Christian Social Democratic Party. Socialist parties Social composition of the socialist party

Stages of party formation. - Socialist parties. - Liberal-bourgeois parties. - Landowner-monarchist parties. - Social class foundations, - Program. - Tactics

At a certain stage of social development, the need to create organizations that unite the most active representatives of various classes or social groups, capable of defending the interests of a given part of the population, is put on the agenda. By the beginning of the 20th century. humanity already had such experience in building political parties. In Russia, this process began later, since the autocracy inhibited any political activity.

The formation of parties is not a one-time act, but a process that goes through certain stages. Stage 1 is the formation of certain ideological and political sentiments that encourage like-minded people to unite in circles. At the 2nd stage, directions of socio-political thought crystallize, the carriers of which are grouped around certain public publications. And only then, at the 3rd stage, the organizational and political formation of the party collective itself takes place on the basis of the developed organizational, ideological and political principles for joint organizational work - propaganda and agitation for its program and tactics.

The eve of the first Russian revolution was the historical moment when political parties in Russia went through the 1st or 2nd stages of their formation. Moreover, if the ruling classes of landowners and the big bourgeoisie had not yet felt the impending danger to their interests and therefore did not yet feel the need for political unification into parties and unions, then the democratic layers of society saw in the organized opposition a real alternative to the existing political power.

During the revolution, the class struggle in Russia acquired a pronounced party character. The process of party formation has entered its 3rd stage.

Depending on the social class basis, program and tactical guidelines, all political parties formed before and during the years of the revolution can be divided into 4 large groups:

1) proletarian (Bolsheviks); 2) revolutionary-democratic (social-democratic and left-wing trends); 3) bourgeois (with two varieties distinguished: liberal and conservative); 4) landowner-monarchist.

In turn, each of these four groups of parties was part of one or another of the three political camps: government, liberal-bourgeois, revolutionary-democratic. It must be borne in mind that the development of the revolution, the deepening of class contradictions, although did not violate the foundations of the distinction political forces, at the same time often led to a change in the position of parties and groups standing on the border of divisions.

Long before the revolution, socialist parties began to organize. Thus, in 1892 the Polish Socialist Party was formed, in 1893 - the Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, in 1898 - the Lithuanian and Latvian Social Democratic Parties.

V.I. Lenin and his comrades in the early 90s began preparations for the creation of a proletarian party. The beginning of such a party was the Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class, organized by them in 1895. The activities of the Union were aimed at combining the theory of socialism with the mass workers' movement. Locally, Social Democratic organizations began to be created from circles and groups under different names.

The task of creating a party became especially urgent in connection with the outbreak that began in the 80s. differentiation in the Russian social democratic movement and the emerging division into 2 main directions: revolutionary and reformist. Reform tendencies in the social democratic movement received their most complete expression in the ideology and tactics of “economism”. “Economists” defended the professional interests of workers and the satisfaction of their everyday needs and the creation of a party similar to a confederation of local cultural and educational circles.

In March 1898, in Minsk, representatives of four “Unions of Struggle”, the Bund and the “Workers’ Newspaper” group (9 delegates in total) gathered at the First Congress of the RSDLP (Russian Social Democratic Labor Party). The congress became a step towards the creation of a revolutionary proletarian party, although the period of fragmentation of handicrafts and circles continued,

The ideological, theoretical and organizational work of V.I. Lenin and his associates made it possible to convene the Second Congress of the RSDLP (July - August 1903). The most important documents adopted by the congress were the Program and the Party Charter. The Program set two fundamental tasks of the party - the overthrow of the autocracy in Russia and the establishment of a democratic republic, the struggle for the victory of the dictatorship of the proletariat. But in the democratic camp, instead of a single RSDLP, there were practically two parties - the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. The final separation of these parties occurred in 1912.

At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. In the revolutionary democratic movement, two main directions emerged: social democratic and left-wing populist, which corresponded to two groups of political parties. The Bolsheviks, as representatives of revolutionary social democracy, led the democratic camp. The Mensheviks represented the reformist trend of Social Democracy. The social democratic trend was replete with various kinds of national formations related to the Mensheviks. Among them: “General Jewish Workers' Union in Lithuania, Poland and Russia” - Bund (1897), Revolutionary Ukrainian Party - RUP (1900), Social Democratic Party (1887), Lithuanian Social Democratic Party ( 1896), Estonian Social Democratic Labor Union (1905).

The main force of the left-narodnik trend was the Socialist Revolutionary Party (SRs). The Social Revolutionaries, who officially declared themselves in January 1902, were formed from disparate populist organizations on the platform of democratic “peasant socialism.” Claiming the title of “peasant”, the Socialist Revolutionary Party was predominantly intellectual in its composition.

There were many people from families of capitalists and nobles. Representatives of peasants and workers also joined the Socialist Revolutionary Party. Ideological and political disagreements in the party, which emerged already at its First Congress (December 1905 - January 1906), led in the summer of 1906 to the split of the Socialist-Revolutionaries into three movements: a) left - “maximalists”, b) center - Socialist-Revolutionaries old type, c) right - “people's socialists” (Enes).

The “maximalists” proposed recognizing the upcoming revolution not as bourgeois, but socialist. They demanded the immediate “socialization” of not only the land, but also all factories and factories. The Enes sought to adapt their “socialism” to the interests of the wealthy part of the peasantry. They refused to support the Socialist Revolutionary idea of ​​socialization of the land, they renounced not only socialism, but also the demand for a democratic republic. They were happy with a constitutional monarchy.

The bulk of the entire composition of the Socialist Revolutionary Party grouped around the Center on the basis of the program adopted at the First Congress. Their program stated that in Russia two forces oppose each other: on the one hand, the nobility, bourgeoisie and rural kulaks, and on the other, the proletariat, the working peasantry and the intelligentsia. They saw one of the tasks of the revolution in the socialization of land, that is, in its transfer from private property to the public domain and its distribution by bodies of people's self-government on the basis of the equalizing labor principle. The Social Revolutionaries set as their immediate goal the task of agitating for the convening of a Constituent Assembly to eliminate the autocratic regime and establish free popular rule. Showing a penchant for revolutionary adventurism, the Social Revolutionaries recognized the tactics of individual terror as the main method of political struggle. The leaders of the party were V.M. Chernov, P.A. Argunov, A.P. Gotz et al.

In terms of tactical methods of struggle, the anarchists approached the Socialist Revolutionaries.

Among a number of national parties of the left-wing populist trend, the largest was the Dashnaktsutyun party - the Armenian Revolutionary Union (1890). This direction was also supported by the Revolutionary Party of Socialist Federalists of Georgia (1904), the Belarusian Revolutionary Party, soon renamed the Belarusian Socialist Community (1902), and the Latvian Social Democratic Union (1901). Since, when developing their programs, the national left-narodnik parties took the documents of the Socialist Revolutionary Party as a standard, their program guidelines had much in common.

Along with these parties, which were supporters of various branches of socialist thought, national parties began to emerge on the outskirts of the country, putting forward general democratic demands on the national question - Polish, Lithuanian, Latvian, Armenian, Georgian, Jewish.

In August 1905, the 1st congress of “Ittifak-el-Muslimin” (“Union of Muslims”) took place, in which Bashkir liberals also participated. The resolution of the congress pointed out the need for the unity of all Muslims and put forward a demand for equalization of Muslims with Russians “in political, religious and property rights.” The adoption of the party charter and the official announcement of the creation of the party took place in January 1906. “Ittifaq-el-Muslimin” dissolved itself after the June Third coup of 1907.

The completion of the creation of the parties of the liberal bourgeoisie coincided with the rise of the first revolution in Russia. Back in 1899, a large group of zemstvo liberals united into the semi-legal “Conversation” circle. In 1903, the “Union of Zemstvo Constitutionalists” was created from the most radical Zemstvo citizens. At the same time, in 1902, the first issue of the magazine “Liberation” was published. In 1904, the “Union of Liberation” was created from representatives of the bourgeois intelligentsia and liberal Zemstvo citizens, which completed the consolidation of forces and approached the formation of the party of constitutional democrats (October 1905). In 1906, the previously adopted official name was added: the party of “people's freedom”. In general, the cadet program was designed for the development of Russia along the capitalist path of the Western model. The initial demand for a constitutional monarchy was replaced in 1917 by the demand for a democratic parliamentary republic. The Cadets emphasized that they, as a supra-class party, occupied a special position; the Cadets Party advocated the cultural self-determination of nations, the equality of citizens, regardless of class. The basis of the party was the liberal intelligentsia, primarily representatives of its upper strata. The party also included highly paid categories of employees, representatives of the urban petty bourgeoisie. The first chairman of the constitutional democratic party of people's freedom was the large landowner Prince P. D. Dolgorukov. In 1907, the scientist-historian P. N. Milyukov became chairman of the party. In those operating in 1905-1907. approximately three hundred cadet organizations had from 60 to 100 thousand party members.

In addition to the Cadets, the liberal-bourgeois camp included more than a dozen all-Russian and national-bourgeois parties. The most significant of them were the party of democratic reforms, the democratic union of constitutionalists, the party of peaceful renewal, etc. All of them were in opposition to the tsarist government, and their programs differed from the cadet program by the demand for national equality and the right of political and cultural self-determination within the framework of autonomy.

In the revolution of 1905-1907. the government was supported by landowner-monarchists, reactionary bourgeois parties and many small political organizations that, to one degree or another, aligned themselves with these parties. Unlike the bourgeois and revolutionary democratic parties, these organizations, as a rule, were only Russian. This is explained by the fact that Russian landowners were at the head of the state.

