Na poti v moderno: poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Slovenian |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Ljubljana
Inšt. za Novejšo Zgodovino
2005
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Zbirka Razpoznavanja
1 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Beschreibung: | 285 S. |
| ISBN: | 9616386069 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV022867529 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20081126 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 071005s2005 |||| 00||| slv d | ||
| 020 | |a 9616386069 |9 961-6386-06-9 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)235944606 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV022867529 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a slv | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a DR1438 | |
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Perovšek, Jurij |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Na poti v moderno |b poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja |c Jurij Perovšek |
| 264 | 1 | |a Ljubljana |b Inšt. za Novejšo Zgodovino |c 2005 | |
| 300 | |a 285 S. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Zbirka Razpoznavanja |v 1 | |
| 648 | 4 | |a Geschichte 1900-2000 | |
| 648 | 4 | |a Geschichte 1800-1900 | |
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1918-1941 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1800-1941 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Geschichte | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Politik | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Liberalism |z Europe |x History |y 19th century | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Liberalism |z Europe |x History |y 20th century | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Liberalism |z Slovenia |x History |y 19th century | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Liberalism |z Slovenia |x History |y 20th century | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Liberalismus |0 (DE-588)4035582-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 4 | |a Europa | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Jugoslawien | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Slovenia |x Politics and government | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Yugoslavia |x Politics and government |y 1918-1945 | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Europa |0 (DE-588)4015701-5 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Slowenien |0 (DE-588)4055302-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Jugoslawien |0 (DE-588)4028966-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Europa |0 (DE-588)4015701-5 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Liberalismus |0 (DE-588)4035582-2 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Slowenien |0 (DE-588)4055302-4 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1800-1941 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Jugoslawien |0 (DE-588)4028966-7 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 1 | |a Liberalismus |0 (DE-588)4035582-2 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 2 | |a Slowenien |0 (DE-588)4055302-4 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1918-1941 |A z |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 830 | 0 | |a Zbirka Razpoznavanja |v 1 |w (DE-604)BV022867517 |9 1 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016072684 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804137125215469568 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | Pregled vsebine
PREDGOVOR
9
LIBERALIZEM
IN
SOCIÁLNO VPRAŠANJE
15
Sćhulze-Delitzscheva zadružnogospodarska
doktrìna
kot
liberalni odgovor na
sociálno
vprašanje
v
19.
stoletju
17
Pnlagoditev
Schulze—
Delitzschevih zadnižnogospodarskih
zamisli na
Slovenskem v letih
1872-1895 35
Pogled na
pojav
socialnega liberalizma
v
evropski
in
slovenski politični misli
in
praksi
43
Sociálni
značaj slovenskega liberalizma
v
letih
1894-1918 49
LIBERALIZEM,
KATOLICIZEM
IN KOMUNIZEM 61
Duhovni
in
idejnopolitični oris Ivana Hribarja
63
Pogledi slovenskega liberalizma na poslanstvo
in delo knezoškofa
Antona Bonaventure Jegliča
84
Janez Evangelist
Krek
in
slovenski
liberalizem
110
Idejni, družbeni
in narodnopolitični
nazori
Ivana Tavčarjapo ustanovitvi Jugoslovanske
demokratske stranke leta
1918 124
MED NARODOM, POLITIKO
IN
DRŽAVO
145
Polemika Ušeničnik-Rostohar
o verí,
narodnosti
in
etiki
v
letih
1912-1913 147
Slovenski
liberalei
in
Jugoslavija.
Nacionálna
politika liberalnega tabora
v
letih
1918-1929 159
Nemški
liberalizem
in
vprašanje naroda
ter
državne
ureditve. Primerjava
z
Jugoslovansko demokratsko
stranko/Samostojno demokratsko stranko
v
dvajsetih letih
171
Jugoslovanska nacionalna stranka
in
vprašanje
slovenske banovine
1939-1941 180
OB
PRELOMNICAH
V
STRANKARSKEM
IN
MEDNARODNOPOLITIČNEM RAZVOJU
191
Ustanovitev Jugoslovanske demokratske stranke
leta
1918 193
Jugoslovanska nacionalna stranka
in
vojna
1939-1941 223
POVZETEK
243
SUMMARY
249
VIRI IN
LITERATURA
257
OSEBNO KAZALO
275
Povzetek
V
odgovoru na vprašanje, kako predstaviti posamezne idejno-
politične tokove
v
novejši evropski
in
slovenski politični praksi, je
najprej potrebno opozoriti na čas,
v
katerem
so
bila zgodovinsko
opredeljena temeljna vprašanja modernega sveta. Opredelitev se ve¬
že na
19.
stoletje,
v
katerem
so
se po prelomni francoski revoluciji
leta
1789
izoblikovale še
danes uveljavljene
osnovne evropske idej¬
ne
izbire
-
liberalna, konservativna
in
socialistična
—,
ki
so
se pričele
razvijati tako
kot teoretični
koncepti
kot tudi kot dejanska
politič¬
na gibanja. Pri tem
so v
okviru posameznih osnovnih idejnih izbir
obravnavali
vsa bistvena
vprašanja idejnega, družbenega, politične-
ga, nacionalnega
in
socialnogospodarskega razvoja, ki spremljajo
novejšo evropsko zgodovino. Tako se je tudi
liberalizem opredelil
glede teh vprašanj. Opredelil se je do ideje
svobodě,
razumevanja
(nacionalne) države, odnosa do demokratične misli
in družbene
ure-
ditve, do naroda
kot veznega člena med
posameznikom, državo
in
družbo, do značaja imperializma
in
do razvoja
struktur
in ureditve
gospodarskega življenja, torej do poglavitnega predmeta vseh poli¬
tičnih razmišljanj
v
19.
stoletju
-
socialnega vprašanja.
Evropski
liberalizem
je že sredi
19.
stoletja
priznával,
da pred¬
stavlja sestavni
del
družbenega
in
političnega življenja tudi
sociálni
problem. Liberalna socialnopolitična misel je tedaj oblikovala druž-
benogospodarski koncept, katerega osrednji poudarek je
bü,
da je
posameznikovo (politično) eksistenco potrebno utemeljiti
v
njegovi
gospodarski
in sociálni
varnosti, lastnini
in
izobrazbi. To
naj bi
ure-
sničila
sociálna
in
politična graditev srednjeslojne meščanske druž¬
be
v
predstavniški parlamentarni državi.
Nosilec tako zamišljenega družbenega programa je
bil sociál¬
ni
liberalizem.
Sociálni
liberalizem
ni podpíral odprave
kapitalizma,
рас
pa njegovo družbenoreformno korekcijo. Največji vpliv je imel
v
Angliji, kjer je pred prvo svetovno vojno
přišel tudi
na oblast. Ta-
krat je bila izvedena vrsta socialnih
reform
(sociálno,
zdravstveno,
ρονζετεκ
243
invalidsko varstvo, uvedba starostnih pokojnin), ki
so
utemeljile
moderno britansko državo blaginje. Podobno je bilo tuđi
v
Italiji,
medtem
ko
se je
v
Franciji
in
na Nemškem liberalna socialnore-
formna doktrina omejevala na koncept družbene samopomoči
in je
v
glavnem odklanjala državni intervencionizem.
V
Franciji je bila
deloma uspešna glede varstva delavskih
interesov, v
Nemčiji pa je
utemeljila gospodarsko
podporo
pomembnemu
delu
srednjega sta¬
nu
ter
omogočila obrtniškemu srednjemu sloju prilagoditev na in¬
dustrijski razvoj.
Med obema svetovnima vojnama zaradi drugačnih liberalnih
gospodarskosocialnih
konceptov sociálni
liberalizem
idejno
in druž-
beno ni
bü
ustvarjalen. Po drugi svetovni pa
so v sedemdesetih
in
osemdesetih letih
20.
stoletja
v
evropskih liberalnih strankah (naj-
bolj očitno
v
Zvezni
republiki
Nemčiji
ter
v
Franciji
in
Italiji)
uvideli
potrebo po aktivni
sociálni politiki
in obudili
idejo socialnega libe¬
ralizma.
Eden od zgodovinskih utemeljiteljev evropskega socialnega li¬
beralizma je
bil nemški
liberalni
politik in sociálni
reformator
Franz
Hermann
Schulze-Delitzsch
(1808-1883).
Sredi
19.
stoletja
je za-
snoval
sistem
konzumnih, surovinsko-nabavnih,
kreditnih
in
pro¬
duktivnih zadrug, oblikovanih na osnovi
vzájemné
solidarne samo¬
pomoči njihovih članov. Schulze-Delitzschev zadružni sistem, ki je
odklanjal državni intervencionizem, je predstavljal tretjo
poť med
kapitalistično
in
socialistično organiziranim gospodarskim nači¬
nom.
Ker
pa je
bil socialnoreformni
program njegove zadružne or¬
ganizacije vezan na prehodni gospodarski stadij na
poti
v
poíno in-
dustrializacijo, ga je prehitel stopnjevani industrijski razvoj
v
drugi
polovici
19.
stoletja. Schulze-Delitzsch
v
svojih prizadevanjih, da bi
rešil sociálni
problem ni
bil uspešen,
kljub temu
paje
imelo njegovo
delo
pozitiven socialnopolitičen účinek.
Njegove zadruge
so
namreč
predstavljale gospodarsko oporo pomembnega
dela
srednjega sta¬
nu.
S
svojim delovanjem je vplival tuđi na
t. i. wilhelminski sociálni
liberalizem
na
prelomu
iz
19.
v
20.
stoletje,
kije
nasproti
socialno-
političnim izzivom industrijske družbe zagovarjal načelo umirjenega
državnega intervencionizma, sodelovanje liberalnega meščanstva
s
socialnodemokratsko organiziranim delavstvom
in ustavnopolitič-
no integracijo sindikatov
v
nemško družbo. Schulze-Delitzschevo
delovanje je vplivalo tuđi na slovenski
liberalizem. Na
njegove za-
družnogospodarske zamisli se je namreč
v prvém
obdobju svojega
razvoja
(1872-1895)
opíralo
slovensko zadružno gibanje,
kije
bilo
v
tistem času pod liberalnim vodstvom;
nato
je vođenje slovenskega
zadražništva prevzelo katoliško gibanje. Prilagoditev Schulze-Deli-
tzschevih zadružnih
načel na Slovenskem v
letih
1872-1895
je po-
menila
enega od
redkih sočasnih vplivov evropskega liberalizma na
slovenski narodnopolitični
in
gospodarski razvoj. Kljub temu, da
slovensko zadružno gibanje pod liberalnim vodstvom ni imelo soci-
alnoreformne vsebine,
so
namreč bili
v
letih
1872-1895
pod vplivom
244
Schultzejevih načel
in
zamisli ustvarjeni gmotni pogoji za slovensko
kulturnopolitično emancipacijo
in
postavljeni temelji za rast sloven-
skega narodnega gospodarstva
in
kapitala.
