1902 “idealism issues” included 12 scholars’ articles. These scholars expressed concern about the tendency of “modern critical movement” to only pay attention to the understanding of social movement with material interests, and put forward “to defend the skeptical spirit of diversity and the exploration of human spirit”.

a Bolshevik postcard in which sailors hold a banner with the words “long live the revolution”,

“road sign phenomenon” and its debate

in July 1909, more than 100 years ago, seven authors published a book called the anthology of road signs. It was such a thin pamphlet that caused an uproar in Russia, and people of all factions were involved in the discussion of the road sign. Critics on the left regarded the book as “the betrayal of liberals”, but the main liberal camp in Russia was even more dissatisfied with the book at that time. Milukov even “flew into a rage” and organized people everywhere to criticize the book. In order to fight back against the viewpoint of the “roadmap school”, he and ovsuniko kulikovsky specially organized and wrote the book “the intellectual class of Russia” in 1910, launching a fierce ideological debate against the “roadmap school”. From the perspective of critical language, liberals and revolutionaries are quite similar. The difference is that liberals seem to be more intolerant of the former “Tongdao” touching their souls with their “ideological profundity”. Because bergayev clearly pointed out that “Russian liberalism thought is very weak and has not formed a liberal ideological system with spiritual prestige and appeal”. They are either purely practical and transactional, or “radical” as the “tail” of revolutionaries, which “is not the ideological system that Russian intellectuals want to pursue”. Although the revolutionaries expressed their righteous indignation at the “ideological excavation” of these “traitors”, perhaps the gap in the ideological spectrum is too large. There is no basis for common discussion between the language of the highest program of materialism and the words of these “God seekers” who “carry the cross”. They are not surprised by their transformation, or they don’t take it to heart at all. Because in the eyes of revolutionaries, these are people who live in the world of ghosts, dreams and religions. They can fight back against this view that they have always attacked the revolution with a “conventional attitude of contempt for social life”, but it is not worth taking it too seriously. What they play is just “abandonment in abandonment”, so their response to the criticism of the “road signs” from the “root” is not as strong as that of orthodox liberals.

how did the Russian cultural conservatism in the 20th century come into being?

after the revolution in 1905, especially after the stolepin reform in 1907, the political reactionary and economic radical reform made profound changes in Russian society, the loss of social confidence and the spread of anarchism caused by the failure of the Japanese Russian war and the subsequent defeat in the first World War The mass democracy of the revolutionary organizations and the “constitutional” demands of the Enlightenment era, and the democracy to protect individual freedom has become the “majority tyranny” of the “radical evolution” of populism. In the climax of the mass movement, a large number of irrational behaviors were released, which made these “legitimate Marxists” who were originally attracted to the logical power of Marxism shudder at Russia’s revolutionary political parties, retreat from the treacherous and dangerous political struggle, disappointed with Russia’s bourgeois Democrats, and have an instinctive aversion to the Pugachev style peasant movement, Worried about the reality of Russia. Their populist, cynical and secular attitudes towards terrorism are more mundane. They saw that the tide of mob politics devoured everything but themselves. In the pain of this spirit and reality, they came to the path of agnosticism. After the dust of the revolution was settled, the “noble thinkers” who “lacked the spirit of struggle” had a fundamental change in their ideological position after a period of painful thinking. They chose to escape from “realistic politics”, resolutely chose the latter in “revolutionary myth” and “ideological deification”, and found their own value with the conversion of their hearts. In their own language, it is better to live in “death” than “death in life”. Maybe this is the spirit of “Phoenix Nirvana”. Because the mainstream of Russia has always believed in orthodox ideas since ancient times, they need to find another way for the Russian ideological circles to create the value of “moving against the mainstream”. The last aristocrats of

,

,

and

turned from the world view of liberating the reality to the “internalism” of saving the soul. They proposed to summarize the history of the Russian liberation movement and Russian intellectuals from the perspective of ideology and philosophy, liquidate the radicalism tradition among Russian civilian intellectuals since the mid-19th century, and eliminate the shadow of “Red Death” of crazy “negatives”, Return to tradition and explore ideas. They believe that each stage of Russia is an “over correction” and total negation of the previous stage, burning the existing accumulation, and in the end, it is always on “white paper” without foundation, and I don’t know where to draw resources. Therefore, they say that in an era when everyone is restless, we need not only the courage to invest, but also the courage to withdraw. The purpose of withdrawing is to reflect calmly, so as to avoid the society constantly returning to the original starting point in the cycle. Therefore, instead of the dilemma of people who are generally thrown off the wheel of revolution, they are the reason for high-profile publicity of “active retreat”. We know that there are quitters in any revolutionary tide, but it is rare to create an ideological system a priori to make up for the ideological paleness and cultural desertification in the revolution after the conscious withdrawal of the Russian “signpost”. After the drastic changes of

,

,

,

, the return of “road sign thought” the debate and thinking about this book have never stopped in Russia in the past 100 years, but it is strange that with the passage of time, more and more people receive the thought of “road sign” in Russian cultural circles. After the drastic changes in the Soviet Union, the anthology of “road signs” was highly praised in Russia, and the people scrambled to read it as if they had found “prophetic teachings”, so that in the early 1990s, the book was sold out of stock, and many of its chapters were incorporated into textbooks for learningBulgakov and other 12 scholars expressed concern about the tendency of “modern critical movement” to only attach importance to understanding social movement with material interests, and put forward “the skeptical spirit of defending diversity and the exploration of human spirit” to support “freedom of conscience”. The 12 scholars were political opponents of the Tsarist Russian system at that time. Most of them participated in the establishment of the liberation Alliance (the predecessor of the Constitutional Democratic Party) in 1901. Among them, Bulgakov, stuluwei, frank and bergayev all changed from “legal Marxism” to liberalism not long ago.