The largest monarchist parties formed after October 17, 1905 were the “Union of the Russian People” (100 thousand people), “Russian People’s Union named after Michael the Archangel” (20 thousand), “Russian Monarchist Party” (more than 2 thousand). Human). The “Union of the Russian People” in its first program document stated that the activities of this party were based on the ideas of Orthodoxy, autocracy, and nationality. Members of the union could consist of “only natural Russian people of both sexes, of all classes and wealth.” The newspaper “Russian Banner” became the main organ of the party, and State Councilor A.I. Dubrovin became the chairman of the main council.

In the program of the main party of the bourgeoisie - the Union of October 17 (Octobrists) - the state structure of Russia was seen as a constitutional monarchy, but not with the Constituent Assembly, but with the State Duma. For non-Russian peoples, except for the Finns, even the right of cultural autonomy was not recognized. The social basis of the party consisted of the large financial and commercial-industrial bourgeoisie, large landowners running their businesses along the capitalist path, and a small part of the top intelligentsia. At first, the Chairman of the Party Central Committee was a large landowner D.N. Shipov, and from October 1906, Moscow merchant A.I. Guchkov.

During the years of the revolution, 18 different party organizations were associated with the “Union of October 17th”, including the Trade and Industrial Union, the Progressive Economic Party, the Baltic Constitutional Party, etc. Many national bourgeois parties acted like the Octobrists, seeing in tsarism their protector from the people’s anger.

Thus, at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. The currents of the liberation movement in Russia are being formalized into political parties, which began to act as spokesmen for the interests of certain social groups and classes in acute political battles. The greatest catalyst for the formation of new political parties was the first Russian revolution. In a short period, more political parties arose in Russia than in any other country in the world. By the end of the civil war of 1917-1920, the number of Russian parties was about 100.

Activities 1 and 2 State. doom

The activities of the I (April 27 - July 9, 1906) and II (February 20 - June 3, 1907) State Duma marked the beginning of the transformation of the autocracy into a constitutional monarchy and the beginning of Russian parliamentarism. The dissolution of the Second State Duma and the simultaneous publication, in violation of the October 17 manifesto, of a new electoral law are considered as the completion of the first Russian revolution.

The creation of a legislative State Duma, although with limited rights, is the most important result of the revolution. In addition, all parties received the right to legal press. The population received some democratic freedoms: the right to vote, assembly, etc. Workers' wages were increased, economic strikes were legalized. For peasants, redemption payments were canceled and land rent was reduced. However, the revolution did not solve the main problems of the country's development. The autocracy, forced to make concessions during the revolution, retained its economic and socio-political foundation. However, the revolution of 1905 -1907. exposed the full depth of socio-economic, political and other contradictions that have struck Russian society, and showed the inevitability of fundamental changes. The “tops” who realized this made an attempt to direct Russia along the path of evolutionary reformism in order to avoid further revolutionary upheavals. The personification of this course was the head of government P. A-Stolypin, with whose name the reforms in the post-revolutionary period are associated.

As a result of the coup d'etat on June 3, 1907, the so-called Juneteenth political system was established in Russia , or Juneteenth monarchy . According to the new electoral law, representation in the Duma from peasants was reduced by half, from workers by 2.5 times, from Poland, the Caucasus and Transcaucasia by 3 times, and the non-Russian peoples of Central Asia, Siberia and Transbaikalia were completely deprived of their representatives in the Duma. The emphasis was placed on a sharp increase in deputy seats for landowners and the big bourgeoisie (they made up a total of less than 1% of the population, but received more than 2/3 of the seats in the State Duma), considered as a reliable social support for the autocracy.

The political course of the post-revolutionary government was characterized by a combination of reactionary measures with the implementation of reforms, maneuvering between the interests of various sectors of society. The government tactics in the Third State Duma are indicative in this regard: if reforms were necessary, the bill was approved by the votes of the Octobrist-Cadet majority, and the adoption of conservative laws was ensured by the votes of the Octobrists and right-wing factions.

Activities of the III and IV State Dumas

After the dissolution of the Second State Duma, a political regime was established in Russia, called the “June Third Monarchy” (1907-1910). The Duma was preserved as a semblance of a constitutional institution, but seats in it were redistributed in favor of the landowners and the big bourgeoisie. On June 3, a new electoral law was issued. One vote of a landowner or nobleman was equal to four votes of the bourgeoisie, 260 votes of peasants, 543 votes of workers. Now the landowners and bourgeoisie, who made up less than one percent of the population, received more than 2/3 of the seats in the Duma.

The Third State Duma, the most “pleasing” of the autocracy, existed for the entire period prescribed by law. Its chairman was cadet Khomyakov, and from 1910 - Octobrist A.I. Guchkov. The Third Duma had 442 deputies: the Cadets had 104 seats, the Octobrists - 154, the right parties - 140, the Social Democrats - 19 seats. On all the most important issues, the government confronted the Duma with a fait accompli. Over 5 years, the Duma approved over 2 thousand legislative acts. Basically these were minor or current laws on estimates, salaries of various officials, etc. The Duma also dealt with important issues raised by the revolution of 1905-1907: workers, national and especially agrarian. The legislative acts it adopted were contradictory and inconsistent.

Elections to the IV State Duma (1912-1917) practically did not change the alignment of factions in the Duma. The chairman was the Octobrist M.V. Rodzianko. The right (Black Hundreds) had 184 votes, the Octobrists (right-centrists) - 99 votes, the left-centrists formed a bloc that included the Cadets (58 votes), nationalists (21 votes) and progressives (47 votes). Since 1913, the majority of the Duma (cadets, progressives, radicals) began to oppose tsarism. Nicholas II repeatedly raised the question of criminal liability of deputies for their critical and revealing speeches from the Duma rostrum.

Socialist direction of social thought. Parties of this direction.

Political parties of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century (1900 - 1916). Social composition and social support, political programs, leaders, activities. Society movements and politics parties: Nationalists(Black Hundreds): Russian meeting 1900, committee of Russian students 1904, Russian monarchist party . Octobrists: party of landowners and commercial and industrial bourgeoisie (leaders Guchkov, Rodzianko). Representatives: Union of October 17, Commercial and Industrial Party. Cadets: party of the liberal-monarchist bourgeoisie (limited monarchy, bourgeois freedoms, preservation of landownership, solution of the labor issue) leaders - Miliukov, Shingarev, Nabokov. Social Revolutionaries(illegal party): socialist revolutionaries. Existed 1901-1902. They arose as a result of the unification of Narodnaya Volya groups. The left wing of bourgeois democracy. Program: democratic republic, political freedoms, labor legislation, socialization of the land. The main political means is individual terror. Leaders: Chernov, Gots, Gershuni. 1908 Azef case. currents: folk socialists and maximalists. RSDLP: Russian Social Democratic Party. 1st congress (1898 Minsk), 2nd congress (1903 Brussels, London; the party program was adopted. The maximum program is the program of the socialist revolution: the replacement of private property with public property, the systematic organization of social production, the abolition of the division of society into classes and the elimination of exploitation, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Program -minimum: overthrow of the autocracy, establishment of a democratic republic, 8-hour working day, full equality of nations with the right to self-determination, destruction of the remnants of serfdom in the countryside. Bolsheviks - faction of the RSDLP, the concept arose at the 2nd Party Congress in connection with the choice of the party’s governing bodies ( Lenin's supporters - the Bolsheviks - won). Leaders of the party as a whole: Lenin, Plekhanov, Martov, Axelrod, Dan. Bolshevik leaders: Lenin, Krasin, Krzhizhanovsky, Bogdanov, Lunacharsky. Progressives : 12-17 party of the big bourgeoisie; intermediate between the Octobrists and the Cadets; initiator of the creation of a progressive bloc in the Duma; leaders - Konovalov, Ryabushinsky. Trudoviks: petty-bourgeois democratic faction of deputies of peasants and populist intelligentsia in the 1st - 4th Dumas. It included peasants, rural teachers, paramedics, extras, district doctors, etc. many of them were associated with the Social Revolutionaries and the All-Russian Peasant Union. Zemstvo movement: expansion of local government (Shitov, Guchkov, Lvov). Women's organizations, youth organizations. Public church activities: education, charity, cultural development. Movement intelligentsia: the task of the intelligentsia is not to prepare a revolution, but to religiously and morally educate the people. Liberators: liberals, grouped around the magazine Osvobozhdenie (editor - Struve), leader Miliukov, 1903 creation of the union, 1904 founding congress of the Liberation Union, fought for rights and freedoms.

The revolutionary movement in Russia, quickly spreading to new layers of the population, creates a number of non-party organizations. The need for unification breaks through with greater force the longer it is suppressed and persecuted. Organizations, in one form or another, often unformed, arise constantly, and their character is extremely original. There are no sharp boundaries here, like those of European organizations. Trade unions take on a political character. Political struggle merges with economic struggle (for example, in the form of a strike), creating temporary or more or less permanent organizations.

What is the significance of this phenomenon? What should be the attitude of social democracy towards him?

Strict partisanship is the result of a highly developed class struggle, and in the interests of an open and broad class struggle, the development of strict partisanship is necessary. Therefore, the party of the conscious proletariat, Social Democracy, always fights against non-partyism and works steadily to create a fundamentally consistent, tightly united socialist workers’ party.

This work is successful among the masses as the development of capitalism splits the entire people deeper and deeper into classes, exacerbating the contradictions between them.

It is quite clear that the real revolution in Russia has generated and is generating many non-party organizations.