Slovenski
liberalizem
ni
posvětil
posebne pozornosti
sociálne¬
mu
vprašanju tuđi po letu
1894,
koje bila
v
osrednji slovenski deže-
li
-
na Kranjskem
-
ustanovljena liberalna Narodna stranka (kasne-
je Narodno napredna stranka). Zanimala gaje predvsem ohranitev
družbene
in
gospodarske moči mlađega slovenskega meščanstva
nasproti delavnim
stanovom
slovenskega naroda.
Take
poglede
so
liberalei
ohranili tuđi po zlomu Avstro-Ogrske monarhije, čeprav se
je ob
ustanovitvi enotne vseslovenske liberalne stranke
-
Jugoslo-
vanske demokratske stranke (vanjo
so se
junija
1918
združile Na¬
rodna stranka za Štajersko, Narodno napredna stranka za Goriško
in
Narodno napredna stranka za Kranjsko)
-
tuđi na
Slovenskem za
kratek
čas programsko uveljavila ideja socialnega liberalizma. Soci-
alnogospodarski pogledi liberalcev
so
se
v
prvi jugoslovanski državi
oziroma
v
času med svetovnima vojnama razvijali
v
smeri
ohranja-
nja obstoječih družbenogospodarskih razmerij, ki
naj
bi
jih
izboljša-
nje položaja gospodarsko šibkih slojev ne ogrozilo.
V
tridesetih letih
pa
so
liberalei
zagovarjali načelo t. i. nacionalnega solidarizma, ki
se je zavzemal za disciplinirano ali nadzorovano demokracijo, ki bo
zmožná
resiti socialnogospodarske problema
v
interesu
celóte.
Na¬
čelo skladnosti
in
solidarnosti vseh slojev, poudarjanje dirigiranega
gospodarstva
in
priznavanje zasebne lastnine
kot temeljnega
pogoja
za uspešen nadaljnji gospodarski razvoj
so
slovensko liberalno soci-
alnogospodarsko doktrino
v
letih pred drugo svetovno vojno
vpeli v
koncept stanovske oziroma korporativne države.
V
času med svetovnima vojnama slovenski
liberalizem tudi
ni
upošteval nacionalnih teženj širokih
piasti
slovenskega ljudstva.
V
nasprotju
z avstrijsko
dobo,
ko se
je zavzemal za slovenske narodne
interese
in
narodno avtonomijo, seje
v
unitaristični
in
centralistični
Kraljevini Srbov, Hrvatov
in Slovencev,
oblikovani leta
1918
(leta
1929
sojo preimenovali
v
Kraljevino Jugoslavijo),
postavil na
stran
jugoslovanskega unitarističnega narodnega programa. Njegovo na-
rodnopolitično izhodišče je namreč bilo, da je
z
nastankom jugoslo-
vanske države nastopil čas vsejugoslovanske sinteze,
v kateri
se bo
dotedanja slovenska narodna
in
jezikovno-kulturna individualnost
převedla v
novo, višjo
ter
civilizacijsko, kulturno
in politično-gospo-
darsko močnejšo nacionalno formacijo velikega Jugoslovanskega
Naroda. Po tem gledanju
naj bi
predstavljala vsejugoslovansko na¬
rodno zlitje
in
njemu državnopravno edino ustrezna centralistično
urejena država končni smisel vsega dotedanjega slovenskega naro-
dnopolitičnega razvoja
in narodnoemancipacijskega
napora. Liberal¬
na politika je bila vodilni dejavnik,
kije na
Slovenskem v
času med
svetovnima vojnama zagovarjal jugoslovanski unitarnocentralis tični
nacionalni program. Odločno je pobijala tedanja slovenska prizade-
vanja po spoštovanju slovenske narodne samobitnosti
in oblikova-
POVZ6TEK
245
nju
avtonomne
slovenske
enote
v
jugoslovanski državi.
V
primerjavi
z
evropskim liberalizmom tistega časa, konkretno
z nemškim v času
Weimarske
republike, kjer je
liberalizem
po koncu prve svetovne
vojne še
ostal odločujoč
politični dejavnik, je slovenski
liberalizem
obšel nacionalni problem. Nemški
in
slovenski
liberalizem,
ki
sta se
sicer ujemala
v
podpiranju
centralističnega
in
narodnounitaristič-
nega
državnega razvoja, je ločila globoka vsebinska razlika. Medtem
ko
si je nemški
v
okviru zgodovinsko izoblikovane narodne skupno-
sti
s
podpiranjem narodnega unitarizma
in
državnega centralizma
prizadeval na novo preurediti nacionalno
in
državno življenje po prvi
svetovni vojni, kjer ne bi bilo prostora za hegemonijo
enega,
to je
pruskega
dela
države, je slovenski
liberalizem
skúšal izničiti
sloven¬
sko narodno individualnost
v
korist namišljenega jugoslovanskega
naroda, obenem pa je
podpíral
velikosrbski
hegemonizem.
S
tem se
je onemogočil pri veliki većini Slovencev,
saj
so
imele
v slovenském
narodu
tedaj
in kasneje
veljavo le
tiste
politične sile,
ki
so se
boje-
vale
za
narodno emancipacijo
ter
suveren
in
enakopraven
položaj
slovenskega naroda
v
jugoslovanski državi.
Usklajenost med evropskim
in
slovenskim liberalizmom pa se
je na političnem
in
idejnem področju pokazala
v kritičnem
vredno-
tenju vloge
in
položaja Cerkve
v
družbi. Pri tem je slovenski
liberali¬
zem
v
pomanjkanju domišljenega idejnega, socialnega
in
političnega
programa vodila zavest
о
njegovem podrejenem položaju nasproti
dobro organiziranemu
ter
sociálno
in
politično
dejavnejšemu kato-
liškemu gibanju
in s
tem sekundarni vlogi
v
slovenski družbi. Kato-
liški tabor je trdno obvladoval slovensko javno življenje, medtem
ko
je
bü
liberalizem
močnejši
le na
gospodarskem področju,
saj mu
je
materiálno zaslombo
zagotavljal liberalni bančni kapital. Obvlado¬
val je tuđi področje kulture,
toda
tu je liberalna inteligenca
zašla v
nepomirljiv kultumobojni odnos do Katoliške cerkve
in
katoliškega
gibanja.
Liberalnemu
taboru, ki načeloma ni posegal
v verska
in
cerkvena vprašanja, a si je prizadeval
z
zakonom preprečiti zlora-
bljanje
vere in
Cerkve
v
politične namene (zlasti
v
šolstvu
in, kar
je bilo značilno
v
avstrijski dobi, pri uvedbi splošne, neposredne,
enake
in
tajne volilne pravice),
sta tako
pritisk političnega katoliciz¬
ma
ter
neizgrajeni programsko politični koncept
in
ekskluzivistična
svobodomislena naravnanost, onemogočila, da bi
v
slovenski druž¬
bi
in politiki
prevzel vlogo suverenega demokratičnega korektiva.
Obsodil se je na nerazsodno zavračanje
vsega, kar
je imelo katoli-
ški predznak.
V
vihri političnih bojev, ki
so
zavladali
v slovenském
javnem
življenju po oblikovanju modernih političnih strank
konec
19.
stoletja, je takšna naravnanost
nato
trajno izčrpavala slovenski
liberalizem,
ki
so
ga omejevali tuđi ozki ideološki
in socialnogospo-
darski interesi, po letu
1918
pa še unitaristični nacionalni program.
Liberalizem
je
vedno
bolj bledel
kot
dejavnik slovenskega družbene-
ga
in
političnega razvoja.
Ob
koncu prve Jugoslavije se je politično
izčrpan
ter
narodno
in
sociálno izkoreninjen
razcepil na množico
246
različnih strank
in
skupin,
večjih
in
manjših,
ki
so imele
sicer
sku¬
pno
provenienco,
ločila
pa so
jih različna stališča do vseh bistvenih
vprašanj
tedanje dobe.
Omenjene značilnosti
slovenskega liberalizma
so
se nazorno
pokazale
v
idejnih
in
političnih pogledih vodilnih liberalnih
politikov
oziroma v
njegovem odnosu do najvidnejših predstavnikov Katoliške
cerkve na
Slovenskem.
Tako je
v času
po ustanovitvi Narodne stran¬
ke za Kranjsko liberalni tabor izkoristil vsako priložnost za napad
na ljubljanskega škofa Antona Bonaventuro Jegliča
(1850-1937),
kije
v
Ljubljani
stoloval v letih
1898-1930.
Škof Jeglič
je s
strani
liberalnega tabora doživel najhujše napade
v
letih
1898-1899,
ko
se je odločil zgraditi katoliški konvikt
z lastno
(prvo) slovensko gi¬
mnazijo, leta
1909,
ko
je
objavil
brošuro Ženinom
in nevestám,
ki
je vsebovala
moralna napotila za zakonsko spolno življenje,
in leta
1925,
ko
so
mu
liberalei
v
okviru njegovih škofovskih dejavnosti
pripisovali
osebno zlorabljanje Cerkve
in
vere
v
politične namene.
Kritični
so bili
tuđi do utemeljitelja slovenskega krščanskosocial-
nega gibanja
in
zadružništva
ter enega
najpomembenjših
politikov
katoliške Slovenske ljudske stranke, Janeza Evangelista Kreka
(1865-1917).
Do Kreka najprej nišo bili bojno razpoloženi. Zaradi
njegovih oštrih protiliberalnih izjav
v
letih
1911-1912
pa
so ga
leta
1913
skúšali
politično
in
moralno izničiti
z javnimi trditvami o do-
mnevni ljubezenski zvezi
z dunajčanko
Kamilo Theimer. Slovenski
liberalizem
je kasneje t. i. afero Theimer
obžaloval
in
Kreka ni več
napadal,
enako pa tuđi
Krek
svojega odnosa do liberalizma ni več
zaostroval.
Najvidnejši nosilec
ostre
liberalne kulturnobojne politi¬
ke je
bil eden od prvákov
slovenskega klasičnega liberalizma Ivan
Tavčar
(1851-1923).
Poleg izrazitega protikatoliškega stališča, ki ga
je po prvi svetovni vojni nadomestil dosledni protikomunizem, je bi¬
lo zanj značilno tuđi ekskluzivno meščansko družbeno
in
politično
stališče, ki ni dopuščalo socialnogospodarske emancipacije drugih
družbenih slojev, konkretno kmetov
in
delavcev. Od leta
1918
je
bü
tuđi izrazit zagovornik jugoslovanskega nacionalnega unitarizma
in
državnega centralizma.
