed a division into active (male) and passive (female) races, which was later borrowed and developed by Gobineau. Anthropological discoveries in the 19th century introduced quantitative methods for recognizing races. The first step was the introduction in 1842 of the so-called. cranial index, a percentage of the length and width of the skull proposed by the Swedish anatomist Anders Adolf Retzius. Further attempts at classification were limited to the study of somatic differences in skin color, hair, figure, eyes, nose and face. The most expressive classification was the division into five primary colors: white, black, brown, red and yellow.
This division of humanity seemed quite acceptable, but even here the variations within a particular group seemed extremely difficult to establish a clear and distinct differentiation.
Anatomical, linguistic, mental and cultural characteristics turned out to be so deeply intertwined that it presented difficulties for any meaningful distinction between races.
Even somatic characteristics could be caused by environmental influences directly through nutritional deficiencies, natural or artificial selection, living conditions or other circumstances. There is no doubt that not only somatic features were insufficient to determine the dividing line between the races. None of these theories fully influenced Hitler. So strong was the Führer's belief in his own intuition regarding this issue that it baffled Nazi scientists when he ordered a study of scientific and historical facts in order to provide a rationalistic explanation of his own position. He discarded as unimportant the facts that destroyed the Nazi racial doctrine in the bud. It is in the very nature of modern dictatorship that its leaders, in addition to claiming political power, seek to set the tone for cultural coordination. In the Third Reich, an entire nation was forced to accept the intuitions of a poorly educated politician whose ideas about racial issues looked like an absolute theater of the absurd.
Military doctrine
Military doctrine, a system of official views and regulations that establishes the direction of military development, preparation of the country and armed forces for war, methods and forms of waging it. Military doctrine is developed and determined by the political leadership of the state. The main provisions of military doctrine are formed and change depending on politics and the social system, the level of development of the productive forces, new scientific achievements and the nature of the expected war.
The fundamentals of the military doctrine of the young Soviet state were developed under the leadership of V.I. Lenin. A great contribution to the development of the Military Doctrine was made by M. V. Frunze, who gave the following definition of its essence: “...”a unified military doctrine” is a teaching accepted in the army of a given state that establishes the nature of the development of the country’s armed forces, the methods of combat training of troops, their driving on the basis of the views prevailing in the state on the nature of the military tasks facing it and the methods of resolving them, arising from the class essence of the state and determined by the level of development of the country’s productive forces” (Izbr. proizv., vol. 2, 1957, p. 8). Modern Soviet military doctrine is based on the peaceful policy of the Soviet Union. It was developed on the basis of instructions from the Central Committee of the CPSU, the Soviet government, as well as data from military science and is based on the political and economic power of the USSR and other countries of the socialist community. The Soviet Military Doctrine reflects the policy of the CPSU in matters of war and peace, determines the essence and nature of possible wars and the attitude towards them, the tasks of preparing the Armed Forces and the country as a whole to fight the aggressor. The Soviet Military Doctrine determines the structure of the Armed Forces, their technical equipment, the direction in the development of military science, military art, tasks and methods of training and political education of personnel. Great importance is attached to the close cooperation of the Soviet Armed Forces with the armies of fraternal socialist countries in ensuring the security of the entire socialist community. The Soviet Military Doctrine serves the cause of peace, curbing imperialist aggressors, and is of a clearly progressive nature. The provisions of the Military Doctrine relating to the Armed Forces are reflected in military manuals, charters and other official manuals, as well as in military-theoretical works that substantiate individual provisions. Military Doctrine In the Military Doctrine of the participating countries of the Warsaw Pact of 1955 are reflected as general provisions aimed at to ensure the security of the entire socialist community, as well as specific provisions determined by the characteristics of each country.
The US military doctrine basically contains views on waging war in order to gain world domination and is of an aggressive nature. It is expressed in the desire of the United States to unite under its leadership all the countries of the capitalist world, to use their territories and armed forces to wage war against socialist countries and peoples fighting for freedom and national independence. Shortly after World War II of 1939-45, the United States adopted the Military Doctrine of “Nuclear Deterrence” - the doctrine of nuclear blackmail and the preparation of a nuclear attack on the Soviet Union and other socialist countries. With the creation of the NATO military bloc in April 1949, the doctrine of “sword” and “shield” was adopted, in which the role of the “sword” was assigned to nuclear weapons and US aviation, and the “shield” was assigned to the ground forces of the European NATO member countries, intended to use the results of nuclear weapons. attacks and invasions on the territory of socialist countries. In the early 50s. 20th century The military doctrine of “massive retaliation” was adopted, providing for a surprise nuclear attack on the USSR and other socialist countries and the outbreak of a nuclear war on a global scale. In connection with the growth of the nuclear power of the Soviet Union in 1962, the United States adopted a Military Doctrine called the “flexible response strategy.” The components of this doctrine are the strategic concepts of “assured destruction” (destruction of the enemy by nuclear strikes), “counterforce” (destruction of nuclear weapons and other military facilities) and “escalation” (gradual expansion and escalation of military conflict).