This revolution is democratic, i.e. bourgeois in its socio-economic content.

This revolution overthrows the autocratic-serf system, liberating the bourgeois system from under it, thus fulfilling the demands of all classes of bourgeois society, being in this sense a revolution of the whole people.

This does not mean that our revolution is not a class revolution; of course not. But it is directed against classes and castes that are obsolete from the point of view of bourgeois society, alien to this society, and hindering its development.

And since the entire economic life of the country has already become bourgeois in all its main features, since the gigantic majority of the population already lives in fact in bourgeois conditions of existence, the anti-revolutionary elements are naturally small in number to the point of minusculeness, they are truly a “handful” in comparison with the “people”.

The class character of the bourgeois revolution is therefore manifested in the “national”, non-class, at first glance, character of the struggle of all classes of bourgeois society against autocracy and serfdom.

The era of the bourgeois revolution is distinguished by the comparative underdevelopment of the class contradictions of capitalist society; purely capitalist contradictions are still very, very strongly overshadowed in our country by the contradictions of “culture” and Asianism, Europeanism and Tatarism, capitalism and serfdom, i.e. demands are brought to the fore, the fulfillment of which will develop capitalism, cleanse it of the slags of feudalism, and improve the conditions of life and struggle for both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

Actually, socialist demands are still ahead, and the next step of the day are the democratic demands of workers in politics, economic demands within the framework of capitalism in the economy.

Even the proletariat makes a revolution within the limits of a minimum program, and not a maximum program.

There is nothing to say about the peasantry, this gigantic mass of the population, overwhelming in its numbers. His “maximum program”, his ultimate goals do not go beyond the boundaries of capitalism, which would unfold even more widely and more magnificently with the transfer of the entire earth to the entire peasantry and to the entire people. The peasant revolution is currently a bourgeois revolution.

This nature of the ongoing revolution quite naturally gives rise to non-party organizations.

The appearance of non-partisanship is inevitably acquired by the entire movement as a whole - but only an appearance, of course. The need for “human,” cultural life, for unification, for the defense of one’s dignity, one’s human and civil rights embraces everyone, unites all classes, gigantically overtakes any partisanship, shakes up people who are still far, far from being able to rise to partisanship.

The urgency of immediate, elementary-necessary rights and reforms pushes aside, so to speak, thoughts and considerations about anything further. Passion for the ongoing struggle, a necessary and legitimate passion, without which the success of the struggle is impossible, forces one to idealize these immediate, elementary goals, paints them in a rosy light, sometimes even dresses them in a fantastic costume - ordinary bourgeois democracy, and is mistaken for socialism.

Everything and everyone seems to be “non-partisan”; everything and everyone seems to be intertwined in one “liberation” (in fact: liberating the entire bourgeois society) movement; everything and everyone takes on a light, subtle touch of “socialism,” especially thanks to the leading role of the socialist proletariat in the democratic struggle.

The idea of ​​non-partisanship cannot but win certain temporary victories under such conditions.

The question is how should How do supporters and representatives of different classes relate to this fact of non-partisanship and this idea of ​​non-partisanship?

As we have already shown, non-partyism is a product, an expression, of the bourgeois character of our revolution.

The bourgeoisie cannot help but gravitate towards non-partyism, because the absence of parties among those fighting for the freedom of bourgeois society means the absence of a new struggle against this very bourgeois society.

Whoever leads a “non-party” struggle for freedom either does not recognize the bourgeois character of freedom, or sanctifies this bourgeois system, or delays the struggle against it.

And vice versa, whoever consciously or unconsciously stands on the side of the bourgeois order cannot help but feel attracted to the idea of ​​​​non-partyism.

In a society based on class divisions, the struggle between hostile classes inevitably becomes a political struggle.

The most integral, complete and formalized expression of the political struggle of classes is the struggle of parties. Non-partisanship is indifference to the struggle of parties. But this indifference does not equate to neutrality, abstinence from the struggle, because in the class struggle there can be no neutrals; It is impossible to “refrain” in a capitalist society from participating in the exchange of products or labor. And exchange inevitably gives rise to economic struggle, and after it political struggle.

Indifference to the struggle is by no means, therefore, in fact, a withdrawal from the struggle, abstinence from it, or neutrality. Indifference is the silent support of the one who is strong, the one who dominates.

Those who were indifferent to the autocracy in Russia before its fall during the October Revolution silently supported the autocracy.

Anyone in modern Europe who is indifferent to the rule of the bourgeoisie tacitly supports the bourgeoisie.

Anyone who is indifferent to the idea of ​​the bourgeois character of the struggle for freedom tacitly supports the dominance of the bourgeoisie in this struggle, the dominance of the bourgeoisie in the emerging free Russia.

Political indifference is political satiety. A well-fed person is “indifferent”, “indifferent” to a piece of bread; a hungry person will always be “partisan” on the issue of a piece of bread. “Indifference and indifference” to a piece of bread does not mean that a person does not need bread, but that a person is always provided with bread, that he never needs bread, that he is firmly attached to the “party” of the well-fed.

Non-partyism in bourgeois society is only a hypocritical, disguised, passive expression of belonging to the party of the well-fed, to the party of the ruling, to the party of the exploiters.

Non-partyism is a bourgeois idea. Party membership is a socialist idea.

To forget this truth at a time when the entire bourgeois society as a whole is rebelling against serfdom and autocracy means, in fact, completely abandoning the socialist criticism of bourgeois society.

The Russian Revolution, despite the fact that it is still at the beginning of its development, already provides a lot of material to confirm this.

Strict partisanship has always been and is defended only by social democracy, the party of the conscious proletariat.

Liberals, representatives of the views of the bourgeoisie, cannot stand socialist partisanship and do not want to hear about the class struggle.

The ideologists of the intermediate class, the petty bourgeoisie, who are tolerant of bourgeois radicalism, are also intolerant of the idea of ​​a social democratic party.

Is it acceptable for socialists to participate in non-party organizations? If so, under what conditions is it permissible? What tactics should be followed in such organizations?

The first question cannot be answered with an unconditional, fundamental: no. It would be wrong to say that in no case and under no conditions is the participation of socialists in non-party (that is, more or less consciously or unconsciously bourgeois) organizations permissible. In the era of the democratic revolution, refusal to participate in non-party organizations would in certain cases be tantamount to refusal to participate in the democratic revolution.

Circumstances may force us to participate in non-party organizations, especially in an era of democratic revolution and, in particular, a democratic revolution in which the proletariat plays a prominent role.

Such participation may be necessary, for example, in the interests of preaching socialism to a vaguely democratic audience or in the interests of the joint struggle of socialists and revolutionary democrats against counter-revolution.

In the first case, such participation will be a means of carrying out one's views;

in the second - a military agreement in order to achieve certain revolutionary goals.

In both cases, participation can only be temporary. In both cases, it is permissible only with complete protection of the independence of the workers' party and with mandatory control and leadership of the entire party as a whole over members and groups of the party "delegated" to non-party unions or councils.

Participation in non-party organizations for a socialist is permissible only as an exception. And the very goals of this participation and its nature, conditions, etc. must be entirely subordinated to the main task: preparing and organizing the socialist proletariat for the conscious leadership of the socialist revolution.

There is no doubt that protecting the ideological and political independence of the party of the proletariat is a constant, unchanging and unconditional duty of socialists. Whoever fails to fulfill this duty is in fact ceases to be a socialist, no matter how sincere his “socialist” (in words) convictions may be.

What tactics should we pursue in non-party unions?

Firstly, take advantage of every opportunity to establish independent connections and promote our entire socialist program.

Secondly, to determine the immediate political tasks of the moment from the point of view of the most complete and decisive implementation of the democratic revolution, to give political slogans in the democratic revolution, to put forward a “program” of those transformations that should be carried out by a fighting revolutionary democracy in contrast to a bargaining liberal democracy.

Only with this approach can the participation of members of our party in non-party revolutionary organizations created today by workers, tomorrow by peasants, the day after tomorrow by soldiers, etc. be permissible and fruitful.

Only with this formulation of the matter will we be able to fulfill the dual task of the workers’ party in the bourgeois revolution: to complete the democratic revolution, to expand and strengthen the cadres of the socialist proletariat, which needs freedom for the merciless struggle to overthrow the rule of capital.

Remember, comrade workers, only the Social Democratic proletariat is a proletariat that has realized its class tasks.

Down with non-partisanship!

Non-partyism has always and everywhere been the weapon and slogan of the bourgeoisie. We can and must go, under certain conditions, together with the unconscious proletarians, together with the proletarians who accept non-proletarian teachings (the program of the “socialist-revolutionaries”) - but in no case and should we never weaken our strict partisanship, in any way case, and must never forget or allow it to be forgotten, that hostility to Social Democracy among the proletariat is a remnant of bourgeois views among the proletariat.

Evasiveness or unprincipledness in theoretical matters in a revolutionary era is tantamount to complete ideological bankruptcy, for it is now that a thoughtful and firm worldview is needed in order for a socialist to control events, and not for events to control him.

The Law of December 11 brought to the fore the question of our tactics in relation to the Duma. Here is the relevant part of the resolution adopted by the conference of the “majority” of the RSDLP:

“The autocratic government, all the time after October 17, trampled all the basic civil liberties won by the proletariat.

The government flooded the entire country with blood, shooting workers, peasants, soldiers and sailors fighting for freedom from cannons and machine guns!

The government mocks the popular demand for the convening of a constituent assembly and, with the law of December 11, is trying again to deceive the proletariat and peasantry and delay its final death.