Od Tavčarja se je razlikoval drugi prvak slovenskega klasič¬
nega liberalizma, Ivan Hribar
(1851-1941).
Tuđi on je odločno na-
sprotoval pritegovanju Cerkve
in
vere
v
politično življenje,
vendar
je
obenem nasprotoval tuđi kulturnobojnemu liberalizmu
in t.
i. farški
gonji. Tradicionalni spopad med političnim katolicizmom
in
libera¬
lizmom ga ni privlačil. Hribar je imel na katoliški strani vrsto do¬
brih prijateljev, medtem koje
bü
politično ali osebno nenaklonjen
le
malokateremu posamezniku iz katoliških vrst.
Bü
je eden od tistih,
ki
so
si
v
boju med katolicizmom
in
liberalizmom na
Slovenskem
-
upoštevaje obe
strani
-
zaslužili dostojanstveno
mesto.
Hribar se
je opredelil tuđi do fašizma
in
komunizma.
O prvém
je
menü,
da
bo njegov
konec
silno žalosten . Glede komunizma
paje opozarjal,
da je protinaravno
in
nemogoče poenotiti vse ljudi
v
smislu enakih
povzevek
247
potřeb. Zato
ni verjel
v svetovno komunistično revolucijo, saj je bil
prepričan, da ni mogoče ljudi raznih narodnosti, ločenih po religi-
jah, izobrazbi
in
moralnih kriterijih, spraviti
v sklenjeno
vojno vrsto.
S
temi mislimi, zapisanimi malo pred smrtjo, je leta
1941
sklenil
vrednotenje svojega časa
in bistvenih
zgodovinskih vprašanj, po¬
vezanih
z
njim. Življenje je končal sam,
v
protest proti italijanski
okupaciji Slovenije aprila
1941.
Vprašanje nove evropske
in
svetovne vojne je slovenski
liberali¬
zem
-
tako
kot
tuđi druge politične sile doma
in
v tujini
-
zaposlova-
lo
že
od njenega začetka
1.
septembra
1939.
Liberalei
so
vojno,
kije
od septembra
1939
spremenila velik
del
dotedanje Evrope, celovito
ocenili.
Opozarjali
so
na njen totalitarni značaj
in
na ideološko so-
očenje demokratičnega, fašističnega
in komunističnega
svetovnega
nazora
v
njej.
Ob
tem nišo spregledali, daje bilo
ob sklenitvi
nem-
ško-sovjetskega pakta
о
nenapadanju avgusta
1939
ideološko na¬
čelo podrejeno velikodržavnim interesom
obeh podpisnic.
Temu na¬
čelu
so pripisovali odločilno vlogo
pri oblikovanju povojnega sveta,
saj so napovedali
velike spremembe
v
organizaciji človeške družbe.
Izšle
naj bi
iz vojaškega, političnega
in
gospodarskega spopada med
anglosasko
demokracijo, ki bi se morala notranje prenoviti,
in
siste¬
mi totalitarnih
diktatur.
Med njimi
so posebej
opozorili na Nemčijo,
Italijo
in
Japonsko.
Razdelitev
t.
i. življenjskih prostorov med njimi
ob
sklenitvi trojnega pakta, septembra
1940, so
že razumeli kot
na¬
crt za bodočo ureditev sveta. Odgovor na vprašanje, kako bo svet
po vojni urejen
in
kdo
bo zmagał
v
njej,
pa
so puščali odprt.
Točno
pa
so napovedali,
da
bo nastopila
nova
doba,
ko se
bo
prihodnja
svetovna politika vodila v
okviru velikih državnih
blokov
kontinen¬
talnih
obsegov.
Ob
tem
so
glede položaja jugoslovanske države po-
udarjali svojo narodnoobrambno
usmeritev in odločenost
da,
če
bo
potrebno,
z všemi
močmi branijo domovino.
Po vojaški zasedbi Slovenije
in vzpostavitvi
okupatorske oblasti
aprila
1941,
je nastopilo novo obdobje
v
razvoju slovenskega libe¬
ralizma. Liberalna idejnopolitična tvornost se med drugo svetovno
vojno na
Slovenskem
kljub odličnim poglobitvam
v
evropski
in sve-
tovni vojaškopolitični razvoj po letu
1939 in
svojemu patriotizmu,
ni mogla učinkovito izraziti. Nov zgodovinski čas je
slovenskému
liberalizmu namenil trde preizkušnje, še trse pa
so z
njim
(in nje-
govimi predstavniki) ravnali po revolucionarnem prevzemu oblasti
leta
1945,
ko
je
bü
za dolga desetletja
izrinjen iz slovenske družbe.
Liberalna politična
izbiră
se je
nato na Slovenskem
začela dejavno
soočati
z
novimi idejnimi, socialnogospodarskimi
in političnimi
izzi-
vi sele po ponovni vzpostavitvi večstrankarskega življenja leta
1990,
v
okviru slovenske narodnodržavne politike pa po oblikovanju Re¬
publike Slovenije leta
1991.
248
Summary
In dealing with the issue of how to present individual politi¬
cal-ideology streams in the contemporary European and Slovene
political practice, one first has to look back at the times when the
basic questions of a modern world were historically determined.
They stem back to the 19th century, when after the French Revolu¬
tion in
1789
today s European main ideology options were formed
-
liberal, conservative and socialist. It was then when not only their
theoretical concepts were developed but they became the actual po¬
litical movements. Each option dealt with the essential questions of
the ideological, social, political, national and social-economic devel¬
opment which have accompanied the contemporary European his¬
tory. Thus, also liberalism developed a stance on the issues such
as an idea of freedom; the comprehension of a (national) state; the
attitude to a democratic thought and the social system; the nation
as a link between the individual, state and the society; the character
of imperialism; and the development of structures and a system of
economic life, i. e. on the main issue of all political thinking in the
19th century
-
the social issue.
In the mid-19th century, the European liberalism already ac¬
knowledged that a social issue should be incorporated in social and
political life. The liberal social-political thought of that time formed
a social-economic concept according to which an individual s (po¬
litical) existence should be founded on his economic and social
security, property and education. This was to be achieved by the
social and political establishment of a middle-class society in a rep¬
resentative parliamentary state.
Such a social program was promoted by social liberalism. The
social liberalism did not support abolition of capitalism, but is so¬
cial-reform correction. It was the most influential in England, where
its followers even came to power before the World War I. A number
of social reforms were carried out then (social, health, invalidity
summary
249
security, introduction of old-age pensions), which founded a mod¬
ern British welfare state. A similar situation was in Italy, whilst in
France and Germany a liberal social-reform doctrine was only re¬
stricted to the concept of social self-assistance and mostly refused
state interventionism. In France, it was partly successful in the pro¬
tection of workers interests, and in Germany it established eco¬
nomic support to a significant part of the middle class and enabled
the craftsmen middle class to adjust to the industrial development.
Because of different liberal economic and social concepts, the
social liberalism was not ideologically or socially creative in the
period between the two world wars. And even after the World War
II, it was not before the
1970s
and
1980s
that the European liberal
parties (in particular in Federal Republic of Germany and France)
again acknowledged the need for an active social policy and revived
the idea of social liberalism.
One of the historical founding fathers of the European social
liberalism was a German liberal politician and social reformist Franz
Hermann Schulze-Delitzsch
(1808-1883).
In the mid-19th century,
he devised a system of various forms of cooperatives (for purchase
of raw materials, credits and production) founded on mutual soli¬
darity and self-assistance of their members. The Schulze-Delitzsch
cooperative system, which refused state interventionism, repre¬
sented the »third way« between the capitalist and socialist economic
system. But the social-reform programme of his cooperative organi¬
sation was tied to the transitional economic stage on the path to
full industrialisation, and this is why an accelerated industrial de¬
velopment in the second half of the 19th century eventually ran him
down. Although Schulze-Delitzsch failed in his efforts to solve the
social problem, his work had a positive social-political effect. His
cooperatives provided economic support to a large part of the mid¬
dle class. He also influenced the
Wilhelmin
social liberalism at the
turn of the 19th century, which proposed as a response to social-po¬
litical challenges of the industrial society a principle of a moderate
state interventionism, cooperation of the liberal middle classes with
socially-democratically organised workers and the constitutional
integration of trade unions into the German society. The Schulze-
Delitzsch activities influenced also the Slovene liberalism. In the
first stage of its development
(1872-1895),
the Slovene cooperative
movement was founded on his economic and cooperative ideas; at
that time it was still under liberal leadership, but was later taken
over by the catholic movement. The adoption of the Schulze-Dei-
itzsch cooperative principles in the Slovene provinces in the period
1872-1895
meant one of the rare examples of a concurrent influ¬
ence of the European liberalism on the Slovene national-political
and economic development. And even though the Slovene coopera¬
tive movement under the liberals had no social-reform intentions,
250
it was under the influence of the Schultze s principles in the period
1872-1895
that the material grounds were established for a Slov¬
ene cultural-political emancipation and the foundations for the rise
of Slovene national economy and capital.
Slovene liberalism paid no particular attention to the social
issue even after
1894,
when a liberal National Party (later on a
National Progressive Party) was established in the central Slovene
province
-
Kranjska.
It was mainly interested in the preservation
of social and economic power of the emerging Slovene middle class
vis-à-vis
the working classes. Such views were preserved by lib¬
erals also after the break-up of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy;
however, even in the Slovene provinces
-
for a short period of time
though
-
the idea of social liberalism emerged in the programmes of
the newly founded all-Slovene liberal party
-
Yugoslav Democratic
Party (which was founded in June
1918
by merging of the National
Party for
Štajerska,
National Progressive Party for
Goriška
and Na¬
tional Progressive Party for
Kranjska).
In the period between the
two world wars, the social-economic views of the liberals in the first
Yugoslav state evolved in the direction of preserving the existing so¬
cial-economic relations, which should not be threatened by an im¬
proved position of economically weaker classes. In the
1930s,
they
advocated the principle of national solidarity , which supported a
disciplined or controlled democracy capable of solving social-eco¬
nomic problems in the interest of all. By the principle of cohesion
and solidarity of all classes, emphasising planned economy and rec¬
ognising private property as a basic precondition for a successful
economic development, the Slovene liberal social economic doctrine
was incorporated into the concept of a social-class and corporative
society in the years before the World War II.