The doctrine of “flexible response” was adopted by the NATO Council in 1967 as the official doctrine of this aggressive military bloc. At the same time, Germany managed to achieve the adoption of the “forward lines” doctrine in NATO, which provided for the deployment of NATO forces directly to the borders of socialist countries to invade their territories and quickly escalate a conventional war into a nuclear one. Countries included in imperialist military blocs are guided by the common military doctrine adopted in one or another bloc. At the same time, the military doctrine of each country has some features and differences. The military doctrine of the reactionary political and monopolistic circles of the Federal Republic of Germany is revanchist in nature and is directed against European socialist countries. The British military doctrine, like the US military doctrine, provides for readiness to wage a nuclear war as part of NATO and limited wars. France, after leaving the NATO military system, is pursuing an independent military policy. Its Military Doctrine proceeds from the fact that the war in which France may be drawn into will acquire the character of a general nuclear war, but strategic nuclear weapons are considered a means of preventing a nuclear war. The remaining capitalist countries that are members of military blocs do not play an independent military role.
The military doctrine of independent developing countries for the most part reflects their desire to strengthen national independence and counter the aggressive policies of imperialism.
Military doctrine of the Russian Federation
For the first time in Russian history, a holistic and logically consistent set of documents in the field of security and foreign policy was developed during 2000-2001: first, the National Security Concept was adopted, and then, based on its main provisions, the Military Doctrine and the Foreign Policy Concept were adopted , Information security doctrine, military construction plans.
The current military doctrine specifies the following purposes for the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and other troops:
in a large-scale (regional) war if it is unleashed by any state (group, coalition of states) - protecting the independence and sovereignty, territorial integrity of the Russian Federation and its allies, repelling aggression, defeating the aggressor, forcing him to cease hostilities on the terms meeting the interests of the Russian Federation and its allies;
in local wars and international armed conflicts - localizing a source of tension, creating preconditions for ending a war, armed conflict or forcing them to end in the early stages; neutralizing the aggressor and achieving a settlement on terms that meet the interests of the Russian Federation and its allies;
in internal armed conflicts - the defeat and liquidation of illegal armed groups, the creation of conditions for a full-scale settlement of the conflict on the basis of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal legislation;
in operations to maintain and restore peace - separation of warring parties, stabilization of the situation, ensuring conditions for a fair peaceful settlement.
The current military doctrine provides that the Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in response to large-scale aggression using conventional weapons in critical situations. for the national security of the Russian Federation situations.
Sources
ru.wikisource.org Wikisource - a free library
hrono.ru Chronos – world history on the Internet
ru.wikipedia.org Wikipedia – the free encyclopedia
- DOCTRINE
ESTRADA - the doctrine of informal recognition of governments, put forward by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mexico X. Estrada in a communiqué of September 27, 1930 ... - DOCTRINE in the Dictionary of Economic Terms:
GOODS - an international legal doctrine put forward in 1907 by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ecuador K. Tobar on the non-recognition of those coming to power after ... - DOCTRINE in the Dictionary of Economic Terms:
ACQUIRED RIGHTS is an international legal theory according to which private property and the associated rights and interests of foreigners must... - DOCTRINE in the Dictionary of Economic Terms:
MONROE - message to Congress from US President D. Monroe dated December 2, 1823 D.m. contained three main provisions that were presented as... - DOCTRINE in the Dictionary of Economic Terms:
INTERNATIONAL LAW in a broad sense - a system of views and concepts about the essence and purpose of international law in specific historical conditions, ... - DOCTRINE in the Dictionary of Economic Terms:
- a set of postulates that serve as the basis of the theory. Economic D. contributes to the explanation of theory and the analysis of economic mechanisms, reflects the need to choose... - DOCTRINE in the Big Encyclopedic Dictionary:
(Latin doctrina) doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, system, guiding theoretical or political principle. See also Military... - DOCTRINE in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, TSB:
(Latin doctrina), doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, political system, guiding theoretical or political principle (for example, military doctrine) or normative ... - DOCTRINE in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron:
cm. … - DOCTRINE in the Modern Encyclopedic Dictionary:
(Latin doctrina), doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, system, guiding theoretical or political principle (for example, military... - DOCTRINE
[Latin doctrina] doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, political system; The Monroe Doctrine "America for Americans" is a principle of US foreign policy established in... - DOCTRINE in the Encyclopedic Dictionary:
y, w. Doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, guiding theoretical or political principle.||Cf. CONCEPT… - DOCTRINE in the Encyclopedic Dictionary:
, -y, w. (book). Doctrine, scientific concept (usually about philosophical, political, ideological theory). * Military doctrine (special) - a system of official ... - DOCTRINE in the Big Russian Encyclopedic Dictionary:
DOCTRINE (lat. doctrina), teaching, scientific. or philosopher theory, system, guiding theoretical. or watered principle. See also Military Doctrine... - DOCTRINE in the Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedia:
? cm. … - DOCTRINE in the Complete Accented Paradigm according to Zaliznyak:
doctrine"on, doctrine"us, doctrine"us, doctrine"n, doctrine"not, doctrine"us, doctrine"well, doctrine"us, doctrine"noy, doctrine"noyu, doctrine"us, doctrine"not,... - DOCTRINE in the Thesaurus of Russian Business Vocabulary:
‘science’ Syn: teaching, ... - DOCTRINE in the New Dictionary of Foreign Words:
(lat. doctrina) doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, political system, guiding theoretical or political ... - DOCTRINE in the Dictionary of Foreign Expressions:
[lat. doctrina] doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, political system, guiding theoretical or political... - DOCTRINE in the Russian Language Thesaurus:
‘science’ Syn: teaching, ... - DOCTRINE in Abramov's Dictionary of Synonyms:
see science, ... - DOCTRINE in the Russian Synonyms dictionary:
concept, Madhyamika, neoplasticism, pan-Americanism, construction, theodicy, theory, doctrine, ... - DOCTRINE in the New Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language by Efremova:
and. A set of officially accepted views on something. problem and the nature of its means...
The concept used is the hieroglyph 教 - whale. jiao, Japanese kyo:, cor. gyo- which corresponds to the concept of “doctrine” in a broad sense from religious teachings to moral and philosophical doctrines. Examples: oomoto- kyo, Aum Shinri kyo, beech- kyo(Buddhism), Tao- jiao(Taoism), yu- gyo(Confucianism), etc. [ ]
Doctrine as a source of law
As a general rule, any doctrine is divided into official, created at the national level or supranational (expert opinions given above), and scientific created at universities and other professorial associations.
Initially, the doctrine was the only source of public international law; it was expressed in the works of Hugo Grotius and other jurists who substantiated the existence of international law from the point of view of the natural law school. The development of positivism ultimately led to the decline of the doctrine, and then to a rethinking of the role of doctrine in law. Currently, in public international law, doctrine is a subsidiary source of law, the application of which is possible only in special circumstances.
The doctrine of the European Union is a conditional concept, representing a set of theoretical ideas about the goals, principles and legal forms of European integration. Traditionally " ...in states, the doctrine consists of the professional views of recognized authorities in the field of national law and, as a rule, is formed over many decades, then in the process of forming the European legal system, the function of the doctrine today is performed by expert opinions of leading European specialists invited to the EU commissions for the purpose of analysis current legislation and preparation of recommendations to determine the principles and content of new EU acts».
Doctrine in Islamic law
The special significance of the doctrine for the development of Islamic law is explained not only by the absence of gaps, but also by the consistency of the Koran and the Sunnah. Most of the norms contained in them are of divine origin, which means they are considered eternal and unchangeable. Therefore, they cannot simply be discarded and replaced by state regulations. In these conditions, Muslim jurists, relying on fundamental sources, interpret them and formulate a solution to be applied in the current situation.
If in the VII-VIII centuries. The sources of Islamic law were indeed the Koran and the Sunnah, as well as ijma and “sayings of the Companions”; then, starting from the 9th-10th centuries, this role gradually transferred to doctrine. Essentially, the end of ijtihad meant the canonization of the conclusions of the main schools of Islamic law that had developed by the middle of the 11th century.
The doctrinal development of Islamic law, while making it difficult to systematize, at the same time gave it a certain flexibility and the opportunity to develop. Modern Muslim legal doctrine as a source of law should be considered in several aspects. In a number of countries (Saudi Arabia, Oman, some principalities of the Persian Gulf) it continues to play the role of a formal source of law, in others (
Doctrine
doctrine on, doctrines, wives (lat. doctrina) ( books). A doctrine, scientific, philosophical or political statement, position.
Political Science: Dictionary-Reference Book
Doctrine
(lat. doctrina)
doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, system, guiding theoretical or political principle.