The Law of December 11th actually excludes the proletariat and the mass of the peasantry from participation in the State Duma and seeks in advance to ensure, with the help of all sorts of tricks and police restrictions, the predominance in the Duma of the Black Hundred elements of the exploiting classes.

Elections to the Duma according to the law on December 11 under the dominance of the Dubasovs and Durnovo are a pure game of parliamentarism. The proletariat is unworthy to participate in the game.

The conference expresses its confidence that the response of the entire class-conscious proletariat of Russia to the new tsarist law will be a decisive struggle against this, like any other, counterfeit of popular representation.

The Conference believes that Social Democracy should strive to disrupt this police Duma, rejecting any participation in it.”

The resolution recommends that all party organizations make extensive use of electoral meetings, but not in order to carry out any kind of elections, subject to police restrictions, but in order to expand the revolutionary organization of the proletariat and conduct agitation in all strata of the people for a decisive struggle against the autocracy, since only after complete victory over it is it possible to convene truly freely elected representatives of the people.

Is this solution to the issue correct?

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks agree that the current Duma is a pathetic fake of popular representation, that we must fight against this deception, prepare for an armed uprising to convene a constituent assembly freely elected by all the people.

The dispute is only about tactics in relation to the Duma.

The Mensheviks say: our party must participate in the selection of representatives and electors.

The Bolsheviks say an active boycott of the Duma.

What does an active boycott of the Duma mean?

Boycott means refusal to participate in elections. We don’t want to elect any deputies to the Duma, or electors, or delegates.

An active boycott does not mean simple exclusion from elections, but the widespread use of election meetings for social democratic agitation and organization. To use assemblies means to penetrate them both legally (by enrolling in the voter lists) and illegally, to present to them the entire program and all the views of the socialists, to show all the falsity and counterfeitness of the Duma, to call for a fight for a constituent assembly.

Why do we refuse to participate in elections?

Because by participating in the elections, we will unwittingly support the people’s faith in the Duma, and by doing this we will weaken the strength of our struggle against the falsification of popular representation. The Duma is not a parliament, but a ploy of the autocracy. We must thwart this ploy by rejecting any participation in the elections.

Because if we recognized participation in elections as permissible, then we would have to go to the end, until the election of deputies to the Duma. Bourgeois democrats advise us to make electoral deals with the Cadets for these purposes, but the Social Democrats reject these deals, realizing that the Duma is not a parliament, but a new police deception.

Because we cannot now derive party benefit from the elections. There is no freedom of agitation. The working class party is under disgrace. Its representatives will be arrested without trial, its newspapers will be closed, its meetings will be prohibited. The party cannot legally unfurl its banner during elections; it cannot publicly field its elected representatives without handing them over to the police. In this state of affairs, the purposes of our agitation and organization are much better served by the revolutionary use of meetings without elections than by participation in meetings for legal elections.

If free representatives are needed, then why take into account some Duma when choosing them? Why give the police lists of our representatives? And why create new Councils of Workers' Deputies in a new way when there are still (for example, in St. Petersburg) the old Councils of Workers' Deputies? This is useless, and even harmful, because it will cause an incorrect, dreamy mood, as if the falling and decaying Soviets can be revived by new elections, and not by new preparations and expansion of the uprising. For the purposes of an uprising, calling legal elections on legal dates is downright ridiculous.

By participating in elections, we place the proletariat in a false relationship with bourgeois democracy, which is again splitting. Moderate liberals (cadets) are strongly in favor of participation. Radicals tend to boycott.

The class basis of this split is clear: the right wing of the bourgeoisie gravitates toward a deal with reaction through the Duma. The left wing of the bourgeoisie gravitates towards an alliance with the revolution, or at least towards supporting it (remember the Union of Unions joining the manifesto of the Executive Committee of the St. Petersburg Council of Workers' Deputies on the financial collapse of the government).

The autocracy needs to “make peace” with the bourgeoisie, and it is forced to strive for this - and, of course, it wants to deceive the public opinion of Europe and Russia. And the State Duma is an excellent means for this purpose. The legal opposition of the bourgeoisie in the Duma is precisely that appearance of a state system recognized by the bourgeoisie, which, perhaps, would still be able to help the autocracy turn out.

The autocracy is in dire need of a legal Duma opposition and is terribly afraid of a boycott. Without a deal with the right wing of the bourgeoisie, you cannot govern the country, you cannot get money, you cannot live longer. The dependence of the autocracy on the bourgeoisie of all Russia is the strongest material dependence.

The Black Hundreds are afraid of a boycott, and only people who are blind or interested in justifying liberals can deny that the success of the boycott would have been ensured if the leaders of the zemstvo and city congresses had spoken out in favor of it.

But the fact of the matter is that the liberal bourgeoisie, with all its fundamental class interests, is drawn to the monarchy, to the two chambers, to order, moderation, to the fight against the “horrors” of the “permanent revolution”, against the “horrors” of the French model of revolution...

The turn of the liberal bourgeoisie, Osvobozhdenie and democratic constitutionalists, from radical phrases about boycott to a decisive war against boycott is first a major political step by the entire Russian bourgeoisie as a class, a step testifying to its treacherous nature, its preparation for betraying the revolution.

The liberals criticized the Duma and accepted the Duma, drawn with an irresistible force to legal paths and to an agreement with the tsar.

The revolutionary people, with the proletariat at their head, denounced the Duma, proclaimed an active boycott and showed in practice their desire to turn this active boycott into an armed uprising.

The political grouping emerged:

for the Duma in order to preserve autocracy, for the Duma in order to suppress the revolution;

for the Duma to limit autocracy, for the Duma to stop the revolution;

against the Duma for the sake of destroying the autocracy, against the Duma in order to complete the victorious revolution.

Down with the Duma! Down with the new police deception! Citizens! Honor the memory of the fallen Moscow heroes with new preparations for an armed uprising!

Long live the freely elected national constituent assembly!

No, we have no reason to take the issue of uprising off the table.

We must not rebuild party tactics from the point of view of the conditions of a given moment of reaction.

We cannot and should not despair that we will finally be able to merge three disparate streams of uprisings - workers, peasants and military - into one victorious uprising.

We must prepare for this, without, of course, refusing to use any and all “legal” means to expand propaganda, agitation and organization, but without at all deluding ourselves about the strength of these means and their significance.

We must collect the experience of the Moscow, Donetsk, Rostov and other uprisings, spread familiarity with them, persistently and patiently prepare new fighting forces, train and temper them through a series of partisan combat actions. A new explosion may not come in the spring, but it is coming, it is, in all likelihood, not too far away.

We must meet it armed, organized in a military manner, and capable of decisive offensive actions.

In short:

Either we must recognize the democratic revolution as over, take the question of uprising off the table and take the “constitutional” path.

Either we recognize the democratic revolution as ongoing, put in the foreground the task of completing it, develop and put into practice the slogan of uprising, proclaim civil war and mercilessly brand all constitutional illusions.

Executions, reaction, and Dubasovism will not crush, but will inflame the movement.

The third step looms before us, which will determine the outcome of the revolution - the struggle of the revolutionary people for power capable of actually realizing freedom.

In this struggle, we need to count on the support not of the opposition, but of the revolutionary democratic parties.

The democratic-revolutionary peasantry will march alongside the socialist proletariat.

This is a great struggle, a difficult struggle, a struggle to bring the democratic revolution to an end, for its complete victory. But all signs indicate that such a struggle is imminent in the course of things.

Let us make sure that the new wave finds the Russian proletariat in combat readiness.

Concept and general characteristics of parties of socialist ideology

Political parties, being an integral element of civil society, simultaneously act as the most important institution in the political sphere of society. At the same time, based on the characteristics of the views of supporters of the relevant political parties, modern scientists identify their most diverse classifications.

At the same time, an analysis of modern special sources allows us to conclude that a fairly large place in the history of world political thought over the past two centuries has been given to parties of socialist ideology, whose place on the political spectrum was located “to the left” of the center, but to the right of more categorical communism or anarchism.

In the most general form, the definition of a party of socialist ideology, already based on the very essence of the definition under consideration, can be formulated as follows:

Definition 1

Parties of socialist ideology (in a broad sense) are the entire set of political parties that existed in different historical periods in different states, the ideal of whose representatives was the socialist social system.

Despite the relative simplicity of the above definition, it seems appropriate to pay special attention to the fact that the term “socialism” itself is not sufficiently defined, which automatically leads to the exceptionally broad content of the concept of “party of socialist ideology.”

So, for example, in connection with the indicated significance of the category under consideration, in a broad sense, religious (Catholic, Christian), social democratic, conservative socialist and other political parties can be classified as parties of socialist ideology.

Clarifying the characteristics being carried out, it seems reasonable to present the existing definition of a party of socialist ideology in a narrow sense in political science:

Definition 2

Parties of socialist ideology (in the narrow sense) are those political associations whose supporters clearly support the idea of ​​abolishing private ownership of the means of production as the basis of an ideal social order.

From the indicated thesis follows an important programmatic feature of the activities of parties of socialist ideology - due to the fact that a social system without private property is virtually unthinkable in the conditions of modern states, such an economic demand is necessarily connected with the political demand for a complete reorganization of the state on strictly democratic principles (and in the most radical options - with the demand for the destruction of the state in the form in which it currently exists.