In the period between the two world wars, Slovene liberalism
paid no attention to the national aspirations of the wider strata of
Slovene population. Unlike in the Austrian era when it advocated
Slovene national interests and national autonomy, the liberalism
under the
unitarist
and centralist Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and
Slovenes setup in
1918
(in
1929
renamed the Kingdom of Yugosla¬
via) decided for the Yugoslav
unitarist
national programme. Its main
national political position was that by the emergence of the Yugoslav
state there was time for an all-Yugoslav synthesis, through which
the Slovene national, language and cultural individuality would be
translated into a new, higher culturally and politically-economi-
cally stronger national formation of a large Yugoslav Nation. By
these views, the all-Yugoslav national amalgamation organised in
an only possible state-legal form
-
a centralist state, was to be the
final goal of the Slovene national-political development and its na¬
tional-emancipation efforts made by that time. Liberal policy was
the principal advocate of the Yugoslav unitarist-centralist national
summary
251
programme
in Slovenia in the period in-between the wars. It fierce¬
ly opposed all the Slovene efforts for a respect of Slovene national
uniqueness and the formation of autonomous Slovene unity within
the Yugoslav state. Unlike the European liberalism of that period,
e. g. the German liberalism during the Weimar Republic which still
preserved a decisive political power after the World War II, Slov¬
ene liberalism completely disregarded the national problem. Thus,
there was a great substantive difference between the German and
Slovene liberalism
-
despite the same views regarding the centralist
and nationally-unitarist state development. The German liberalism
endeavoured
-
within the historically formed national community
and by supporting the national unitarism and state centralism
-
to
organise anew the life of a nation and the state after the World War
I, by doing away with the hegemony of one, i. e. the Prussian part
of the state. On the other hand, the Slovene liberalism tried to wipe
out Slovene national individuality for the sake of an imaginary Yu¬
goslav nation and by doing so in fact supported the Great-Serbia s
hegemony. In turn, a great majority of Slovenes rejected it, as at
that time and also later only those political forces prospered that
fought for national emancipation and a sovereign and equal posi¬
tion of the Slovene nation within the Yugoslav state.
The European and Slovene liberalisms were, however, politi¬
cally and ideologically more coherent as regarded the critical con¬
sideration of the role and position of the
,
Church in the society.
The Slovene liberalism in particular was
-
in the absence of a well
though-out ideological, social and political programme
-
guided by
the awareness of its secondary position
vis-à-vis a
well-organised
and socially and politically more active catholic movement. Whilst
the catholic camp firmly controlled Slovene public life, liberalism
was only stronger in the economic area, thanks to being materially
backed by liberal banking capital. It also dominated culture, but here
the liberal intellectuals started an uncompromising cultural fight
with the Catholic Church and the catholic movement. Although the
liberal camp in principle never interfered with the church s affairs
but only tried to prevent by law any exploiting of the religion and
the Church for political purposes (in particular in schooling and in
introducing a universal, direct, equal and secret suffrage), the pres¬
sure of the political Catholicism, an incomplete political programme
concept, and its
exclusivist
liberal orientation prevented liberalism
to play a role of a sovereign democratic corrective in the Slovene
society. It merely focused on an imprudent rejection of everything
related to Catholicism. In the maelstrom of political fights which
ravaged Slovene public life ever after forming of modern political
parties in the late 19th century, such an orientation slowly exhaust¬
ed Slovene liberalism. And above all, its expansion was further held
back by its narrow ideological and social-economic interests and
after
1918
also by
a unitarist
national programme. Liberalism as a
252
factor
of Slovene social and political development thus weakened
only to end up politically exhausted and nationally and socially
eradicated at the end of the first Yugoslavia. Eventually, it split to a
number of different parties and groups, some of them larger some
smaller, all joined by a common provenience but divided by differing
positions on the essential questions of that time.
The mentioned characteristics of Slovene liberalism were clear¬
ly manifested in the ideological and political views of the leading
liberal politicians as well as in their attitude to the most promi¬
nent representatives of the Catholic Church. Thus, when a National
Party for
Kranjska
was established, the liberal camp used every op¬
portunity to attack the Ljubljana bishop Anton
Bonaventura
Jeglič
(1850-1937),
who resided in Ljubljana from
1898-1930.
Bishop
Jeglič
had to endure the fiercest attacks of the liberal camp in the
years
1898-1899,
when he decided to build a Catholic boarding
school and the adjacent (first) Slovene grammar school; in
1909,
when publishing a brochure To Bridegrooms and Brides contain¬
ing moral instructions for marital sex life; and in
1925,
when being
accused by liberals of a personal misuse of the Church and religion
for political purposes. Liberals also criticised the founding father
of Slovene Christian social movement and cooperative movement,
and one of the most prominent politicians of the catholic Slovene
People s Party: Janez Evangelist
Krek
(1865-1917).
At first, they
were not hostile to him. But his sharp anti-liberal statements in the
years
1911-1912
made them try to politically and morally slander
him in
1913
by bringing to public an alleged love affair with a Vien¬
nese
Kamila
Theimer. Later, Slovene liberalists regretted the The-
imer affair and stopped denouncing him, and also
Krek
eased his
stance on liberalism. Ivan
Tavčar
(1851-1923),
one of the leaders
of Slovene classical liberalism, was the fiercest advocate of a sharp
liberal policy of cultural fight. Apart from his extremely anti-catho¬
lic views, which were after the World War I replaced by consistent
anti-communism, he advocated an
exclusivist
middle-class social
and political position, denying any social-economic emancipation
to other social classes, i. e. farmers and workers. As from
1918,
he
was also a fierce advocate of Yugoslav national
unitarismi
and state
centralism.
The second leader of the Slovene classical liberalism, Ivan
Hribar
(1851-1941),
differed from
Tavčar.
He as well strongly op¬
posed the intervention of the Church and religion in the political
life, but at the same time, he also opposed the liberalism based on
cultural fight and the anti-church campaign . He was not attracted
by a traditional conflict between political Catholicism and liberal¬
ism. Hribar had a number of good friends also on the catholic side,
and disagreed politically and personally only with a few individuals
from that camp. He was one of the personalities who in the dispute
between Catholicism and liberalism on the Slovene grounds earned
SUMMARY
253
a prominent and well-respected position on both sides. Hribar also
had a clear stance on fascism and communism. He believed that the
end of the former will be extremely sad . Regarding the latter he
warned that it was extremely unnatural and impossible to unify all
the people -on the grounds of the same needs. Therefore, he did not
believe in a world communist revolution, as he was convinced that
that people of different nationalities, religions, education and moral
criteria could not be lined up in one army . With these thoughts
which he noted down shortly before his death, he concluded his
study of his times and of the essential historical issues related to
it. He took his own life in protest against the Italian occupation of
Slovenia in
1941.
The issue of a new European and world war occupied Slovene
liberal camp
-
like all other political forces at home and abroad
-
from
its very break out on
1
September
1939.
They made a thorough re¬
view of the war, which from September
1939
by then already changed
a large part of Europe. They warned against its totalitarian character
and the ideological confrontation of democratic, fascist and commu¬
nist world views. They also did not overlook that upon concluding of
the German-Soviet non-aggression treaty in August
1939
the ideo¬
logical principle was subordinated to the state interests of both sig¬
natories. They attributed the ideological principle a decisive role in
the formation of the post-war world, forecasting great changes in the
organisation of human society. They were to stem from the military,
political and economic conflict between the Anglo-Saxon democracy,
which was to be internally transformed, and the systems of totali¬
tarian dictatorships. Of the latter, they particularly exposed Germa¬
ny, Italy and Japan. The division of the »spheres of interest« among
themselves upon the conclusion of the Triple Pact in September
1940
was already understood as a plan for the future world system. They
however, left open the question of the post-war world system and of
the winner of war. They correctly foresaw that a new era would start
and the world politics would be led within the framework of great
blocks of states of continental dimensions. As for the position of the
Yugoslav state, they emphasised their national-defence orientation
and determination to defend their home country.
After Slovenia had been occupied and the occupying authority
established in April
1941,
a new era begun for Slovene liberalism.
Despite the excellent studies of the European and world military-
political development after
1939
and strong patriotism, the ideo¬
logical-political creativeness of liberals could not be efficiently ex¬
pressed during the World War II. A new historical epoch put Slovene
liberalism to severe tests, and its position even worsened after the
revolutionary takeover of power in
1945,
ousting it from the Slovene
society for many decades. The liberal political option only started
to actively face new ideas and social-economic and political chal¬
lenges after the
reestablishment
of a multi-party life in
1990,
and it
254
became engaged in Slovene national politics after the formation of
the Republic of Slovenia in
1991.
SUMMARY
5
|
| adam_txt |
Pregled vsebine
PREDGOVOR
9
LIBERALIZEM
IN
SOCIÁLNO VPRAŠANJE
15
Sćhulze-Delitzscheva zadružnogospodarska
doktrìna
kot
liberalni odgovor na
sociálno
vprašanje
v
19.
stoletju
17
Pnlagoditev
Schulze—
Delitzschevih zadnižnogospodarskih
zamisli na
Slovenskem v letih
1872-1895 35
Pogled na
pojav
socialnega liberalizma
v
evropski
in
slovenski politični misli
in
praksi
43
Sociálni
značaj slovenskega liberalizma
v
letih
1894-1918 49
LIBERALIZEM,'
KATOLICIZEM
IN KOMUNIZEM 61
Duhovni
in
idejnopolitični oris Ivana Hribarja
63
Pogledi slovenskega liberalizma na poslanstvo
in delo knezoškofa
Antona Bonaventure Jegliča
84
Janez Evangelist
Krek
in
slovenski
liberalizem
110
Idejni, družbeni
in narodnopolitični
nazori
Ivana Tavčarjapo ustanovitvi Jugoslovanske
demokratske stranke leta
1918 124
MED NARODOM, POLITIKO
IN
DRŽAVO
145
Polemika Ušeničnik-Rostohar
o verí,
narodnosti
in
etiki
v
letih
1912-1913 147
Slovenski
liberalei
in
Jugoslavija.