Modern economic dictionary. 1999
DOCTRINE
The beginnings of modern natural science. Thesaurus
Doctrine
(from lat. doctrina - doctrine) - systematized political, ideological or philosophical teaching: concept, set of principles. As a rule, it is used to denote dogmatic and scholastic views, i.e. in relation to outdated teachings, concepts, etc.
Dictionary of economic terms
Doctrine
a set of postulates that serve as the basis of economic theory. The doctrine contributes to the explanation of the theory and the analysis of economic mechanisms, reflects the need to choose between sets of fundamental principles on the basis of which an explanatory theory can be developed.
A brief dictionary of operational-tactical and general military terms
Doctrine
1) political, philosophical or other doctrine, theory;
2) military doctrine - a doctrine, a system of views on the conduct of war by a given state.
Bible: Topical Dictionary
Doctrine
♦ true teaching about faith and life
A. Commented topics:
1. DIRECTION as the theme of Proverbs:
2. PROTECTION as the theme of Colossians:
3. DISCRETION as the theme of 2 John:
4. FALSE TEACHING as the theme of 1 Timothy:
5. FALSE TEACHERS as a theme:
♦ Second Epistle of Peter:
♦ Epistles of Jude:
B. The Importance of Knowing Doctrine
♦ emphasized in the Old Testament:
Ps 78:1-9; Proverbs 7:1–4; Proverbs 13:14
♦ emphasized in the New Testament,
1 Cor 11:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 2 Tim 1:13; Titus 1:9; Titus 2:1
IN. Attitude towards false doctrine
1. The Essence of False Teachers
♦ law (scribes):
Matthew 23:2–4,16–22; Mark 12:38–40; Luke 20:46,47; 1 Tim 1:6,7
♦ erroneous doctrines:
1Tim 4:1-3; 2 Tim 4:3,4; Titus 1:10,11
♦ perverting the truth:
Acts 20:29,30; 2 Tim 2:16-18
♦ introducing heresies:
2 Pet 2:1; 2In 7
♦ leading to split:
Rom 16:17,18; 1 Tim 6:3-5
♦ immorality:
2 Tim 3:6–8; Rev 2:14,20
2. Commands about false teachers
♦ beware of them:
Mark 12:38; Luke 20:46; Acts 20:31; 2In 8
♦ stop their mouths:
1 Tim 1:3,4; Titus 1:10,11,13,14
♦ avoid them:
Rom 16:17; 2 Tim 2:16–18; 2John 10:11
Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms
Doctrine
♦ (ENG doctrine)
(lat. doctrina from docere - to teach)
what church teaches, and what she believes to be true. Churches establish and endorse their official teachings and dogmas in a variety of ways.
Thesaurus of Russian business vocabulary
Doctrine
'the science'
Syn: doctrine, theory
encyclopedic Dictionary
Doctrine
(Latin doctrina), doctrine, scientific or philosophical theory, system, guiding theoretical or political principle. See also Military Doctrine.
Ozhegov's Dictionary
DOCTR AND ON THE, s, and.(book). Doctrine, scientific concept (usually about philosophical, political, ideological theory).
Military doctrine(special) a system of official government regulations on the military development and military training of the country.
Efremova's Dictionary
Doctrine
and.
A set of officially accepted views on something. problem and character
means of solving it.
Encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron
Doctrine
See Teaching.
Sentences containing "doctrine"
If the goal of the military component of state policy is considered to be the reliable provision of military security of the state, then it is advisable to include the following among the priorities proclaimed in the military doctrine.
A citizen of the Russian Federation, in turn, as well as any state structure or public organization, is obliged to comply with the requirements of military doctrine and other legislative acts, but he also has the right to count on the protection of his personal and public interests and advantages by the state.
The state has the right to develop a military doctrine or not, but it is obliged to ensure the military security of the individual, society and the protection of the national interests of the country.
Military doctrine and system of priorities in the theory and practice of military security.
But this same circumstance creates a potential target of attack for the authorities, a target that is easily and naturally extracted from historical storehouses along with the fundamental concepts of the revived former power doctrine.
The anti-Stalinist doctrine of the 20th Congress was in no way the product of the personal creativity of Khrushchev alone.
Is the class principle of Marxist doctrine to blame for this?
Now the most important object for the government and its doctrine of order has become public organizations.
Not only the socialist character of Soviet society is called into question, but also its socialist future, realism and the viability of the Marxist doctrine of socialism itself.
Most often, the personalist political tradition is explained from the standpoint of civilizational doctrines by the inertia of consciousness.