Signs of parties of socialist ideology

• Representation in socialist political parties predominantly belongs to the proletariat, striving for a social reorganization in which it would own part of the corresponding capitalist values;
• Since, as noted above, achieving the ideal of a socialist party requires a radical reorganization of the entire society on a qualitatively new basis, a party of socialist ideology is always a revolutionary party, while maintaining the possibility of a non-violent transfer of power;
• The proletariat in various countries, aware of their own class interests, opposes itself not to the ideologically close proletariat of foreign countries, but exclusively to other social classes (primarily the bourgeoisie). From this characteristic follows a very important feature inherent in most parties of socialist ideology - all of them are international and cosmopolitan in the content of their own views, actions and ideas.

Note 1

However, despite the presence of the designated general features, the specific forms and directions of activity of parties of socialist ideology often differed significantly depending on the specific historical conditions and characteristics of the state organization of certain countries.

History of the formation and development of parties of socialist ideology in Russia

The beginning of the widespread dissemination and development of socialist ideas in our country is traditionally associated with the period of the 40s. XIX century. Moreover, in the first decades, the corresponding dissemination took place mainly in secret circles consisting of representatives of the Russian intelligentsia of that time.

An active and fairly widespread political movement, socialist in the nature of its own aspirations, took shape in our country in the first half of the 1870s, under the name of “movement to the people.” However, due to large-scale persecution by the official authorities, the socialist movement in question acquired an underground and downright revolutionary character.

After the failure of populism, based on socialist views, the Narodnaya Volya movement was formed, the defeat of whose representatives led to a temporary cessation of the development of revolutionary ideas in our country.

However, gradually, in subsequent years, the foundations of social democracy were laid, the first ideologists of which in Russia were emigrants (Plekhanov, Axelrod, etc.).

In the mid-1890s. The propaganda of social democratic ideas led by young people in working class circles began to find favorable soil and from the 2nd half of the 1890s, social democratic circles were formed in all large cities of Russia, in which workers occupied a prominent place. In 1898, the formal foundation of the Social Democratic Party was laid at a secret congress of representatives of these circles in Minsk.

A positive aspect of the corresponding activity was that by the time political parties were officially allowed to operate in Russia, the designated socialist associations had already formed a strong ideological and personnel base, which made it possible to achieve significant political successes.

Contents of the article

SOCIALIST PARTIES. On September 28, 1864, the 1st International (International Workers' Association) was formed in London. The formation of the International led to a struggle between its many groups for leadership of the organization. In 1872, fearing that anarchists would seize power, the 5th (Hague) Congress of the International moved the organization's headquarters to New York. In 1876 the 1st International formally ceased to exist.

Thirteen years later, in 1889, the 2nd International was formed in Paris, which functioned until the outbreak of the First World War. Socialists who opposed the war and supported the Bolshevik revolution in Russia founded the 3rd International (Communist International, Comintern) in 1919, which lasted until 1943. By 1922, most European socialist parties had split, and their left-wing groups formed communist parties. The so-called 2 1/2 International (or Vienna International) did not last long, from 1921 to 1923, when the Socialist Workers' International was formed on the basis of it and the Berne International. This organization, in turn, was swept away in 1939 by World War II. In 1951, at the international congress of social democracy held in Frankfurt am Main, the Socialist International arose - an association of parties seeking to establish “democratic socialism”. Its creation was preceded by many years of preparatory work by prominent figures of social democracy within the framework of the Committee of International Socialist Conferences (COMISCO), which existed in 1947–1951. By 1996, the Socialist International included almost 150 parties and more than 100 states with the status of full members, i.e. having voting rights and paying membership fees, and the status of advisory members, i.e. having the right to speak at congresses and paying membership fees, but not having the right to vote. Socialist parties in the Asian region also created the Asian Socialist Conference (1953).

Germany.

The first known socialist party was the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD), created in 1869 under the leadership of V. Liebknecht and A. Bebel. In 1885, the General German Workers' Union under the leadership of F. Lassalle joined the party. Despite the ban on its activities by O. Bismarck in 1878, the party continued to grow and in the 1912 elections received 4.5 million votes, or 110 seats in the Reichstag. During World War I, the party split over a vote on war credits. 16 socialist members of the Reichstag broke with the SPD and created the Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany (NSPD) in 1917. At the end of the war, in the elections to the National Constituent Assembly, the Social Democrats won 38% of the votes, while the Independent Social Democrats received less than 8% of the votes. The following year (1918), the independent Social Democrats split, and in 1920 the NSDPG joined the Communist Party of Germany. The remaining "independents" and social democrats reunited in 1922.

In 1931 the socialist government in Prussia was overthrown by Hindenburg. Adolf Hitler came to power in January 1933, and already in June the Social Democratic Party of Germany was banned. After the collapse of the Nazis in 1945, the SPD was forced to merge with the Communist Party in the Soviet occupation zone, forming the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED). Many socialists who refused to comply with this decision were arrested and imprisoned. In West Germany, where the Communist Party was banned, the Social Democratic Party of Germany, formed in 1946, became the main opposition force opposing the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) government. In 1965, the CDU was forced into a coalition with the Social Democrats to elect Kurt Georg Kiesinger (1904–1988) as Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, and the SPD entered into a government coalition with the CDU/CSU from 1966–1969. Having won a sufficient number of seats in the 1969 elections, the Social Democrats, in alliance with the liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP), formed a coalition government in which the socialists played the leading role. This coalition remained in power throughout the 1970s (1969–1982), first under the leadership of W. Brandt and then G. Schmidt. In 1982, the liberals changed allies and nominated CDU leader G. Kohl to the post of chancellor. In 1990, the year of German reunification, the SPD managed to receive only a third of the votes, and He. Kohl became chancellor of a united Germany. From that time on, the party was in opposition, although it actively won land elections. At the end of 1995, Gerhard Schröder became the leader of the SPD.

France.

In 1905, several independent French socialist parties and organizations merged into the united French Socialist Party. The party enjoyed significant influence until 1914, when the assassination of J. Jaurès (1859–1914) occurred. In 1920, at the congress in Tours, the majority of delegates voted to join the Communist International. Taking control of the party apparatus, this majority renamed the party the French Communist Party. A minority left the congress and declared their affiliation with the French Socialist Party.

The split greatly weakened the socialists, but after a few years they regained their strength. In 1936, Leon Blum (1872–1950) became prime minister, and after the Second World War, socialists often came to lead the country or were included in coalition cabinets. In 1958, the party majority supported the rise to power of General Charles de Gaulle. The opposition minority, together with François Mitterrand (1916–1996) and Pierre Mendès-France (1907–1982), organized an independent socialist movement after the party's self-dissolution in 1968; The socialist-communist alliance operated successfully. In 1971, the new Socialist Party of France was formed. The communists left the alliance in 1978, precipitating the left's defeat in the year of legislative elections. In 1981, Mitterrand won the presidential election. In 1988 he was re-elected, but socialist control over the national assembly continued to be sporadic, and in 1993 the alliance of conservative forces received a huge majority of votes. The coalition of left forces won the elections to the National Assembly (June 1997), and the socialist leader Lionel Jospin became the country's prime minister under Gaullist President Jacques Chirac. Despite the presence of representatives of five parties in the government, all key posts in it were occupied by the socialists, who, after early elections, owned the largest number of seats in parliament.

United Kingdom.

The British Labor Party was formed in 1906 as a result of the merger of trade unions and socialist associations and is the successor to the Independent Labor Party, founded in 1893 by James Keir Hardie (1856–1915), leader of the Scottish Labor Party. In the elections of 1906, Labor won its first victory, gaining 29 seats in the House of Commons. The party, which in 1918 declared its goal to establish a socialist economic system, grew rapidly after the First World War. In 1924 and 1929–1931, minority governments were formed under the leadership of James Ramsay MacDonald (1866–1937). In the 1945 elections, the Labor Party won 393 seats in parliament, more than 60% of the total number of seats. The coming to power of the Labor Party marked the first coming of a workers' government, based on a solid majority in Parliament and carrying out peaceful and gradual democratic changes.

Labor governed from 1945–1951 with Clement Attlee as prime minister and from 1964–1970 and 1974–1979 under Harold Wilson. They managed to transfer the war economy of Great Britain to a peaceful footing, they nationalized the Bank of England, mines, power stations, inland transport, civil aviation, steel and pipe factories, introduced a national health service, expanded other social services, carried out planning in the field of housing construction, urban development and agriculture.

In the early 1980s, the Labor Party moved strongly to the left, with many party members leaving the party to form the Social Democratic Party. Although the Labor Party declined significantly in numbers in the early 1990s, its policies adopted a more conservative line. In the spring of 1994, Labor received a significant increase in votes in local elections.

In May 1997, after 18 years in opposition, the Labor Party came to power. Its leader, Tony Blair, who became Prime Minister, in his program put forward new goals not only for his party, but also for the entire social democratic movement as a whole (refusal to rely on trade unions, rigid market positions, etc.). The party achieved the support of a significant part of the population and 418 of the 659 seats in parliament.

Scandinavia.

Among the small countries of Europe, the socialist movement in the mid-20th century. nowhere has experienced such a rise as in the Scandinavian countries - Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland. In all four countries, the Social Democratic and Labor parties were closely associated with the trade union movement and did much to develop legislation on social issues.

Denmark.

The beginning of the socialist movement in Denmark dates back to 1871, when the Danish Section of the 1st International was created. In 1872, the section called a meeting in Copenhagen in support of the striking masons, and it was dissolved by the government. In 1876, the independent Social Democratic Party (SDPD, until 1884 – Social Democratic Union) was created, and in 1884 the first representatives to parliament were delegated from the SDPD. After the First World War, the Social Democrats managed to significantly increase their prestige, and after the Second World War, the SDPD became the ruling party in Denmark, although it never received a majority in parliament. SDPD-led coalitions ruled the country for a long period, from 1945 until the early 1980s, when a conservative coalition came to power. The Socialists remained out of work until 1993, when the leader of the Social Democratic Party, P. Rasmussen, created a majority coalition with several right-wing and center parties.