Nacionálna
politika liberalnega tabora
v
letih
1918-1929 159
Nemški
liberalizem
in
vprašanje naroda
ter
državne
ureditve. Primerjava
z
Jugoslovansko demokratsko
stranko/Samostojno demokratsko stranko
v
dvajsetih letih
171
Jugoslovanska nacionalna stranka
in
vprašanje
slovenske banovine
1939-1941 180
OB
PRELOMNICAH
V
STRANKARSKEM
IN
MEDNARODNOPOLITIČNEM RAZVOJU
191
Ustanovitev Jugoslovanske demokratske stranke
leta
1918 193
Jugoslovanska nacionalna stranka
in
vojna
1939-1941 223
POVZETEK
243
SUMMARY
249
VIRI IN
LITERATURA
257
OSEBNO KAZALO
275
Povzetek
V
odgovoru na vprašanje, kako predstaviti posamezne idejno-
politične tokove
v
novejši evropski
in
slovenski politični praksi, je
najprej potrebno opozoriti na čas,
v
katerem
so
bila zgodovinsko
opredeljena temeljna vprašanja modernega sveta. Opredelitev se ve¬
že na
19.
stoletje,
v
katerem
so
se po prelomni francoski revoluciji
leta
1789
izoblikovale še
danes uveljavljene
osnovne evropske idej¬
ne
izbire
-
liberalna, konservativna
in
socialistična
—,
ki
so
se pričele
razvijati tako
kot teoretični
koncepti
kot tudi kot dejanska
politič¬
na gibanja. Pri tem
so v
okviru posameznih osnovnih idejnih izbir
obravnavali
vsa bistvena
vprašanja idejnega, družbenega, politične-
ga, nacionalnega
in
socialnogospodarskega razvoja, ki spremljajo
novejšo evropsko zgodovino. Tako se je tudi
liberalizem opredelil
glede teh vprašanj. Opredelil se je do ideje
svobodě,
razumevanja
(nacionalne) države, odnosa do demokratične misli
in družbene
ure-
ditve, do naroda
kot veznega člena med
posameznikom, državo
in
družbo, do značaja imperializma
in
do razvoja
struktur
in ureditve
gospodarskega življenja, torej do poglavitnega predmeta vseh poli¬
tičnih razmišljanj
v
19.
stoletju
-
socialnega vprašanja.
Evropski
liberalizem
je že sredi
19.
stoletja
priznával,
da pred¬
stavlja sestavni
del
družbenega
in
političnega življenja tudi
sociálni
problem. Liberalna socialnopolitična misel je tedaj oblikovala druž-
benogospodarski koncept, katerega osrednji poudarek je
bü,
da je
posameznikovo (politično) eksistenco potrebno utemeljiti
v
njegovi
gospodarski
in sociálni
varnosti, lastnini
in
izobrazbi. To
naj bi
ure-
sničila
sociálna
in
politična graditev srednjeslojne meščanske druž¬
be
v
predstavniški parlamentarni državi.
Nosilec tako zamišljenega družbenega programa je
bil sociál¬
ni
liberalizem.
Sociálni
liberalizem
ni podpíral odprave
kapitalizma,
рас
pa njegovo družbenoreformno korekcijo. Največji vpliv je imel
v
Angliji, kjer je pred prvo svetovno vojno
přišel tudi
na oblast. Ta-
krat je bila izvedena vrsta socialnih
reform
(sociálno,
zdravstveno,
ρονζετεκ
243
invalidsko varstvo, uvedba starostnih pokojnin), ki
so
utemeljile
moderno britansko državo blaginje. Podobno je bilo tuđi
v
Italiji,
medtem
ko
se je
v
Franciji
in
na Nemškem liberalna socialnore-
formna doktrina omejevala na koncept družbene samopomoči
in je
v
glavnem odklanjala državni intervencionizem.
V
Franciji je bila
deloma uspešna glede varstva delavskih
interesov, v
Nemčiji pa je
utemeljila gospodarsko
podporo
pomembnemu
delu
srednjega sta¬
nu
ter
omogočila obrtniškemu srednjemu sloju prilagoditev na in¬
dustrijski razvoj.
Med obema svetovnima vojnama zaradi drugačnih liberalnih
gospodarskosocialnih
konceptov sociálni
liberalizem
idejno
in druž-
beno ni
bü
ustvarjalen. Po drugi svetovni pa
so v sedemdesetih
in
osemdesetih letih
20.
stoletja
v
evropskih liberalnih strankah (naj-
bolj očitno
v
Zvezni
republiki
Nemčiji
ter
v
Franciji
in
Italiji)
uvideli
potrebo po aktivni
sociálni politiki
in obudili
idejo socialnega libe¬
ralizma.
Eden od zgodovinskih utemeljiteljev evropskega socialnega li¬
beralizma je
bil nemški
liberalni
politik in sociálni
reformator
Franz
Hermann
Schulze-Delitzsch
(1808-1883).
Sredi
19.
stoletja
je za-
snoval
sistem
konzumnih, surovinsko-nabavnih,
kreditnih
in
pro¬
duktivnih zadrug, oblikovanih na osnovi
vzájemné
solidarne samo¬
pomoči njihovih članov. Schulze-Delitzschev zadružni sistem, ki je
odklanjal državni intervencionizem, je predstavljal "tretjo
poť' med
kapitalistično
in
socialistično organiziranim gospodarskim nači¬
nom.
Ker
pa je
bil socialnoreformni
program njegove zadružne or¬
ganizacije vezan na prehodni gospodarski stadij na
poti
v
poíno in-
dustrializacijo, ga je prehitel stopnjevani industrijski razvoj
v
drugi
polovici
19.
stoletja. Schulze-Delitzsch
v
svojih prizadevanjih, da bi
rešil sociálni
problem ni
bil uspešen,
kljub temu
paje
imelo njegovo
delo
pozitiven socialnopolitičen účinek.
Njegove zadruge
so
namreč
predstavljale gospodarsko oporo pomembnega
dela
srednjega sta¬
nu.
S
svojim delovanjem je vplival tuđi na
t. i. wilhelminski sociálni
liberalizem
na
prelomu
iz
19.
v
20.
stoletje,
kije
nasproti
socialno-
političnim izzivom industrijske družbe zagovarjal načelo umirjenega
državnega intervencionizma, sodelovanje liberalnega meščanstva
s
socialnodemokratsko organiziranim delavstvom
in ustavnopolitič-
no integracijo sindikatov
v
nemško družbo. Schulze-Delitzschevo
delovanje je vplivalo tuđi na slovenski
liberalizem. Na
njegove za-
družnogospodarske zamisli se je namreč
v prvém
obdobju svojega
razvoja
(1872-1895)
opíralo
slovensko zadružno gibanje,
kije
bilo
v
tistem času pod liberalnim vodstvom;
nato
je vođenje slovenskega
zadražništva prevzelo katoliško gibanje. Prilagoditev Schulze-Deli-
tzschevih zadružnih
načel na Slovenskem v
letih
1872-1895
je po-
menila
enega od
redkih sočasnih vplivov evropskega liberalizma na
slovenski narodnopolitični
in
gospodarski razvoj. Kljub temu, da
slovensko zadružno gibanje pod liberalnim vodstvom ni imelo soci-
alnoreformne vsebine,
so
namreč bili
v
letih
1872-1895
pod vplivom
244
Schultzejevih načel
in
zamisli ustvarjeni gmotni pogoji za slovensko
kulturnopolitično emancipacijo
in
postavljeni temelji za rast sloven-
skega narodnega gospodarstva
in
kapitala.
Slovenski
liberalizem
ni
posvětil
posebne pozornosti
sociálne¬
mu
vprašanju tuđi po letu
1894,
koje bila
v
osrednji slovenski deže-
li
-
na Kranjskem
-
ustanovljena liberalna Narodna stranka (kasne-
je Narodno napredna stranka). Zanimala gaje predvsem ohranitev
družbene
in
gospodarske moči mlađega slovenskega meščanstva
nasproti delavnim
stanovom
slovenskega naroda.
Take
poglede
so
liberalei
ohranili tuđi po zlomu Avstro-Ogrske monarhije, čeprav se
je ob
ustanovitvi enotne vseslovenske liberalne stranke
-
Jugoslo-
vanske demokratske stranke (vanjo
so se
junija
1918
združile Na¬
rodna stranka za Štajersko, Narodno napredna stranka za Goriško
in
Narodno napredna stranka za Kranjsko)
-
tuđi na
Slovenskem za
kratek
čas programsko uveljavila ideja socialnega liberalizma. Soci-
alnogospodarski pogledi liberalcev
so
se
v
prvi jugoslovanski državi
oziroma
v
času med svetovnima vojnama razvijali
v
smeri
ohranja-
nja obstoječih družbenogospodarskih razmerij, ki
naj
bi
jih
izboljša-
nje položaja gospodarsko šibkih slojev ne ogrozilo.
V
tridesetih letih
pa
so
liberalei
zagovarjali načelo t. i. nacionalnega solidarizma, ki
se je zavzemal za disciplinirano ali nadzorovano demokracijo, ki bo
zmožná
resiti socialnogospodarske problema
v
interesu
celóte.
Na¬
čelo skladnosti
in
solidarnosti vseh slojev, poudarjanje dirigiranega
gospodarstva
in
priznavanje zasebne lastnine
kot temeljnega
pogoja
za uspešen nadaljnji gospodarski razvoj
so
slovensko liberalno soci-
alnogospodarsko doktrino
v
letih pred drugo svetovno vojno
vpeli v
koncept stanovske oziroma korporativne države.
V
času med svetovnima vojnama slovenski
liberalizem tudi
ni
upošteval nacionalnih teženj širokih
piasti
slovenskega ljudstva.
V
nasprotju
z avstrijsko
dobo,
ko se
je zavzemal za slovenske narodne
interese
in
narodno avtonomijo, seje
v
unitaristični
in
centralistični
Kraljevini Srbov, Hrvatov
in Slovencev,
oblikovani leta
1918
(leta
1929
sojo preimenovali
v
Kraljevino Jugoslavijo),
postavil na
stran
jugoslovanskega unitarističnega narodnega programa. Njegovo na-
rodnopolitično izhodišče je namreč bilo, da je
z
nastankom jugoslo-
vanske države nastopil čas vsejugoslovanske sinteze,
v kateri
se bo
dotedanja slovenska narodna
in
jezikovno-kulturna individualnost
převedla v
novo, višjo
ter
civilizacijsko, kulturno
in politično-gospo-
darsko močnejšo nacionalno formacijo velikega Jugoslovanskega
Naroda. Po tem gledanju
naj bi
predstavljala vsejugoslovansko na¬
rodno zlitje
in
njemu državnopravno edino ustrezna centralistično
urejena država končni smisel vsega dotedanjega slovenskega naro-
dnopolitičnega razvoja
in narodnoemancipacijskega
napora. Liberal¬
na politika je bila vodilni dejavnik,
kije na
Slovenskem v
času med
svetovnima vojnama zagovarjal jugoslovanski unitarnocentralis tični
nacionalni program. Odločno je pobijala tedanja slovenska prizade-
vanja po spoštovanju slovenske narodne samobitnosti
in oblikova-
POVZ6TEK
245
nju
avtonomne
slovenske
enote
v
jugoslovanski državi.
