K.P. Pobedonostsev: autocracy as a personal interest or a result of immanent criticism of multiparty democracy?

Abstract

The article examines the socio-political legacy of the famous Russian lawyer and statesman, Chief Pro¬secutor of the Holy Synod Konstantin Petrovich Pobedonostsev (1827–1907), and analyzes the reasons why he strongly advocated the tsar rule and autocracy in Russia. Usually, Pobedonostsev’s rejection of democracy and his active propaganda of monarchy and imperial autocracy are explained by the peculiarities of his personality, such as reactionism, backwardness, and even by his own selfish interests. The author of the article substantiates the thesis that Pobedonostsev was a widely educated person in the European context, who closely followed the development and problems of Western representative democracy. The author convincingly shows that Pobedonostsev’s reflections in this area were an organic part of the pan-European intellectual discussion about the necessity to change the democratic system in the era of mass parties. Thus, the article relies on and develops the approach of A.Yu. Polunov, who claimed that Pobedonostsev’s worldview had been formed under the strong influence of European political thought. Regarding Pobedonostsev’s views in the context of the tradition of Western criticism of liberal democracy, which were presented, in particular, in the works of Moisey Ostrogorsky, Hilaire Belloc and Robert Michels, published many years after the publication of the Moscow Collection, the author comes to the conclusion that the ideas of the Russian conservative thinker remain rather relevant today, since they contribute to a better understanding of the true, i.e. aggressive essence of the modern Western democracies, reveal the behind-the-scenes processes of dehumanization, cultural degradation and offer effective ways to counteract these tendencies.