Norway.

In this country, the Social Democratic Party, later the Norwegian Labor Party (NLP), was founded in 1887, and in 1903 it managed to win 4 seats in parliament. In 1928 the CHP came to power, and in 1933 it again shared responsibilities with Prime Minister Johan Nygorsvoll (1879–1952). Apart from a period of exile during World War II, the party formed the Norwegian government until 1965. A CHP-controlled government also ruled Norway from 1971–1972 and 1973–1981, as well as 1986–1989, after which it was replaced at the helm by a coalition of conservatives , centrist and far-right parties. Paradoxically, the 1989 elections saw the rise of the Socialist Left Party (SPL), founded in 1975. The party had a strong environmental agenda, criticized the government's welfare policies, and won 17 seats in parliament, becoming the fourth largest party in Norway. The leader of the party is Erich Solheim. In 1993, in the legislative elections, the Norwegian Workers' Party again came to power. The results of the local government elections in September 1995 showed a tendency for voters to move away from the CHP, although overall it still traditionally received more votes than any other party. A government was formed led by party leader Thorbjørn Jagland. However, in September 1997, in the parliamentary elections, the CHP was unable to gain the required number of votes, effectively losing the elections.

Sweden.

The Social Democratic Workers' Party of Sweden (SDLP) was founded in Stockholm in 1889. Its leader, Karl Hjalmar Branting (1860–1925), was elected to the Second Chamber (lower house) of parliament in 1896; in 1917 Branting and three other Social Democrats joined the Liberal government and became energetically involved in the fight for women's equality and other constitutional reforms. Branting headed three all-socialist governments from 1920 to 1925. The SDLP was in power (sometimes in coalition with other parties) from 1932 to 1976, when it was defeated by an anti-socialist coalition. The next period of Socialist rule lasted from 1982 to 1991 under Olof Palm (1927–1986) and his successor Ingvar Karlsson (b. 1934).

In 1994, after a short break, the party returned to power, and in the spring of 1996, I. Karlsson was replaced as prime minister by SDLP Chairman Göran Persson.

Finland.

In this country, the socialist movement arose in 1899 with the founding of the Finnish Workers' Party, and since 1903 - the Social Democratic Party of Finland (SDPF). In the 1907 elections, the Social Democrats received 80 of the 200 seats in the new parliament. 19 years later, the Social Democrats formed Finland's first socialist government with Väinö Tanner (1881–1966) as prime minister, but it resigned the following year.

At the end of the 1930s, the Social Democrats became part of the coalition government. Socialist leader Mauno Pekkala (1890–1952) was appointed prime minister in the coalition government in 1946–1948; the party's split in the 1950s weakened it politically. The next Socialist victory came in 1966, when a coalition led by the Social Democrats came to control more than 150 seats in parliament. The government formed after the 1972 elections was dominated by the Social Democrats, whose leaders became prime ministers in subsequent cabinets. Although movement veteran socialist leader Mauno Koivisto (b. 1923) was elected President of Finland in 1982 and re-elected in 1988, the Social Democrats began to lose electoral support towards the end of the 1980s. The party was forced to agree to a partnership with the conservative coalition in 1987, and since 1991 a non-socialist coalition began to occupy leading positions in the Finnish government.

Currently, the Finnish government is headed by Social Democrat Paavo Lipponen. The government coalition, formed in May 1995, includes the SDP (63 seats in the 200-seat parliament), the Conservative Party, the Left Union, the Greens and the Swedish People's Party.

Belgium.

In Belgium, the socialist movement has long been an important political and social force. The Belgian Workers' Party - renamed the Belgian Socialist Party (BSP) in 1941 - was created in Brussels in April 1885. Throughout its history, it took an active part in the development of the trade union movement and the organization of consumer cooperation.

In the political field before the First World War, the party devoted considerable attention to the issue of universal equality. In 1893, 1902 and 1912 she called for a general strike in defense of more liberal laws on equal rights for citizens. Its leader, Emil Vandervelde (1866–1938), served in the cabinet during the war.

After the elections of 1919, the party entered into a coalition government under the leadership of the Catholic Party. Socialists participated in several other coalition governments from the 1920s to the 1940s. Socialist leaders - Paul Henri Spaak (1899-1972), Achille van Akker and Camille Huysmans (1871-1968) - were appointed prime ministers. Beginning in the 50s, the Belgian Socialist Party fought with the Social Christian (Catholic) Party. The coalition of Social Christians and Socialists was formed in 1988. Ten years earlier, in 1978, the Belgian Socialist Party, like the other main Belgian parties, split into the Socialist Party (Francophone) and the Socialist Party (Flemish).

In 1994, a coalition government was formed from representatives of a four-party coalition, which included two socialist parties: the SP (Flemish) - leader Louis Tobakk; and SP (Francophone) - leader Philippe Busquin. These parties have 20 and 21 seats in the House of Representatives, respectively.

Netherlands.

In the Netherlands, the socialist movement became a real political force in 1894 with the birth of the Social Democratic Workers' Party. Its main leader in 1925 was P. Troelstra. In 1897 the party took part in the elections, receiving two seats in parliament. In 1913, this number increased to 16. Over the next few years, the party devoted much attention to the struggle for universal equality and the establishment of an 8-hour working day. During the interwar years, from 1918 to 1939, the party presented a comprehensive plan for economic reform.

After World War II, on February 9, 1946, the Social Democratic Labor Party merged with several political groups of various orientations to form the Labor Party. The new party won 29 of the 100 parliamentary seats in the next elections, and the socialist V. Schermerhorn became prime minister. Until the end of the 1940s and throughout the 1950s, the Labor Party participated in the work of coalition cabinets. Socialist leader V. Dreez served as prime minister for many years.

In 1960, the Labor Party gave way to left and right parties. However, in the early 1970s it again became the largest national political party with Prime Minister J. den Euyl, who held the post from 1973–1977. The Labor Party remained in opposition until 1989, when it merged with the centrist Christian Democratic Appeal in a coalition government.

Despite the loss of some votes in the elections in May 1994, the Labor Party remained the largest parliamentary party (37 deputies, in 1989 - 49), the leading force in parliament. Was part of the ruling coalition (Social Democrats, left and right liberals). The head of government is Wim Kok (PT).

Austria.

The Social Democratic Party of Austria (SDPA) was founded by a founding congress in 1888–1889. After 20 years, it consolidated with the labor movement.

Austro-Hungarian Empire at the end of the 19th century. was a multinational state, and the socialist parties of various nations united on a federal basis into the multinational Reich Party (of 6 parties), whose parliamentary representatives formed a special group in the Reichstag. From the very beginning, the Socialist Party aimed to transform the monarchy into a democratic state and establish equality among the peoples that made up the empire. In the first parliamentary elections in 1907, in which the entire male population of the country took part, the socialists gained more than a million votes.

The defeat of the Central European powers in World War I destroyed the empire. The remaining German part of the monarchy was declared a republic on November 12, 1918, and the Socialists came to dominate the coalition government that was formed by the socialist Karl Renner (1870–1950). However, in 1920 the Socialists lost the elections, losing to the Christian Social (Catholic) Party, although they retained their positions in Vienna.

The SDPA remained an opposition party in the 1920s and early 1930s. On February 12, 1934, Engelbert Dollfuss (1892–1934), carrying out a coup d'etat, abolished the democratic constitution of the republic, after street fighting that lasted four days, defeated the Social Democratic Party, imprisoned its leaders, dissolved the trade unions and proclaimed Austria a corporate state on the Italian model . This defeat paved the way for the subsequent Anschluss.

After World War II, the socialist movement quickly revived, the Socialist Party of Austria (SPA) was formed, and on April 29, 1945, a provisional government headed by Karl Renner was formed in Vienna. In the elections in November and December 1945, Renner was elected president, a coalition government was formed, the prime minister of which was a member of the Austrian People's Party (formerly the Christian Social Party), and a socialist was appointed as its commissioner.

The coalition of the Austrian People's Party and the Social Democrats lasted with short breaks until 1966, when the People's Party managed to achieve a one-party government. In the 1970 elections, the SPA won a significant number of seats in parliament and created the first one-party socialist government in Austrian history. Socialist leader Bruno Kreisky (b. 1911) became prime minister. In the 1971 elections, the Socialist Party increased its representation and gained a parliamentary majority. Kreisky resigned after the SPA briefly lost its absolute majority in the 1983 elections. Coalition governments led by the SPA were created after elections in 1983 (with the Austrian Freedom Party), 1987 and 1900 (with the Austrian People's Party). In 1991, the SPA was again renamed the Social Democratic Party of Austria (SDPA).

Italy.

The Italian Socialist Party (PSI) was founded in 1892 by the lawyer and publisher Filippo Turati (1857–1932). In the next elections the party won 6 seats in the Chamber of Deputies. In 1913, when the entire male population of the country over the age of 21 received the right to vote, the party won 51 seats in the Chamber of Deputies; the newly organized Socialist Reform Party won 23 seats, and the independent socialists won 8 seats. When World War I began, the Socialist Party opposed the war, which Italy entered in 1915. After the declaration of war, Benito Mussolini, publisher of the socialist newspaper Avanti, suddenly became a supporter of the war and an implacable opponent of the socialist movement.