V
primerjavi
z
evropskim liberalizmom tistega časa, konkretno
z nemškim v času
Weimarske
republike, kjer je
liberalizem
po koncu prve svetovne
vojne še
ostal odločujoč
politični dejavnik, je slovenski
liberalizem
obšel nacionalni problem. Nemški
in
slovenski
liberalizem,
ki
sta se
sicer ujemala
v
podpiranju
centralističnega
in
narodnounitaristič-
nega
državnega razvoja, je ločila globoka vsebinska razlika. Medtem
ko
si je nemški
v
okviru zgodovinsko izoblikovane narodne skupno-
sti
s
podpiranjem narodnega unitarizma
in
državnega centralizma
prizadeval na novo preurediti nacionalno
in
državno življenje po prvi
svetovni vojni, kjer ne bi bilo prostora za hegemonijo
enega,
to je
pruskega
dela
države, je slovenski
liberalizem
skúšal izničiti
sloven¬
sko narodno individualnost
v
korist namišljenega jugoslovanskega
naroda, obenem pa je
podpíral
velikosrbski
hegemonizem.
S
tem se
je onemogočil pri veliki većini Slovencev,
saj
so
imele
v slovenském
narodu
tedaj
in kasneje
veljavo le
tiste
politične sile,
ki
so se
boje-
vale
za
narodno emancipacijo
ter
suveren
in
enakopraven
položaj
slovenskega naroda
v
jugoslovanski državi.
Usklajenost med evropskim
in
slovenskim liberalizmom pa se
je na političnem
in
idejnem področju pokazala
v kritičnem
vredno-
tenju vloge
in
položaja Cerkve
v
družbi. Pri tem je slovenski
liberali¬
zem
v
pomanjkanju domišljenega idejnega, socialnega
in
političnega
programa vodila zavest
о
njegovem podrejenem položaju nasproti
dobro organiziranemu
ter
sociálno
in
politično
dejavnejšemu kato-
liškemu gibanju
in s
tem sekundarni vlogi
v
slovenski družbi. Kato-
liški tabor je trdno obvladoval slovensko javno življenje, medtem
ko
je
bü
liberalizem
močnejši
le na
gospodarskem področju,
saj mu
je
materiálno zaslombo
zagotavljal liberalni bančni kapital. Obvlado¬
val je tuđi področje kulture,
toda
tu je liberalna inteligenca
zašla v
nepomirljiv kultumobojni odnos do Katoliške cerkve
in
katoliškega
gibanja.
Liberalnemu
taboru, ki načeloma ni posegal
v verska
in
cerkvena vprašanja, a si je prizadeval
z
zakonom preprečiti zlora-
bljanje
vere in
Cerkve
v
politične namene (zlasti
v
šolstvu
in, kar
je bilo značilno
v
avstrijski dobi, pri uvedbi splošne, neposredne,
enake
in
tajne volilne pravice),
sta tako
pritisk političnega katoliciz¬
ma
ter
neizgrajeni programsko politični koncept
in
ekskluzivistična
svobodomislena naravnanost, onemogočila, da bi
v
slovenski druž¬
bi
in politiki
prevzel vlogo suverenega demokratičnega korektiva.
Obsodil se je na nerazsodno zavračanje
vsega, kar
je imelo katoli-
ški predznak.
V
vihri političnih bojev, ki
so
zavladali
v slovenském
javnem
življenju po oblikovanju modernih političnih strank
konec
19.
stoletja, je takšna naravnanost
nato
trajno izčrpavala slovenski
liberalizem,
ki
so
ga omejevali tuđi ozki ideološki
in socialnogospo-
darski interesi, po letu
1918
pa še unitaristični nacionalni program.
Liberalizem
je
vedno
bolj bledel
kot
dejavnik slovenskega družbene-
ga
in
političnega razvoja.
Ob
koncu prve Jugoslavije se je politično
izčrpan
ter
narodno
in
sociálno izkoreninjen
razcepil na množico
246
različnih strank
in
skupin,
večjih
in
manjših,
ki
so imele
sicer
sku¬
pno
provenienco,
ločila
pa so
jih različna stališča do vseh bistvenih
vprašanj
tedanje dobe.
Omenjene značilnosti
slovenskega liberalizma
so
se nazorno
pokazale
v
idejnih
in
političnih pogledih vodilnih liberalnih
politikov
oziroma v
njegovem odnosu do najvidnejših predstavnikov Katoliške
cerkve na
Slovenskem.
Tako je
v času
po ustanovitvi Narodne stran¬
ke za Kranjsko liberalni tabor izkoristil vsako priložnost za napad
na ljubljanskega škofa Antona Bonaventuro Jegliča
(1850-1937),
kije
v
Ljubljani
stoloval v letih
1898-1930.
Škof Jeglič
je s
strani
liberalnega tabora doživel najhujše napade
v
letih
1898-1899,
ko
se je odločil zgraditi katoliški konvikt
z lastno
(prvo) slovensko gi¬
mnazijo, leta
1909,
ko
je
objavil
brošuro Ženinom
in nevestám,
ki
je vsebovala
moralna napotila za zakonsko spolno življenje,
in leta
1925,
ko
so
mu
liberalei
v
okviru njegovih škofovskih dejavnosti
pripisovali
osebno zlorabljanje Cerkve
in
vere
v
politične namene.
Kritični
so bili
tuđi do utemeljitelja slovenskega krščanskosocial-
nega gibanja
in
zadružništva
ter enega
najpomembenjših
politikov
katoliške Slovenske ljudske stranke, Janeza Evangelista Kreka
(1865-1917).
Do Kreka najprej nišo bili bojno razpoloženi. Zaradi
njegovih oštrih protiliberalnih izjav
v
letih
1911-1912
pa
so ga
leta
1913
skúšali
politično
in
moralno izničiti
z javnimi trditvami o do-
mnevni ljubezenski zvezi
z dunajčanko
Kamilo Theimer. Slovenski
liberalizem
je kasneje t. i. afero Theimer
obžaloval
in
Kreka ni več
napadal,
enako pa tuđi
Krek
svojega odnosa do liberalizma ni več
zaostroval.
Najvidnejši nosilec
ostre
liberalne kulturnobojne politi¬
ke je
bil eden od prvákov
slovenskega klasičnega liberalizma Ivan
Tavčar
(1851-1923).
Poleg izrazitega protikatoliškega stališča, ki ga
je po prvi svetovni vojni nadomestil dosledni protikomunizem, je bi¬
lo zanj značilno tuđi ekskluzivno meščansko družbeno
in
politično
stališče, ki ni dopuščalo socialnogospodarske emancipacije drugih
družbenih slojev, konkretno kmetov
in
delavcev. Od leta
1918
je
bü
tuđi izrazit zagovornik jugoslovanskega nacionalnega unitarizma
in
državnega centralizma.
Od Tavčarja se je razlikoval drugi prvak slovenskega klasič¬
nega liberalizma, Ivan Hribar
(1851-1941).
Tuđi on je odločno na-
sprotoval pritegovanju Cerkve
in
vere
v
politično življenje,
vendar
je
obenem nasprotoval tuđi kulturnobojnemu liberalizmu
in t.
i. farški
gonji. Tradicionalni spopad med političnim katolicizmom
in
libera¬
lizmom ga ni privlačil. Hribar je imel na katoliški strani vrsto do¬
brih prijateljev, medtem koje
bü
politično ali osebno nenaklonjen
le
malokateremu posamezniku iz katoliških vrst.
Bü
je eden od tistih,
ki
so
si
v
boju med katolicizmom
in
liberalizmom na
Slovenskem
-
upoštevaje obe
strani
-
zaslužili dostojanstveno
mesto.
Hribar se
je opredelil tuđi do fašizma
in
komunizma.
O prvém
je
menü,
da
bo njegov
konec
"silno žalosten". Glede komunizma
paje opozarjal,
da je protinaravno
in
nemogoče poenotiti vse ljudi
v
smislu enakih
povzevek
247
potřeb. Zato
ni verjel
v svetovno komunistično revolucijo, saj je bil
prepričan, da ni mogoče ljudi raznih narodnosti, ločenih po religi-
jah, izobrazbi
in
moralnih kriterijih, spraviti
v sklenjeno
vojno vrsto.
S
temi mislimi, zapisanimi malo pred smrtjo, je leta
1941
sklenil
vrednotenje svojega časa
in bistvenih
zgodovinskih vprašanj, po¬
vezanih
z
njim. Življenje je končal sam,
v
protest proti italijanski
okupaciji Slovenije aprila
1941.
Vprašanje nove evropske
in
svetovne vojne je slovenski
liberali¬
zem
-
tako
kot
tuđi druge politične sile doma
in
v tujini
-
zaposlova-
lo
že
od njenega začetka
1.
septembra
1939.
Liberalei
so
vojno,
kije
od septembra
1939
spremenila velik
del
dotedanje Evrope, celovito
ocenili.
Opozarjali
so
na njen totalitarni značaj
in
na ideološko so-
očenje demokratičnega, fašističnega
in komunističnega
svetovnega
nazora
v
njej.
Ob
tem nišo spregledali, daje bilo
ob sklenitvi
nem-
ško-sovjetskega pakta
о
nenapadanju avgusta
1939
ideološko na¬
čelo podrejeno velikodržavnim interesom
obeh podpisnic.
Temu na¬
čelu
so pripisovali odločilno vlogo
pri oblikovanju povojnega sveta,
saj so napovedali
velike spremembe
v
organizaciji človeške družbe.
Izšle
naj bi
iz vojaškega, političnega
in
gospodarskega spopada med
anglosasko
demokracijo, ki bi se morala notranje prenoviti,
in
siste¬
mi totalitarnih
diktatur.
Med njimi
so posebej
opozorili na Nemčijo,
Italijo
in
Japonsko.
Razdelitev
t.
i. življenjskih prostorov med njimi
ob
sklenitvi trojnega pakta, septembra
1940, so
že razumeli kot
na¬
crt za bodočo ureditev sveta. Odgovor na vprašanje, kako bo svet
po vojni urejen
in
kdo
bo zmagał
v
njej,
pa
so puščali odprt.
Točno
pa
so napovedali,
da
bo nastopila
nova
doba,
ko se
bo
prihodnja
svetovna politika vodila v
okviru velikih državnih
blokov
kontinen¬
talnih
obsegov.
Ob
tem
so
glede položaja jugoslovanske države po-
udarjali svojo narodnoobrambno
usmeritev in odločenost
da,
če
bo
potrebno,
z všemi
močmi branijo domovino.
Po vojaški zasedbi Slovenije
in vzpostavitvi
okupatorske oblasti
aprila
1941,
je nastopilo novo obdobje
v
razvoju slovenskega libe¬
ralizma. Liberalna idejnopolitična tvornost se med drugo svetovno
vojno na
Slovenskem
kljub odličnim poglobitvam
v
evropski
in sve-
tovni vojaškopolitični razvoj po letu
1939 in
svojemu patriotizmu,
ni mogla učinkovito izraziti. Nov zgodovinski čas je
slovenskému
liberalizmu namenil trde preizkušnje, še trse pa
so z
njim
(in nje-
govimi predstavniki) ravnali po revolucionarnem prevzemu oblasti
leta
1945,
ko
je
bü
za dolga desetletja
izrinjen iz slovenske družbe.
Liberalna politična
izbiră
se je
nato na Slovenskem
začela dejavno
soočati
z
novimi idejnimi, socialnogospodarskimi
in političnimi
izzi-
vi sele po ponovni vzpostavitvi večstrankarskega življenja leta
1990,
v
okviru slovenske narodnodržavne politike pa po oblikovanju Re¬
publike Slovenije leta
1991.
248
Summary
In dealing with the issue of how to present individual politi¬
cal-ideology streams in the contemporary European and Slovene
political practice, one first has to look back at the times when the
basic questions of a modern world were historically determined.
They stem back to the 19th century, when after the French Revolu¬
tion in
1789
today's European main ideology options were formed
-
liberal, conservative and socialist. It was then when not only their
theoretical concepts were developed but they became the actual po¬
litical movements. Each option dealt with the essential questions of
the ideological, social, political, national and social-economic devel¬
opment which have accompanied the contemporary European his¬
tory. Thus, also liberalism developed a stance on the issues such
as an idea of freedom; the comprehension of a (national) state; the
attitude to a democratic thought and the social system; the nation
as a link between the individual, state and the society; the character
of imperialism; and the development of structures and a system of
economic life, i. e. on the main issue of all political thinking in the
19th century
-
the social issue.
In the mid-19th century, the European liberalism already ac¬
knowledged that a social issue should be incorporated in social and
political life. The liberal social-political thought of that time formed
a social-economic concept according to which an individual's (po¬
litical) existence should be founded on his economic and social
security, property and education. This was to be achieved by the
social and political establishment of a middle-class society in a rep¬
resentative parliamentary state.
Such a social program was promoted by social liberalism. The
social liberalism did not support abolition of capitalism, but is so¬
cial-reform correction. It was the most influential in England, where
its followers even came to power before the World War I. A number
of social reforms were carried out then (social, health, invalidity
summary
249
security, introduction of old-age pensions), which founded a mod¬
ern British welfare state. A similar situation was in Italy, whilst in
France and Germany a liberal social-reform doctrine was only re¬
stricted to the concept of social self-assistance and mostly refused
state interventionism. In France, it was partly successful in the pro¬
tection of workers' interests, and in Germany it established eco¬
nomic support to a significant part of the middle class and enabled
the craftsmen middle class to adjust to the industrial development.
Because of different liberal economic and social concepts, the
social liberalism was not ideologically or socially "creative" in the
period between the two world wars. And even after the World War
II, it was not before the
1970s
and
1980s
that the European liberal
parties (in particular in Federal Republic of Germany and France)
again acknowledged the need for an active social policy and revived
the idea of social liberalism.
One of the historical founding fathers of the European social
liberalism was a German liberal politician and social reformist Franz
Hermann Schulze-Delitzsch
(1808-1883).
In the mid-19th century,
he devised a system of various forms of cooperatives (for purchase
of raw materials, credits and production) founded on mutual soli¬
darity and self-assistance of their members. The Schulze-Delitzsch
cooperative system, which refused state interventionism, repre¬
sented the »third way« between the capitalist and socialist economic
system. But the social-reform programme of his cooperative organi¬
sation was tied to the transitional economic stage on the path to
full industrialisation, and this is why an accelerated industrial de¬
velopment in the second half of the 19th century eventually ran him
down. Although Schulze-Delitzsch failed in his efforts to solve the
social problem, his work had a positive social-political effect. His
cooperatives provided economic support to a large part of the mid¬
dle class. He also influenced the
"Wilhelmin
social liberalism" at the
turn of the 19th century, which proposed as a response to social-po¬
litical challenges of the industrial society a principle of a moderate
state interventionism, cooperation of the liberal middle classes with
socially-democratically organised workers and the constitutional
integration of trade unions into the German society. The Schulze-
Delitzsch activities influenced also the Slovene liberalism. In the
first stage of its development
(1872-1895),
the Slovene cooperative
movement was founded on his economic and cooperative ideas; at
that time it was still under liberal leadership, but was later taken
over by the catholic movement. The adoption of the Schulze-Dei-
itzsch cooperative principles in the Slovene provinces in the period
1872-1895
meant one of the rare examples of a concurrent influ¬
ence of the European liberalism on the Slovene national-political
and economic development. And even though the Slovene coopera¬
tive movement under the liberals had no social-reform intentions,
250
it was under the influence of the Schultze's principles in the period
1872-1895
that the material grounds were established for a Slov¬
ene cultural-political emancipation and the foundations for the rise
of Slovene national economy and capital.
Slovene liberalism paid no particular attention to the social
issue even after
1894,
when a liberal National Party (later on a
National Progressive Party) was established in the central Slovene
province
-
Kranjska.
It was mainly interested in the preservation
of social and economic power of the emerging Slovene middle class
vis-à-vis
the working classes. Such views were preserved by lib¬
erals also after the break-up of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy;
however, even in the Slovene provinces
-
for a short period of time
though
-
the idea of social liberalism emerged in the programmes of
the newly founded all-Slovene liberal party
-
Yugoslav Democratic
Party (which was founded in June
1918
by merging of the National
Party for
Štajerska,
National Progressive Party for
Goriška
and Na¬
tional Progressive Party for
Kranjska).
In the period between the
two world wars, the social-economic views of the liberals in the first
Yugoslav state evolved in the direction of preserving the existing so¬
cial-economic relations, which should not be threatened by an im¬
proved position of economically weaker classes. In the
1930s,
they
advocated the principle of "national solidarity", which supported a
disciplined or controlled democracy capable of solving social-eco¬
nomic problems in the interest of all. By the principle of cohesion
and solidarity of all classes, emphasising planned economy and rec¬
ognising private property as a basic precondition for a successful
economic development, the Slovene liberal social economic doctrine
was incorporated into the concept of a social-class and corporative
society in the years before the World War II.
In the period between the two world wars, Slovene liberalism
paid no attention to the national aspirations of the wider strata of
Slovene population. Unlike in the Austrian era when it advocated
Slovene national interests and national autonomy, the liberalism
under the
unitarist
and centralist Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and
Slovenes setup in
1918
(in
1929
renamed the Kingdom of Yugosla¬
via) decided for the Yugoslav
unitarist
national programme. Its main
national political position was that by the emergence of the Yugoslav
state there was time for an all-Yugoslav synthesis, through which
the Slovene national, language and cultural individuality would be
translated into a new, higher culturally and politically-economi-
cally stronger national formation of a large Yugoslav Nation. By
these views, the all-Yugoslav national amalgamation organised in
an only possible state-legal form
-
a centralist state, was to be the
final goal of the Slovene national-political development and its na¬
tional-emancipation efforts made by that time. Liberal policy was
the principal advocate of the Yugoslav unitarist-centralist national
summary
251
programme
in Slovenia in the period in-between the wars. It fierce¬
ly opposed all the Slovene efforts for a respect of Slovene national
uniqueness and the formation of autonomous Slovene unity within
the Yugoslav state. Unlike the European liberalism of that period,
e. g. the German liberalism during the Weimar Republic which still
preserved a decisive political power after the World War II, Slov¬
ene liberalism completely disregarded the national problem. Thus,
there was a great substantive difference between the German and
Slovene liberalism
-
despite the same views regarding the centralist
and nationally-unitarist state development. The German liberalism
endeavoured
-
within the historically formed national community
and by supporting the national unitarism and state centralism
-
to
organise anew the life of a nation and the state after the World War
I, by doing away with the hegemony of one, i. e. the Prussian part
of the state. On the other hand, the Slovene liberalism tried to wipe
out Slovene national individuality for the sake of an imaginary Yu¬
goslav nation and by doing so in fact supported the Great-Serbia's
hegemony. In turn, a great majority of Slovenes rejected it, as at
that time and also later only those political forces prospered that
fought for national emancipation and a sovereign and equal posi¬
tion of the Slovene nation within the Yugoslav state.
The European and Slovene liberalisms were, however, politi¬
cally and ideologically more coherent as regarded the critical con¬
sideration of the role and position of the
,
Church in the society.
The Slovene liberalism in particular was
-
in the absence of a well
though-out ideological, social and political programme
-
guided by
the awareness of its secondary position
vis-à-vis a
well-organised
and socially and politically more active catholic movement. Whilst
the catholic camp firmly controlled Slovene public life, liberalism
was only stronger in the economic area, thanks to being materially
backed by liberal banking capital. It also dominated culture, but here
the liberal intellectuals started an uncompromising cultural fight
with the Catholic Church and the catholic movement. Although the
liberal camp in principle never interfered with the church's affairs
but only tried to prevent by law any exploiting of the religion and
the Church for political purposes (in particular in schooling and in
introducing a universal, direct, equal and secret suffrage), the pres¬
sure of the political Catholicism, an incomplete political programme
concept, and its
exclusivist
liberal orientation prevented liberalism
to play a role of a sovereign democratic corrective in the Slovene
society. It merely focused on an imprudent rejection of everything
related to Catholicism. In the maelstrom of political fights which
ravaged Slovene public life ever after forming of modern political
parties in the late 19th century, such an orientation slowly exhaust¬
ed Slovene liberalism. And above all, its expansion was further held
back by its narrow ideological and social-economic interests and
after
1918
also by
a unitarist
national programme. Liberalism as a
252
factor
of Slovene social and political development thus weakened
only to end up politically exhausted and nationally and socially
eradicated at the end of the first Yugoslavia. Eventually, it split to a
number of different parties and groups, some of them larger some
smaller, all joined by a common provenience but divided by differing
positions on the essential questions of that time.
The mentioned characteristics of Slovene liberalism were clear¬
ly manifested in the ideological and political views of the leading
liberal politicians as well as in their attitude to the most promi¬
nent representatives of the Catholic Church. Thus, when a National
Party for
Kranjska
was established, the liberal camp used every op¬
portunity to attack the Ljubljana bishop Anton
Bonaventura
Jeglič
(1850-1937),
who resided in Ljubljana from
1898-1930.