The Italian socialist movement took increasingly leftist positions before and during the war. This drift to the left was supported by the majority of voters, and in November 1919 the party won 150 seats in the Chamber of Deputies. In 1922, the fascist government came to power; in 1924, the fascists killed the socialist leader Giacomo Matteotti (1885–1924), and the party was soon dissolved.

After the defeat of Hitler and Mussolini, the socialists reorganized the Italian Socialist Party, which, under the leadership of Pietro Nenni (1891–1980), formed a single pact with the communists to work together in elections. The right wing of the party broke away and formed the Social Democratic Party. Nenni's party gradually split with the communists, and both socialist parties took part in the center-left coalition government created after 1963.

In the 1970s, the Italian Socialist Party, while continuing to participate in the national center-left government, also teamed up with the Communists to create unified left-wing governments in most of Italy's main cities and regions. The famous socialist leader Alessandro Pertini (b. 1896) was elected President of Italy (1978–1985). In 1983, Bettino (Benedetto) Craxi (b. 1934) became the first socialist to head the government. Craxi left office in 1987, after which the Socialists served in several coalition governments led by the Christian Democratic Party. After the 1992 elections, a new coalition government was created, in which the leader of the Socialist Party, D. Amato, took the post of prime minister. In May 1996, a government of the left center was formed in Italy with the active (9 out of 20 seats) participation of the former Communist Party, which switched to social democratic positions, the Democratic Party of the Left, a member of the Socialist International.

Spain.

The Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) was founded in 1879, but until the First World War it remained a small group whose influence on the labor movement was insignificant compared to anarcho-syndicalism. During the 1920s, the PSOE gained numerous supporters in Madrid and its surrounding areas, as well as in industrialized Asturias. The Socialists were the leading party in the Popular Front coalition that won the 1936 elections. Socialist leaders, first Francisco Largo Caballero (1869–1946), then Juan Negrin (1894–1956), presided over the Republican Popular Front government, which presided over the long and unsuccessful war with Francoists. Outlawed during Franco's dictatorship, the PSOE went underground and many of its members emigrated. After Franco's death, it becomes the leading Spanish left-wing party. Under the leadership of Felipe Gonzalez (b. 1942), the PSOE formed the Spanish government after a complete victory in the 1982 elections. The Socialists led by him also won in 1986, 1989 and 1993. In 1996, the PSOE was defeated by the People's Party and went into opposition. In 1997, Joaquín Almunía became the general secretary of the PSOE, replacing Felipe González, who led the party for approx. 23 years old. The chairman of the party is Ramon Rubial.

Portugal.

Small socialist groups were kept underground during the half-century dictatorship of António de Oliveira Salazar (1889–1970). The Portuguese Socialist Party (PSP) then became the most popular party in the country. Its leader, Mário Soares (b. 1924), served as prime minister from 1976–1978 and 1983–1985. In 1986, Soares became President of Portugal and was re-elected in 1991.

In October 1995, the PSP won the next parliamentary elections, achieving an almost absolute majority of seats (112), replacing the Social Democratic Party. The head of the government was the leader of the Socialists, Secretary General of the PSP, Antonio Guterres. In February 1996, socialist Jorge Sampaio became president of the country.

Greece.

The labor movement in Greece became prominent after the First World War, being at that time under predominant communist influence. The first significant socialist party was the Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK - an acronym from Greek), founded in 1974 under the leadership of Andreas Papandreou (1919–1996). After PASOK won a decisive victory in the 1981 elections, Papandreou served as prime minister of a one-party socialist cabinet for 8 years. The Socialists were re-elected in October 1993.

Other European parties.

The Socialist International was also joined by the Social Democratic Party of Switzerland (founded in 1870), the Luxembourg Socialist Workers' Party (LSWP), the Social Democratic Party of Iceland (founded in 1916) and the Labor Party of Malta (LPM). All four parties participated in coalition or workers' governments.

Israel.

In the Middle East after World War II, the largest socialist movement arose in Israel. The Social Democratic Party affiliated with the Socialist International was called Mapai (Workers' Party) and was founded by David Ben-Gurion (1886–1973) and others in January 1930 as a result of the merger of a number of Zionist parties. Mapai actively contributed to the process of legalization of the State of Israel.

After 1948, Mapai headed a number of governments. From 1948–1953, then from 1955–1963, Ben-Gurion was party leader, government prime minister, and defense minister. He was then replaced by Levi Eshkol, who achieved a partial merger with another workers' party, Ahdut Ha'Avoda (Labor Union). Ben-Gurion, disapproving of the union, created a new party - RAFI ("Workers' List of Israel"); in 1968 the three parties merged to form the Israeli Labor Party (PTI). After Eshkol's death in 1969, Golda Meir (1898–1978) became prime minister and leader of the Israeli Labor Party. She retired in 1974; Her successor was Yitzhak Rabin. Rabin was replaced by Shimon Peres. The PTI lost power in 1977. Rabin, who regained leadership of the party in February 1992, became prime minister after the PTI won elections four months later. He was killed on November 4, 1995. In the elections on May 29, 1996, socialist parties were defeated by the right-wing Likud bloc, and B. Netanyahu became prime minister of the country.

Japan.

In Asia, the socialist movement first originated in Japan. The Japanese Socialist Party (JSP) was founded in 1901, but was soon disbanded by the police. After dissolution, the socialists transferred their activities to the field of education and actively opposed the war with Russia of 1904–1905. The First World War led to the revitalization of industry and the growth of the labor movement. However, only after the introduction of universal suffrage in 1927 did the socialist movement become a noticeable force in the political life of the country. In the 1928 elections, the Socialists won several seats in parliament.

During World War II, political parties were banned. The Japanese Socialist Party was only re-established after the defeat of Japan in 1945, and socialist leader Tetsu Katayama served as prime minister from May 1947 to February 1948. From March to October 1948, the JSP was part of the coalition government of Hitoshi Ashidi. After this, the socialists were in opposition. In the early 1950s they split into right and left wing parties (Left SPJ and Right SPJ); in 1955 they merged into the SPJ. In 1991, the Socialist Party and the Democratic Socialist Party participated in a seven-party coalition government formed after the long rule of the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan. Since January 1996, the Japan Socialist Party has adopted the name "Social Democratic Party of Japan" in Japanese (the English name was adopted in 1991). In the second half of the 1990s, its position in political life deteriorated, especially after the New Democratic League left its ranks in 1993. In February 1996, socialist leader Tomiichi Murayama became prime minister of the country.

India.

The socialist movement in India began with the formation of a socialist group in the Indian National Congress (INC), the leading political party of the country. In 1934, socialists united with other Indian nationalists to form the Congress Socialist Party. In 1947, after India gained independence, the socialist group left the Congress, considering it too conservative, and formed the Socialist Party of India. Several other splits followed, weakening the influence of the socialists in India. In the early 1990s, the socialist movement was represented by the Socialist People's Party (created in 1991) and the Socialist Party (1992).

USA.

A significant role in the socialist movement in the USA was played by German emigrants who arrived in the country in the 30s and 40s of the 19th century. His organization began in 1876, when the Socialist Labor Party of the USA, first called the Workers' Party of America, was created. The SWP nominated its own presidential candidate in the 1892 elections.

Six years later, in 1898, Eugene Debs (1855–1926), Victor (Louis) Berger (1860–1929) and others organized the Social Democratic Party of America. The following year, Morris Hillquit (1869–1933) and a group of moderate socialists in the SWP broke with party leader Daniel De Leon (1852–1914) and in 1900 united with the Social Democratic Party, nominating Debs for President of the United States. Following this campaign, in which Debs received 100,000 votes, a joint convention was adopted on January 29, 1901, which later led to the organization of the Socialist Party of the United States.

The US Socialist Party has grown steadily since its organization in 1902. It supported Eugene Debs in presidential elections in 1904, 1908 and 1912. In the 1912 election, Debs received 897,000 votes, over 1,000 socialists served in government offices, among them about 56 mayors, 300 city councilors and Congressman Victor Berger. Over the next ten years, internal divisions among socialists over party politics led to a sharp decline in party membership, although in 1920 Debs, prosecuted for an anti-war speech in Canton, Ohio, received 920,000 votes as a presidential candidate.

In 1924, the party endorsed Robert Marion LaFollette (1855–1925) as the Progressive Party's presidential candidate in the hope that, with the support of the American Federation of Labor and other groups, it would lead to the formation of an influential progressive farmer-labor party. 4 years later, in 1928, these political constructions did not materialize: the Socialist Party named Norman (Mattoon) Thomas (1884–1968) as its leader, who received 267,000 votes, and in 1932, during the Great Depression, 885,000 votes.

Over the next four years, a number of social reforms were introduced. The success of Roosevelt's New Deal in attracting the labor movement weakened the socialists, and the party received a small number of votes in the next election.

In 1957, the socialists merged with the Social Democratic Federation, forming the Socialist Party - the Social Democratic Federation. In 1972, this party merged with the Democratic Socialist Federation and was named the Social Democrats of the USA. The new entity moved far to the right and after 1980 became an active supporter of the military and diplomatic policies of the Reagan administration.

Some socialists who were critical of the party's failure to oppose the Vietnam War refused to join the US Social Democrats. In 1973 they formed the Socialist Organizing Committee, which in 1982 merged with the New American Movement to form the Republican People's Party of Democratic Socialists of the USA (RPDS). In 1983, at the XVI Congress of the Socialist International, it received the status of a full member. Until 1989, M. Harrington was the chairman of the party; after his resignation, this post was taken by S. Roberts. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) work within the Democratic Party and labor movement with the strategic goal of creating a mass socialist party.