Bishop
Jeglič
had to endure the fiercest attacks of the liberal camp in the
years
1898-1899,
when he decided to build a Catholic boarding
school and the adjacent (first) Slovene grammar school; in
1909,
when publishing a brochure "To Bridegrooms and Brides" contain¬
ing moral instructions for marital sex life; and in
1925,
when being
accused by liberals of a personal misuse of the Church and religion
for political purposes. Liberals also criticised the founding father
of Slovene Christian social movement and cooperative movement,
and one of the most prominent politicians of the catholic Slovene
People's Party: Janez Evangelist
Krek
(1865-1917).
At first, they
were not hostile to him. But his sharp anti-liberal statements in the
years
1911-1912
made them try to politically and morally slander
him in
1913
by bringing to public an alleged love affair with a Vien¬
nese
Kamila
Theimer. Later, Slovene liberalists regretted the "The-
imer affair" and stopped denouncing him, and also
Krek
eased his
stance on liberalism. Ivan
Tavčar
(1851-1923),
one of the leaders
of Slovene classical liberalism, was the fiercest advocate of a sharp
liberal policy of cultural fight. Apart from his extremely anti-catho¬
lic views, which were after the World War I replaced by consistent
anti-communism, he advocated an
exclusivist
middle-class social
and political position, denying any social-economic emancipation
to other social classes, i. e. farmers and workers. As from
1918,
he
was also a fierce advocate of Yugoslav national
unitarismi
and state
centralism.
The second leader of the Slovene classical liberalism, Ivan
Hribar
(1851-1941),
differed from
Tavčar.
He as well strongly op¬
posed the intervention of the Church and religion in the political
life, but at the same time, he also opposed the liberalism based on
cultural fight and the "anti-church campaign". He was not attracted
by a traditional conflict between political Catholicism and liberal¬
ism. Hribar had a number of good friends also on the catholic side,
and disagreed politically and personally only with a few individuals
from that camp. He was one of the personalities who in the dispute
between Catholicism and liberalism on the Slovene grounds earned
SUMMARY
253
a prominent and well-respected position on both sides. Hribar also
had a clear stance on fascism and communism. He believed that the
end of the former will be "extremely sad". Regarding the latter he
warned that it was extremely unnatural and impossible to unify all
the people -on the grounds of the same needs. Therefore, he did not
believe in a world communist revolution, as he was convinced that
that people of different nationalities, religions, education and moral
criteria could not be lined up in one "army". With these thoughts
which he noted down shortly before his death, he concluded his
study of his times and of the essential historical issues related to
it. He took his own life in protest against the Italian occupation of
Slovenia in
1941.
The issue of a new European and world war occupied Slovene
liberal camp
-
like all other political forces at home and abroad
-
from
its very break out on
1
September
1939.
They made a thorough re¬
view of the war, which from September
1939
by then already changed
a large part of Europe. They warned against its totalitarian character
and the ideological confrontation of democratic, fascist and commu¬
nist world views. They also did not overlook that upon concluding of
the German-Soviet non-aggression treaty in August
1939
the ideo¬
logical principle was subordinated to the state interests of both sig¬
natories. They attributed the ideological principle a decisive role in
the formation of the post-war world, forecasting great changes in the
organisation of human society. They were to stem from the military,
political and economic conflict between the Anglo-Saxon democracy,
which was to be internally transformed, and the systems of totali¬
tarian dictatorships. Of the latter, they particularly exposed Germa¬
ny, Italy and Japan. The division of the »spheres of interest« among
themselves upon the conclusion of the Triple Pact in September
1940
was already understood as a plan for the future world system. They
however, left open the question of the post-war world system and of
the winner of war. They correctly foresaw that a new era would start
and the world politics would be led within the framework of great
blocks of states of continental dimensions. As for the position of the
Yugoslav state, they emphasised their national-defence orientation
and determination to defend their home country.
After Slovenia had been occupied and the occupying authority
established in April
1941,
a new era begun for Slovene liberalism.
Despite the excellent studies of the European and world military-
political development after
1939
and strong patriotism, the ideo¬
logical-political creativeness of liberals could not be efficiently ex¬
pressed during the World War II. A new historical epoch put Slovene
liberalism to severe tests, and its position even worsened after the
revolutionary takeover of power in
1945,
ousting it from the Slovene
society for many decades. The liberal political option only started
to actively face new ideas and social-economic and political chal¬
lenges after the
reestablishment
of a multi-party life in
1990,
and it
254
became engaged in Slovene national politics after the formation of
the Republic of Slovenia in
1991.
SUMMARY
"5 |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Perovšek, Jurij |
| author_facet | Perovšek, Jurij |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Perovšek, Jurij |
| author_variant | j p jp |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV022867529 |
| callnumber-first | D - World History |
| callnumber-label | DR1438 |
| callnumber-raw | DR1438 |
| callnumber-search | DR1438 |
| callnumber-sort | DR 41438 |
| callnumber-subject | DR - Balkan Peninsula |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)235944606 (DE-599)BVBBV022867529 |
| era | Geschichte 1900-2000 Geschichte 1800-1900 Geschichte 1918-1941 gnd Geschichte 1800-1941 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1900-2000 Geschichte 1800-1900 Geschichte 1918-1941 Geschichte 1800-1941 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02728nam a2200673 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV022867529</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20081126 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">071005s2005 |||| 00||| slv d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9616386069</subfield><subfield code="9">961-6386-06-9</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)235944606</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV022867529</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">slv</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">DR1438</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Perovšek, Jurij</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Na poti v moderno</subfield><subfield code="b">poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja</subfield><subfield code="c">Jurij Perovšek</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Ljubljana</subfield><subfield code="b">Inšt. za Novejšo Zgodovino</subfield><subfield code="c">2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">285 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zbirka Razpoznavanja</subfield><subfield code="v">1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1900-2000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1800-1900</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1918-1941</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1800-1941</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Geschichte</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Liberalism</subfield><subfield code="z">Europe</subfield><subfield code="x">History</subfield><subfield code="y">19th century</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Liberalism</subfield><subfield code="z">Europe</subfield><subfield code="x">History</subfield><subfield code="y">20th century</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Liberalism</subfield><subfield code="z">Slovenia</subfield><subfield code="x">History</subfield><subfield code="y">19th century</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Liberalism</subfield><subfield code="z">Slovenia</subfield><subfield code="x">History</subfield><subfield code="y">20th century</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Liberalismus</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4035582-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Europa</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Jugoslawien</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Slovenia</subfield><subfield code="x">Politics and government</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Yugoslavia</subfield><subfield code="x">Politics and government</subfield><subfield code="y">1918-1945</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Europa</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4015701-5</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Slowenien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4055302-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Jugoslawien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4028966-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Europa</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4015701-5</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Liberalismus</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4035582-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Slowenien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4055302-4</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1800-1941</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Jugoslawien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4028966-7</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Liberalismus</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4035582-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Slowenien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4055302-4</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1918-1941</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Zbirka Razpoznavanja</subfield><subfield code="v">1</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV022867517</subfield><subfield code="9">1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016072684</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Europa Jugoslawien Slovenia Politics and government Yugoslavia Politics and government 1918-1945 Europa (DE-588)4015701-5 gnd Slowenien (DE-588)4055302-4 gnd Jugoslawien (DE-588)4028966-7 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Europa Jugoslawien Slovenia Politics and government Yugoslavia Politics and government 1918-1945 Slowenien |
| id | DE-604.BV022867529 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T18:45:47Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T21:07:18Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9616386069 |
| language | Slovenian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-016072684 |
| oclc_num | 235944606 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 285 S. |
| publishDate | 2005 |
| publishDateSearch | 2005 |
| publishDateSort | 2005 |
| publisher | Inšt. za Novejšo Zgodovino |
| record_format | marc |
| series | Zbirka Razpoznavanja |
| series2 | Zbirka Razpoznavanja |
| spelling | Perovšek, Jurij Verfasser aut Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja Jurij Perovšek Ljubljana Inšt. za Novejšo Zgodovino 2005 285 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Zbirka Razpoznavanja 1 Geschichte 1900-2000 Geschichte 1800-1900 Geschichte 1918-1941 gnd rswk-swf Geschichte 1800-1941 gnd rswk-swf Geschichte Politik Liberalism Europe History 19th century Liberalism Europe History 20th century Liberalism Slovenia History 19th century Liberalism Slovenia History 20th century Liberalismus (DE-588)4035582-2 gnd rswk-swf Europa Jugoslawien Slovenia Politics and government Yugoslavia Politics and government 1918-1945 Europa (DE-588)4015701-5 gnd rswk-swf Slowenien (DE-588)4055302-4 gnd rswk-swf Jugoslawien (DE-588)4028966-7 gnd rswk-swf Europa (DE-588)4015701-5 g Liberalismus (DE-588)4035582-2 s Slowenien (DE-588)4055302-4 g Geschichte 1800-1941 z DE-604 Jugoslawien (DE-588)4028966-7 g Geschichte 1918-1941 z Zbirka Razpoznavanja 1 (DE-604)BV022867517 1 Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Perovšek, Jurij Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja Zbirka Razpoznavanja Geschichte Politik Liberalism Europe History 19th century Liberalism Europe History 20th century Liberalism Slovenia History 19th century Liberalism Slovenia History 20th century Liberalismus (DE-588)4035582-2 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4035582-2 (DE-588)4015701-5 (DE-588)4055302-4 (DE-588)4028966-7 |
| title | Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja |
| title_auth | Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja |
| title_exact_search | Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja |
| title_full | Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja Jurij Perovšek |
| title_fullStr | Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja Jurij Perovšek |
| title_full_unstemmed | Na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja Jurij Perovšek |
| title_short | Na poti v moderno |
| title_sort | na poti v moderno poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19 in 20 stoletja |
| title_sub | poglavja iz zgodovine evropskega in slovenskega liberalizma 19. in 20. stoletja |
| topic | Geschichte Politik Liberalism Europe History 19th century Liberalism Europe History 20th century Liberalism Slovenia History 19th century Liberalism Slovenia History 20th century Liberalismus (DE-588)4035582-2 gnd |
| topic_facet | Geschichte Politik Liberalism Europe History 19th century Liberalism Europe History 20th century Liberalism Slovenia History 19th century Liberalism Slovenia History 20th century Liberalismus Europa Jugoslawien Slovenia Politics and government Yugoslavia Politics and government 1918-1945 Slowenien |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016072684&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV022867517 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT perovsekjurij napotivmodernopoglavjaizzgodovineevropskegainslovenskegaliberalizma19in20stoletja |