Canada.

In the 90s of the 19th century. and at the beginning of the 20th century. Several small socialist parties emerged in Canada. After the First World War, on the initiative of the socialists, several more provincial workers' parties were created. These parties won a small number of seats in provincial governments and in 1920 and 1921 sent two of their representatives, A. MacDonald and J. Woodsworth, to the federal parliament. These Laborists united in Parliament with other progressives in the "Ginger Group", which in 1932 convened a conference of labor, socialist and farmer organizations in Calgary (Alberta), where it was decided to unite and form the Federation of Labour, Farmers and Farmers. socialist organizations, which later became known as the Federation of Cooperative Cooperation (FCC). In 1933, the first congress of the FCC adopted a long-term program known as the Regina Manifesto (after the location of the congress).

In subsequent years the party was represented in many provincial parliaments, as well as in the dominion parliament. The FCC delegation in parliament in 1945 had representation of 28 deputies. In 1944, the party won a majority of seats in the Saskatchewan Parliament, and its leader T. S. Douglas was elected prime minister, a post he held until the late 1940s and throughout the 1950s. Under his leadership, the provincial government gained a high reputation for promoting social reform. In the late 1950s, the movement advocated transforming the FCC into the New Democratic Party of Canada (NDPC), which was founded in 1961 and was the governing party in the provinces of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, British Columbia and Ontario. The leader of the party in 1971–1976 was D. Lewis, then the party was led by D. E. Broadbent. In the parliamentary elections held on June 2, 1996, the NDP received 11% of the vote against 6.9% in 1993. Social Democrats advocated for taking effective measures against unemployment, in particular by creating jobs in the public sector, increasing wages, unemployment benefits, other social benefits, providing better medical care for the poor and elderly. They saw sources of financing for their programs mainly in increasing corporate taxation.

Parties of Latin and South America.

Among them, the socialist parties of Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guiana, Jamaica, Peru, Venezuela and Uruguay should be highlighted.

The first socialist party in Argentina was created by J. Justo in 1896. Subsequently, it split into several small factions that had no influence in the country. The Jamaica People's National Party (PNP), founded in 1938 by Norman W. Manley, was the ruling party from 1955–1962. In 1972, the PNP returned to power, and Michael Manley, son of Norman W. Manley and party leader since 1969, became the new prime minister and remained in this post until the PNP's defeat in the elections in 1980. In 1970, the Socialist Party of Chile (founded 1933 ) led the left coalition to victory in the presidential elections. Its leader, Salvador Allende, was overthrown in 1973 in a military coup. In 1989, the HRC was recreated, receiving the name United Socialist Party of Chile (USPC). In 1990, J. Arrate became the chairman of the party, and K. Almeida became the general secretary. The Socialist Party of Uruguay (founded in 1911) was illegal from 1973 to 1985.

New Zealand.

Of all the workers' parties in the Commonwealth countries, the New Zealand Labor Party (NZLP), created in Wellington in 1916 at a conference of delegates from the Social Democratic Party (founded in 1913), the New Zealand Federation of United Workers (trade unions) and the Labor Representative Committee, achieved the greatest success. In 1935 the party won its first victory and remained in power for 14 years. Labor also governed 1957–1960, 1972–1975 and 1984–1990; by the mid-1990s they formed a powerful opposition.

Australia.

Although local Labor parties had existed since 1890 in various Australian states, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) was not created until 1901. Three years later, in 1904, party leader D. C. Watson (1867–1941) became prime minister and formed the first in the Commonwealth Labor cabinet. From that time until 1949, Labor cabinets alternated with those of the Liberals and the Agrarian Party. The Labor Party was in power from 1972–1975 (Prime Minister G. Whitlam) and returned to power after winning the elections in 1983 under the leadership of Robert Hawke (b. 1929), who was replaced in 1991 by Paul Keating. In March 1996, the Australian Labor Party was defeated in the parliamentary elections, losing to a coalition of the Liberal and National parties.

SOCIALIST PARTIES IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AFTER 1991

In the first half of the 1990s, social democratic parties appeared and strengthened in the second half of Central European countries, which came as a surprise both to the Socialist International (focused more on the regions of the “Third World”) and to the reformers within these countries. The emerging parties can be divided into three types: 1) authentic, or historical, existing in almost each of the 12 (before 1991 – 8) countries in the region, but occupying a different place in political life; the strongest position is that of the Czech Social Democratic Party, which gained almost an equal number of votes with the ruling party in the Senate elections in 1996; 2) reformed - former ruling - parties that declared themselves social democratic (some were accepted into the Socialist International). In 1997, they were in power in Poland (lost parliamentary elections in September 1997) and Hungary, and lost it a year earlier (in 1996) in Romania and Bulgaria; in 1997 they came to power in Albania and strengthened their positions in a number of countries - the former republics of Yugoslavia; 3) parties of different origins, adapting social democratic slogans and programs to their goals (for example, in Romania, the leader of the Democratic Party P. Roman announced a social democratic alternative to the Party of Social Democracy of Romania - PSDR, which ruled until 1996); There are similar parties in other countries in the region.

It is noteworthy that the economic course and main political initiatives of these parties are focused on the values ​​of liberalism (introducing the market, allowing unemployment, joining NATO), complemented by a strong social policy. At the same time, they distance themselves from communist parties and groups (unlike the countries of Western Europe, where the Socialist International encourages dialogue between socialists and social democrats with communists).

In the countries of the region, the following large parties of all three types can be distinguished.

Poland.

Social Democracy of the Republic of Poland (founded in January 1990 on the ruins of the PUWP; reformed, ruling until September 1997); since September 1996, a member of the Socialist International, was accepted as an exception without passing the status of an observer party. A member of the party was the President of Poland A. Kwasniewski.

Czech Republic.

Czech Social Democratic Party (reestablished as the Czechoslovak Social Democratic Party in November 1989; since January 1993, after the collapse of the Czechoslovak Social Democratic Republic, - the Czech Social Democratic Party). In the parliamentary elections of May 31 - June 1, 1996, it almost equally divided votes with the ruling Civic Democratic Party in the Senate. The party leader is Milos Zeman. By the mid-1990s, the ČSDP had 12,000 members. Since 1990, a full member of the Socialist International (previously it included the emigrant Czechoslovak Social Democratic Party); Since 1995 he has enjoyed observer status in the Party of European Socialists.

Slovakia.

Movement for a Democratic Slovakia (founded in the spring of 1991 after the collapse of the general democratic Slovak movement “Public Against Violence”, adapted social democratic slogans, ruling). The leader is the Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, Vladimir Meciar.

The Social Democratic Party of Slovakia (SDPS) was restored in February 1990 by A. Dubcek, authentic, opposition. In 1992 it had 10 thousand members, and in the same year it joined the Socialist International.

Hungary.

the Hungarian Socialist Party (HSP), successor to Kadar's Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party; created in October 1989, reformed, ruling. In May 1994, at the second free elections, the VSP, led by D. Horn, received an absolute majority of seats in parliament (209 out of 386); formed a coalition government with the second largest party in parliament (69) - the liberal Union of Free Democrats (USD). In 1994, the VSP had from 30 to 35 thousand members. In 1994, the Socialist International accepted the VSP into its ranks.

Social Democratic Party of Hungary (SDPV), leader - A. Petrasovich, restored in January 1989, authentic, opposition. She was the first to join the Socialist International in November 1989. In the 1990 elections she received 3.6% of the vote.

Bulgaria.

The revival of the activities of the authentic Bulgarian Social Democratic Party (BSDP) took place on November 26, 1989. In 1948, as a result of repressions, the party ceased its activities in the country, but continued to work in exile in Vienna, where it published the newspaper “Free People”. Chairman – P. Dertliev. In 1990 she received the right to full membership in the Socialist International.

Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), former Bulgarian Communist Party, reformed, ruling 1990–1991 and 1994–1996, opposition since 1997; has four factions in its ranks (orthodox communists, socialists, technocrats and social democrats).

Albania.

Socialist Party of Albania (ASP), founded in June 1991, reformed, ruling since 1997; the leader, Fatos Nano, became the country's president in 1997.

Based on the reformist wing of the former ruling Albanian Labor Party (APT), the Social Democratic Party of Albania (SDPA) was created in April 1991; in 1995, some of its members left the party, founding the Social Democratic Union.

Romania.

Party of Social Democracy of Romania, founded in 1993, reformed, ruling until the fall of 1996. Parliamentary elections in September 1996 ended the seven-year rule of the former communists led by I. Iliescu.

Republics of the former Yugoslavia.

There are similar parties with a socialist orientation of all three types: the Social Democratic Union of Slovenia, the successor to the Social Democratic Party of Slovenia, founded in 1896; Social Democratic Party of Croatia, successor to the oldest Social Democratic Party of Croatia in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, created in 1894; a number of reformed social-democratic parties that left the SKY and advocate the restoration of Yugoslavia; Socialist Party of Serbia, with national orientation; Social Democratic Party of Slovenia, created in 1996; Social Democratic Action, party in Croatia, founded in 1994.

In addition, there are a relatively small branch of the Social Democratic Union of Yugoslavia in Slovenia and the Social Democratic Union of Croatia.

Russia.

By the decision of the 20th Congress of the Socialist International, held in September 1996 in New York, in Russia and the CIS countries it remains to be revealed by the beginning of the 21st century. parties and movements that truly adhere to the principles of socialism, and not just declare them in their programs.